Transcript: AAC — 11 Dec 2025 (Q&A)

WEBVTT

00:00:01.000 --> 00:00:08.200
I assume there is audio now, so I will simply re-say what I have already said, for those of you who are not lip readers.

00:00:08.200 --> 00:00:09.500
I assume there's audio now.

00:00:09.500 --> 00:00:12.700
I know the chat will catch up here in a minute or so.

00:00:12.700 --> 00:00:14.960
Someone said it's better, so I assume that's good.

00:00:14.960 --> 00:00:17.980
Okay, anyway, welcome to the At Any Cost podcast.

00:00:17.980 --> 00:00:20.580
It is the 11th of December, 2025.

00:00:20.580 --> 00:00:24.860
This is the seventh episode, also the seventh Q&A episode.

00:00:24.860 --> 00:00:28.980
And I have quite a few questions tonight, 40-something questions.

00:00:29.060 --> 00:00:34.320
I know I will not get through all of those this episode, but it means that I have questions for future episodes.

00:00:34.320 --> 00:00:41.580
And I will, of course, save those, like I've done in the past, for questions to which I did not get in other episodes.

00:00:41.580 --> 00:00:43.460
Just a little bit of housekeeping before I start.

00:00:43.460 --> 00:00:47.460
Of course, as always, questions can be submitted on the forum.

00:00:47.460 --> 00:00:50.940
The link should be in the description on all platforms.

00:00:50.940 --> 00:00:52.660
Hopefully it's there.

00:00:52.660 --> 00:00:54.260
So everything seems to be working.

00:00:54.260 --> 00:00:57.620
Everything's green on my end, so I will get into the questions here.

00:00:58.180 --> 00:01:00.180
Let me just pull up that first question.

00:01:03.680 --> 00:01:06.840
It's about good works and unbelievers.

00:01:06.840 --> 00:01:17.040
You have said a few times before that the Lutheran understanding of good works, that they are not counted toward unbelievers, or that they are actually not good works, but instead filthy rags.

00:01:17.040 --> 00:01:19.660
Which is just a quote of scripture, of course.

00:01:19.660 --> 00:01:24.740
But you have also said the weight of sin against God is infinite, so no number of good deeds could make up for it.

00:01:25.480 --> 00:01:37.620
It seems to me that the view in which one's good works count towards themselves, yet this is an infinite whole, so it's an impossible task, would be both consistent with Christian redemption, also go over better in the ears of an unbeliever.

00:01:39.800 --> 00:01:42.640
What problems does this view present?

00:01:42.640 --> 00:01:46.180
Why is the more severe form more accurate, and in what ways?

00:01:47.560 --> 00:02:08.400
So, there are a few questions here, and it's one of those subjects that there's a little bit of nuance in what exactly is being said and what exactly is meant, because, a different pen here, are good works good in and of themselves?

00:02:08.400 --> 00:02:20.120
The answer to that is both yes and no, and I'll get into sort of the meta issue here after speaking first about good works proper.

00:02:20.640 --> 00:02:27.920
Because the meta issue is really the question, but there are things that are good in and of themselves, because they are good.

00:02:27.920 --> 00:02:30.320
Everything created by God is good.

00:02:30.320 --> 00:02:35.500
So, human beings in their nature are good.

00:02:35.500 --> 00:02:44.960
Which sounds kind of crazy to Christian ears, because we're used to thinking about human beings as fallen and sinful, and it's a different sense of nature.

00:02:44.960 --> 00:02:49.300
It's in our essence, in the thing that God created, we are good.

00:02:50.580 --> 00:02:55.620
Now, we are corrupted by the fall and by original sin.

00:02:55.620 --> 00:03:00.280
And so, we are not good in that sense.

00:03:00.280 --> 00:03:04.640
Our nature is corrupted, but it is a good thing that was corrupted.

00:03:04.640 --> 00:03:10.460
Similarly, I'm going to take my tea bag out of my tea here before it gets bitter.

00:03:10.460 --> 00:03:22.380
But similarly, with regard to good works, and this gets into the sort of meta issue here, the status of the individual matters.

00:03:22.380 --> 00:03:26.400
This is something that we used to recognize in our laws and elsewhere.

00:03:26.400 --> 00:03:44.140
I've used the example before of crimes that are enhanced by the status of the person against whom the crime was committed, which is obviously relevant for sin, because sin, all sin, is committed against God, against you, against you only have I sinned, to use the psalm.

00:03:45.720 --> 00:03:53.980
And so, with regard to certain crimes, the most obvious example, probably the best example, is treason.

00:03:53.980 --> 00:03:59.420
Because there are different kinds of treason, historically at least, because what ultimately is treason?

00:03:59.420 --> 00:04:04.480
Treason is betraying someone to whom you owed a duty.

00:04:04.480 --> 00:04:08.180
Now we have high treason, which is treason against your sovereign.

00:04:08.200 --> 00:04:12.780
Used to be treason against the king, now it's treason against your country, or whatever it happens to be.

00:04:14.480 --> 00:04:16.560
Maybe you still have a king, depending where you are.

00:04:16.560 --> 00:04:24.080
But you have high treason, and you have petty treason, which is just French for small in this case.

00:04:24.080 --> 00:04:27.960
It's not petty like, you know, unimportant.

00:04:27.960 --> 00:04:34.020
So petty treason would be treason against someone who is your head, basically.

00:04:34.020 --> 00:04:43.800
Historically the most common one would have been children murdering their parents, usually their father, or a wife murdering her husband.

00:04:43.800 --> 00:04:47.780
That is not just murder, it's also petty treason.

00:04:47.780 --> 00:04:58.800
Similarly, with regard to sin, because sin is committed against God, the transgress of sin is infinite, which again is correctly stated in that question.

00:04:58.800 --> 00:05:03.000
It's why you can never pay back the debt that is owed.

00:05:03.000 --> 00:05:08.860
You can never pay back an infinite debt with any amount of finite payments.

00:05:09.600 --> 00:05:21.760
And so, human beings being finite, we can't ever render an infinite amount to God, which is why Christ had to die, because Christ being God, his death of infinite value.

00:05:21.760 --> 00:05:24.000
So, that balances the scales.

00:05:27.300 --> 00:05:41.360
So, the question then of whether or not a person can do a good work, a truly good work, matters with regard to the status of the individual.

00:05:41.360 --> 00:05:50.700
If the individual is in good standing, as it were, with God, which is to say in Christ, because that's the only way to be in good standing with God.

00:05:50.700 --> 00:05:56.640
So, if you're in Christ, you have your slate wiped clean with regard to sin.

00:05:56.640 --> 00:06:03.340
Your sin is not counted against you, because Christ's righteousness is imputed to you, because you are in Christ.

00:06:03.340 --> 00:06:04.200
It's an issue of headship.

00:06:05.580 --> 00:06:21.080
Those who are still fallen, those who are still not righteous, according to imputed righteousness, do not have good works, because everything they do is sin, because they are sinners.

00:06:21.080 --> 00:06:27.900
An important point here that I've commented on before, I've raised it many places, but it bears repeating.

00:06:27.900 --> 00:06:32.200
You do not become a sinner, because you sin.

00:06:34.080 --> 00:06:37.360
You sin, because you are a sinner.

00:06:37.360 --> 00:06:45.060
Now, that's true of everyone, except Adam, because Adam became a sinner, because he sinned.

00:06:45.060 --> 00:06:47.500
For the rest of us were born sinners.

00:06:47.500 --> 00:06:50.840
In sin did my mother conceive me, again to quote the Psalms.

00:06:50.840 --> 00:06:54.280
And so, we sin because we're sinners.

00:06:54.280 --> 00:07:01.380
In order for our good works to actually have merit before God, we have to be cleansed of being a sinner.

00:07:02.220 --> 00:07:04.220
Which means we have to be in Christ.

00:07:05.280 --> 00:07:09.780
Those who are not in Christ, therefore, cannot have works that are actually good.

00:07:09.780 --> 00:07:14.780
It's the distinction between whether something is good per se.

00:07:14.780 --> 00:07:17.180
So, feeding your children is good.

00:07:17.180 --> 00:07:19.480
Starving your children is bad.

00:07:19.480 --> 00:07:22.740
Doesn't actually matter if you're a Christian or a non-Christian.

00:07:22.740 --> 00:07:25.080
Those two things remain what they are.

00:07:25.080 --> 00:07:27.460
Good to feed your children, bad to starve your children.

00:07:28.960 --> 00:07:39.540
But, the good act, the good work, does not count for you before God unless you are in Christ, because you are a sinner.

00:07:40.820 --> 00:07:49.520
So, it's sort of two different things there, and there's a nuance, but it's important to understand the nature of it.

00:07:50.560 --> 00:07:54.080
To some degree, it's not something that has to be raised with, say, new believers.

00:07:54.080 --> 00:07:56.160
This is something that's more meat than milk.

00:07:57.560 --> 00:08:06.440
But, once you progress in the faith, it's important to understand the reality of how bad and corrupting sin is.

00:08:06.440 --> 00:08:11.080
And anytime you minimize sin, what are you also inevitably doing?

00:08:11.080 --> 00:08:15.440
You're minimizing Christ's sacrifice, which you never want to do.

00:08:15.440 --> 00:08:42.580
And so, it is necessary to understand the depth of the depravity of sin, and the corruption of it, and what it does to the individual, and the fact that an individual who is still living in that sin, not to say that those of us who are in Christ are sinless, it's just not counted against us because of imputed righteousness, but if you are still living in that sin, you cannot truly do anything that is good because you are still a sinner.

00:08:42.580 --> 00:08:46.760
So, for those who are new to the faith, it's not something on which we should focus.

00:08:46.760 --> 00:08:52.140
No, we can point out that, yes, there are things that are good in themselves because God created them.

00:08:53.000 --> 00:08:55.440
All of the things God created are good.

00:08:55.440 --> 00:08:58.440
The things that God tells us to do are good.

00:08:58.440 --> 00:09:01.400
So, if we do them, we've done something good.

00:09:01.400 --> 00:09:04.320
But it's not counted unless you're in Christ.

00:09:07.240 --> 00:09:09.160
I believe that answers that question.

00:09:09.160 --> 00:09:11.320
Let me pull up the second question here.

00:09:18.912 --> 00:09:23.252
This is from last week, I carried over a question.

00:09:23.252 --> 00:09:31.292
And I do try to give preference to questions that are on the forum simply because that helps me as I've pointed out before, but anyway.

00:09:31.292 --> 00:09:37.852
Was the Tetragrammaton in the Old Testament Hebrew or text, or was it a Masoretic addition?

00:09:37.852 --> 00:09:40.832
If the latter, what is the origin, how did it end up there?

00:09:40.832 --> 00:09:54.492
I don't have to deal with the if the latter bit, because yes, as far as we can tell, and we do have fairly good proof for this, is the Tetragrammaton was present in the Ur text when that existed.

00:09:55.652 --> 00:10:07.952
So for those who aren't aware what Ur text means, it just means the actual Old Testament in the Hebrew that God gave to Old Testament Israel that was lost and destroyed.

00:10:07.952 --> 00:10:13.992
Incidentally, the final copies of it destroyed with the destruction of the temple in 70 AD, burned on the temple steps no less.

00:10:14.672 --> 00:10:17.492
So, judgment from God there.

00:10:17.492 --> 00:10:20.692
And the Tetragrammaton, for those who don't know, it just means four letters.

00:10:20.692 --> 00:10:21.412
It's just Greek.

00:10:21.412 --> 00:10:24.652
Incidentally, it's Greek, not Aramaic or Hebrew or anything.

00:10:24.652 --> 00:10:30.852
So YHWH in English, Yod He Vav He in Hebrew.

00:10:30.852 --> 00:10:34.612
And I don't care if I pronounce this correctly because it's Hebrew and I don't care.

00:10:34.612 --> 00:10:44.212
But some of the Septuagint papyri do, in fact, have in Hebrew letters the Tetragrammaton.

00:10:45.532 --> 00:11:01.852
The issue is, as we pointed out in the episodes on the Septuagint and elsewhere, we don't know the vocalization of it because the Hebrews decided they were going to be more pious than God and not use God's name.

00:11:01.852 --> 00:11:10.652
They probably thought they were getting around the commandment not to take the name of the Lord, thy God, in vain because, well, we're not using it at all, so we can't take it in vain.

00:11:10.652 --> 00:11:14.892
Probably their rules lawyering, trying to Jew God.

00:11:14.892 --> 00:11:25.332
But some copies, like I said, of Septuagint papyri do have it, and so we can rely on that, but all it gives us is the letters.

00:11:25.332 --> 00:11:28.312
It doesn't give us the vowels, so we don't know what it is.

00:11:28.312 --> 00:11:40.052
But what we do know is that the inspired Greek text translates it as Lord, Kurios, and so we know to call him Lord, God, all these other names that he has.

00:11:40.052 --> 00:11:42.692
So we shouldn't use that.

00:11:42.692 --> 00:11:45.412
I wouldn't say that it's wrong to use the four letters on something.

00:11:45.412 --> 00:11:55.652
For instance, they're on the cover page of the Book of Concord, but they're not transliterated, vowels aren't added, it's just the four letters.

00:11:56.732 --> 00:12:14.972
Another interesting point with regard to the translation of that, and particularly the Greek, in this case specifically the Greek, there are some texts that have it translated as transliterated into English, IAO.

00:12:14.972 --> 00:12:20.752
So iota, alpha, omega, not the other O, but the last one.

00:12:20.752 --> 00:12:27.352
Which is perhaps interesting because that's essentially one of the names God uses for himself.

00:12:27.352 --> 00:12:31.352
I am the alpha and the omega, to quote Revelation, the beginning and the end.

00:12:31.792 --> 00:12:43.172
So, sort of an interesting point that is translated sometimes is that as well, which does not sound like, you know, Yahweh or whatever it happens to be, IAO.

00:12:43.172 --> 00:12:44.252
It's not the same thing.

00:12:44.252 --> 00:12:49.152
I know some people have tried to make that argument, but they honestly don't even sound similar.

00:12:50.232 --> 00:12:53.732
So, is it present in the Urtext?

00:12:53.812 --> 00:13:00.392
Sure, but still without the vowels, because Hebrews and Abjad, they don't write down their vowels at all at that point.

00:13:00.392 --> 00:13:02.372
They didn't even die of diacritics yet.

00:13:04.392 --> 00:13:12.492
The next question, where should a Christian attend church if there are no faithful congregations nearby?

00:13:12.492 --> 00:13:17.612
I've answered this one a number of times, but this is one of those that definitely bears repeating, and I don't know that I've answered it in this format yet.

00:13:17.612 --> 00:13:19.872
In fact, I believe I have not, except in passing.

00:13:21.592 --> 00:13:30.552
If you do not have a faithful congregation nearby, you should start a house church, or you should find a house church.

00:13:30.552 --> 00:13:31.972
There's nothing wrong with doing that.

00:13:31.972 --> 00:13:34.872
House churches are perfectly acceptable.

00:13:34.872 --> 00:13:45.352
If your house church does really well, and grows, and I hope that it does, or the members of the church just have a lot of children, then you can acquire a building.

00:13:45.352 --> 00:13:46.812
Nothing wrong with that.

00:13:46.812 --> 00:13:51.392
If you happen to have a man who is sufficiently competent among you, ordain him.

00:13:51.392 --> 00:13:53.152
There's nothing that stops you from doing that.

00:13:53.152 --> 00:13:56.372
The congregation calls, the congregation ordains.

00:13:56.372 --> 00:14:01.692
The bishop is not the one that has the power from God to do that.

00:14:01.692 --> 00:14:09.792
The bishop, if you have a system that is an Episcopal system, you have a bishop in your system, then he does that as a point of Christian order.

00:14:09.792 --> 00:14:11.852
It's a matter of good order in the church.

00:14:11.852 --> 00:14:26.652
But during times like this, that's not necessary, and it could very well be harmful, probably, because most of the bishops are, in fact, not faithful, sort of regardless of which church body is in view.

00:14:26.652 --> 00:14:37.392
The Roman Catholic bishops are faithless, the Anglican bishops are faithless, the LCMS equivalent of bishops are faithless, so that's the reality of the situation.

00:14:37.392 --> 00:14:39.232
Start a home church.

00:14:39.232 --> 00:14:41.172
Perfectly acceptable.

00:14:41.172 --> 00:14:48.872
You're going to avoid a lot of the issues, and eventually, perhaps, then you'll be able to acquire a church building, maybe from one of these mainline churches as they go under.

00:14:49.992 --> 00:14:54.552
One of the biggest ways in which ELCA currently makes money is selling old church buildings.

00:14:54.552 --> 00:14:57.152
So...

00:14:57.152 --> 00:14:59.252
The next question.

00:14:59.252 --> 00:15:02.632
When did you become a Christian?

00:15:02.632 --> 00:15:05.032
I can answer that one in two words, in utero.

00:15:08.772 --> 00:15:12.312
So for that one, I would definitely say, I was a Christian from the very beginning.

00:15:13.392 --> 00:15:17.992
I was born into a Christian family, raised as a Christian, never been anything else.

00:15:17.992 --> 00:15:20.692
Now, I was not raised Lutheran.

00:15:20.692 --> 00:15:26.412
I did become a Lutheran later in life, but I've been a Christian my entire life.

00:15:26.412 --> 00:15:29.572
So...

00:15:29.572 --> 00:15:31.312
The next question.

00:15:31.312 --> 00:15:37.392
For your confident faith daily devotions, which book could I buy to get the same in print form?

00:15:37.392 --> 00:15:40.532
What daily prayer routine addition to daily readings and devotion, if any?

00:15:41.392 --> 00:15:56.612
So, the answer for that, specifically, I read the lectionary, the daily lectionary readings from the Treasury of Daily Prayer, which is very similar to many other daily lectionaries across a number of denominations.

00:15:56.612 --> 00:15:58.692
But it is specifically the Treasury of Daily Prayer.

00:15:58.692 --> 00:16:00.832
I'll put a link in the show notes.

00:16:00.832 --> 00:16:05.312
And that is from Concordia Publishing House, the publishing arm of the LCMS.

00:16:05.312 --> 00:16:18.192
I am currently reading the Old Testament, so the Psalms and the Old Testament reading from NETS, which is a translation of the Septuagint, which is just the new English translation of the Septuagint.

00:16:18.192 --> 00:16:21.572
That's available for free online, or you can purchase a hard copy.

00:16:21.572 --> 00:16:24.172
They're relatively reasonably priced.

00:16:24.172 --> 00:16:28.152
They're not great print quality, but they're good enough.

00:16:28.152 --> 00:16:30.652
The New Testament readings, I just read the ESV.

00:16:30.652 --> 00:16:31.692
ESV is fine.

00:16:31.692 --> 00:16:35.592
I do fix some of the things it does that are, I would say, wrong.

00:16:36.872 --> 00:16:43.092
They're kind of quirks, more than being wrong, but definitely some of the translators had an agenda.

00:16:43.092 --> 00:16:50.932
And so the biggest one, I never say Gentiles, because Gentiles is not an English word.

00:16:50.932 --> 00:16:57.172
So it's completely ridiculous that we have it in our English translations of scripture.

00:16:57.172 --> 00:17:02.932
As I put it out before, Gentiles is basically of the nations in Latin.

00:17:04.192 --> 00:17:15.612
Well, we have all the words of the nations, or whatever it happens to be, whichever noun case it is, to the nations, of the nations, from the nations, whatever it is.

00:17:15.612 --> 00:17:18.852
We have all these things in English, it should be translated.

00:17:18.852 --> 00:17:27.032
And so I follow sort of the same thing that Luther did, depending on the context for the term, and there are a couple of different terms there, actually.

00:17:27.032 --> 00:17:37.692
There's ethnicos and ethnos, but you either have, essentially, nations, heathen, or peoples.

00:17:37.692 --> 00:17:41.812
And really, you can get away with just heathen and nations is sufficient.

00:17:41.812 --> 00:17:50.192
There are a couple of places where it's kind of awkward in English to say either of those, and so people sounds better, but, or peoples, plural.

00:17:50.192 --> 00:17:56.452
So I do change that when I'm reading, but I just do that on the fly while I'm reading the text, because it's not accurate to say Gentiles.

00:17:56.452 --> 00:17:57.952
It's misleading, it's Judaizing.

00:17:57.952 --> 00:17:59.932
We should not be doing it.

00:17:59.932 --> 00:18:13.612
But other than that, the only other thing that I mentally change, and then obviously speak the corrected form, there are some places where the translators were uncomfortable with the word slave.

00:18:13.612 --> 00:18:25.212
Now, yes, the Greek doulos can mean servant or slave, but it generally has the meaning, at least the nuance, of slave more than servant.

00:18:25.212 --> 00:18:37.532
Not always, because certainly when, and for instance, some of the letters, you have Paul speaking about us being servants of Christ, perhaps that's a little more servant.

00:18:37.532 --> 00:18:47.792
There are times where Christ is contrasting things, and it seems like servant is perhaps meant more so than slave, but there are also times where very clearly slave is meant.

00:18:47.792 --> 00:18:50.572
And so I will change that if it says servant, I'll change it to slave.

00:18:50.632 --> 00:18:54.532
And even the ESV, some versions of it, do indeed have slave.

00:18:54.532 --> 00:18:58.712
So that's something that they have gone back and forth on that one.

00:18:58.712 --> 00:19:09.132
And then finally, for the readings from the Book of Concord, which is the final bit of the Daily Devotions, I use the Reader's Edition, second edition.

00:19:09.132 --> 00:19:12.452
You probably won't be able to find the first edition, so it hardly matters which one.

00:19:12.452 --> 00:19:14.912
If you have the Reader's Edition, it's going to be the second.

00:19:15.952 --> 00:19:29.132
The reason that I like that one primarily for people is that it's the one I recommend for anyone who is new to Lutheranism or these theology issues, because it has a lot of helpful material in the book.

00:19:29.132 --> 00:19:39.512
There are essays on various topics, there's history, there's context, all these things that even most Lutherans simply will not know.

00:19:39.512 --> 00:19:41.012
At least not all of it.

00:19:41.012 --> 00:19:43.212
And so it's very helpful to have those materials.

00:19:43.212 --> 00:19:52.192
As anyone who knows what a Reader's Edition is, not the Reader's Edition of the Bible, which is just the Bible with all the formatting removed, basically, so it reads like a normal book.

00:19:52.192 --> 00:20:02.092
But a Reader's Edition of any other work is typically something that is accompanied by explanatory essays, lots of footnotes, helpful materials.

00:20:02.092 --> 00:20:06.452
That's what the RE2 of the Book of Concord is.

00:20:06.452 --> 00:20:14.692
Now, that's not the same translation as is available on thebookofconcord.org, which is the website that I maintain for the Book of Concord.

00:20:15.792 --> 00:20:20.812
That one is the Triglotta English, because it's in the public domain.

00:20:20.812 --> 00:20:23.512
The Reader's Edition second is not in the public domain.

00:20:23.512 --> 00:20:28.292
I did ask CPH if they would let me add that to the Book of Concord website.

00:20:28.292 --> 00:20:29.372
They said no.

00:20:29.372 --> 00:20:32.852
So that's why it's not available on there yet.

00:20:32.852 --> 00:20:34.112
Maybe one day they will.

00:20:34.112 --> 00:20:35.372
We can hope.

00:20:37.112 --> 00:20:39.272
Next question, sort of related.

00:20:39.272 --> 00:20:43.992
Will you be recording a daily Septuagint version of the Bible in 2026?

00:20:43.992 --> 00:20:46.492
That is currently the plan.

00:20:46.492 --> 00:20:49.572
I think I will probably use the nets.

00:20:49.572 --> 00:20:53.932
There are some quirks in the Lexham edition that I don't really like.

00:20:53.932 --> 00:21:12.092
But the problem with all the currently existing editions is that they're either really old, sort of like the original King James, which would be the Brenton edition, and Brenton also does some weird stuff, where sometimes he pulls from the Masoretic for seemingly no reason.

00:21:12.092 --> 00:21:13.172
He just felt like it.

00:21:13.172 --> 00:21:15.252
Maybe he was translating and remembered what he'd read.

00:21:15.252 --> 00:21:17.052
I don't know what happened there.

00:21:18.352 --> 00:21:26.252
They're the ones that are very academic, like nets, and to some degree the Lexham, LES2 at this point, the second edition of it.

00:21:26.252 --> 00:21:31.072
And there are none that really flow well as natural English.

00:21:31.072 --> 00:21:33.632
But of course, I've critiqued the ESV for the same thing.

00:21:33.712 --> 00:21:49.712
It can be stilted at times, because they tried to make the English follow the Hebrew, which is what they were using, the Masoretic, and in the New Testament, the Greek grammar, which doesn't work in English, because English grammar is different from both Greek and Hebrew grammar.

00:21:49.712 --> 00:21:51.732
So it sounds stilted.

00:21:51.732 --> 00:21:54.552
So there are problems with all the editions currently available.

00:21:54.552 --> 00:21:55.872
I'm not saying they're unfaithful.

00:21:55.872 --> 00:21:58.432
The nets basically is very faithful.

00:21:58.432 --> 00:22:01.692
I don't think I've found anything where I truly objected to their translation decisions.

00:22:02.672 --> 00:22:10.152
It's just stilted because it's meant to be sort of overly literal in an academic way.

00:22:10.152 --> 00:22:29.132
And the biggest challenge there, for me personally, as I'm going to be reading it aloud, they translate some of the names extremely literally from Greek into English, which makes them unpronounceable, or just they sound completely crazy.

00:22:29.132 --> 00:22:36.712
I can't remember exactly what it is now, but Nebuchadnezzar is something completely insane in the Nets edition.

00:22:36.712 --> 00:22:48.152
And so I'd have to decide if I were going to just change those mentally as I'm going through from what I know from reading other editions of scripture in English.

00:22:48.152 --> 00:22:54.632
In some cases, you know, you get a list of names, and it's difficult to do that because maybe you don't remember them all, and they're very different in the Greek.

00:22:54.632 --> 00:22:57.752
So there are some challenges there deciding which one.

00:22:57.812 --> 00:23:09.332
But yes, the short answer is, I do intend to do the readings from the Septuagint for the next series, as it were, of the Through the Bible in a Year.

00:23:09.332 --> 00:23:10.832
Probably the Nets.

00:23:10.852 --> 00:23:13.832
Possibly the Lexem, but probably the Nets.

00:23:16.292 --> 00:23:19.952
The next question, question seven.

00:23:21.092 --> 00:23:28.092
What is the best way to prevent my daughters from mixing, please, something specific instead of read the Bible or something like that?

00:23:28.092 --> 00:23:35.092
Of course, I'm going to go something more specific than that, because just read the Bible is not actually going to solve all your problems.

00:23:35.092 --> 00:23:38.032
There are other things you have to do in life.

00:23:38.032 --> 00:23:42.472
They are still really young, so this is entirely preventative, not reactionary.

00:23:44.652 --> 00:23:49.132
I'll probably write something more substantial on this in the future.

00:23:49.132 --> 00:23:53.072
In fact, I'll make a note of that, because I definitely should do that at some point.

00:23:54.372 --> 00:24:02.672
But there are some things I can say now, some concrete things you can do, that will be very helpful.

00:24:02.712 --> 00:24:06.672
One, of course, is going to be to inform them of the consequences.

00:24:06.672 --> 00:24:10.132
Inform them their children will be less fit.

00:24:10.132 --> 00:24:18.092
Inform them their children will be less related to them than any random individual they pass on the street, who is of their same race, of course.

00:24:18.092 --> 00:24:22.792
Inform them of all these various problems they are going to encounter if they go down that path.

00:24:23.952 --> 00:24:28.072
Inform them of the reality of domestic violence and other things like that.

00:24:28.072 --> 00:24:33.052
To some degree, you can very well reason with them even though they are teenage girls.

00:24:33.052 --> 00:24:34.592
That's going to be challenging, of course.

00:24:34.592 --> 00:24:37.192
There are some difficulties there.

00:24:37.192 --> 00:24:43.752
But you can still reason with them, particularly when it comes to talking to them about what will happen to their children.

00:24:43.752 --> 00:24:47.072
They are going to have that natural maternal instinct.

00:24:47.072 --> 00:24:50.632
All women have that until propaganda and the world beats it out of them.

00:24:51.272 --> 00:24:53.612
So, you can appeal to that, and that's entirely natural.

00:24:53.612 --> 00:24:55.652
It's a thing that you should do.

00:24:56.772 --> 00:25:09.652
You, particularly in the case of white daughters, you can point out eye color, things like that, things that they simply will not be able to pass on to their children if they marry outside their race, if they miscegenate.

00:25:10.972 --> 00:25:26.872
And obviously, one of the easiest steps you can take, not perhaps easiest, but certainly most effective, simplest, if not in the execution than in saying it, stating it, keep them away from non-whites.

00:25:26.872 --> 00:25:34.892
If you keep them away from them, they're not going to have the opportunity to fall into that particular sin, that particular path.

00:25:34.892 --> 00:25:39.472
And yes, there are times where very frequently it is sin, so I'm comfortable saying that.

00:25:39.472 --> 00:25:39.992
Not always.

00:25:39.992 --> 00:25:48.092
I've explained per se and per quote before, so I won't go down that rabbit trail here, because that would eat up ten minutes of the time for this episode, and I don't want to do that here.

00:25:50.232 --> 00:26:09.092
And then I guess the final recommendation, we marry them off early, do not give them that opportunity, that window of time where the world is going to appeal to their irrationality, to get them to do things that they will regret for the rest of their lives, and that have consequences they probably cannot undo.

00:26:10.112 --> 00:26:12.072
Definitely cannot undo in many cases.

00:26:12.072 --> 00:26:20.672
So I think that's sort of a general recommendation for fathers who have daughters, because of the state of things in the world.

00:26:20.672 --> 00:26:21.892
Marry them off early.

00:26:21.892 --> 00:26:23.652
You're going to avoid a lot of problems.

00:26:23.652 --> 00:26:27.232
And though I'm not saying, you know, 16, but 21.

00:26:27.232 --> 00:26:28.392
Marry them off early.

00:26:28.392 --> 00:26:30.592
Solve many of these problems for yourself.

00:26:30.592 --> 00:26:31.812
And for her.

00:26:31.812 --> 00:26:36.572
She will eventually thank you when she realizes what you did for her and what she got to avoid.

00:26:38.352 --> 00:26:43.652
But yes, I think I will write something more substantive on that at some point in the future.

00:26:43.732 --> 00:26:46.912
I think that's something that needs to be addressed.

00:26:46.912 --> 00:26:55.312
And I know that I also need to write something more substantial on interracial marriage and the intersection with theology and morality.

00:26:56.572 --> 00:27:00.512
But for now, next question.

00:27:00.512 --> 00:27:10.052
With usury robbing us all, very true, would there be a realistic way for Christians to pool money and buy out each other's loans?

00:27:10.052 --> 00:27:17.132
Not necessarily debt forgiveness, but an organization that effectively refinances at 0 percent.

00:27:20.212 --> 00:27:28.692
I can certainly think of ways that you could play games with the financial and legal system and accomplish that goal.

00:27:29.732 --> 00:27:35.012
But you would be shut down by the same financial and legal system pretty quickly.

00:27:36.572 --> 00:27:42.972
So, could you manage to erase a substantial chunk of debt for a certain number of people?

00:27:42.972 --> 00:27:44.352
The answer is yes.

00:27:44.352 --> 00:27:50.252
And you could manage to do that with relatively small amounts of money.

00:27:50.252 --> 00:28:02.692
But it would probably have a negative impact on the credit scores of the individuals you help, which probably won't matter for many because getting rid of the huge debt is better than retaining the probably not great credit score.

00:28:03.852 --> 00:28:05.632
But certainly better than what it will be.

00:28:05.632 --> 00:28:11.392
And of course, those things rebound as long as you play the game, unfortunately, but it is what it is.

00:28:11.392 --> 00:28:15.532
It's the reality of the situation which we find ourselves.

00:28:15.532 --> 00:28:19.212
But yes, the issue would be is that you would be shut down.

00:28:19.212 --> 00:28:28.632
And so it would have to be quite a few individuals pursuing this so that they could each get a certain amount of work done before getting shut down.

00:28:28.632 --> 00:28:32.452
Because once you get shut down, they're never letting you do it again.

00:28:32.552 --> 00:28:35.052
You'll never get away with that again.

00:28:35.052 --> 00:28:42.052
And it may have financial consequences for the person who is responsible for the entity you set up to do this.

00:28:43.252 --> 00:28:49.392
And they would potentially go after you for fraud depending on how you execute the plan.

00:28:49.392 --> 00:28:50.992
So is it possible?

00:28:50.992 --> 00:28:52.812
To some degree, yes.

00:28:52.812 --> 00:28:54.252
Is it practicable?

00:28:54.252 --> 00:28:57.332
I would have to say probably not.

00:28:57.332 --> 00:29:00.112
We really have to have political power to ban usury.

00:29:00.512 --> 00:29:02.552
And that means the charging of any interest, incidentally.

00:29:02.552 --> 00:29:04.432
Not the charging of unreasonable interest.

00:29:04.432 --> 00:29:23.512
That was a redefinition that came from, I won't name names here because I'm not looking to get into that theological fire right now, but that came from only a handful of hundreds of years ago, where it was changed from the charging of any interest to the charging of exorbitant or excessive interest.

00:29:23.512 --> 00:29:31.132
The traditional understanding of Christians and the church and the plain meaning of scripture is, the charging of any interest is prohibited.

00:29:31.132 --> 00:29:33.532
Because money is not productive.

00:29:33.532 --> 00:29:35.152
Money is not fruitful.

00:29:35.152 --> 00:29:36.332
Money is sterile.

00:29:36.332 --> 00:29:38.912
It should not produce new money.

00:29:42.192 --> 00:29:48.292
Next question, sort of shifting gears, but not entirely since it's still politics.

00:29:48.292 --> 00:29:51.452
I'll take a sip of, perhaps ironically here, I guess, tea.

00:29:56.032 --> 00:29:58.512
And you'll see why I said ironically here in a second.

00:30:00.272 --> 00:30:03.112
How big of a threat is China to the West?

00:30:03.112 --> 00:30:04.912
Is there a possibility of war?

00:30:04.912 --> 00:30:07.732
And if so, how can it be prevented?

00:30:10.272 --> 00:30:20.852
I think the only reasonable answer to that is that China, currently and for the foreseeable future, is the second greatest threat to the West after the Jews.

00:30:22.512 --> 00:30:26.252
Which is, yes, to say they are a larger threat than Islam, ultimately.

00:30:26.252 --> 00:30:34.032
Now, of course, the Muslims in our lands are a problem, but that's a very eminently solvable problem.

00:30:34.032 --> 00:30:36.952
Even if some people may find it distasteful, it's solvable.

00:30:37.972 --> 00:30:39.312
China is a bigger threat.

00:30:39.312 --> 00:30:57.292
And the reason China is a bigger threat is because China has a population of over a billion people who recognize themselves as Chinese, who believe themselves correctly to be Chinese, even though they have a number of different ethnic groups under that umbrella, they're still all Chinese.

00:30:57.292 --> 00:30:59.232
They're just not all Han, basically.

00:30:59.232 --> 00:31:04.172
Although more and more of them are as the party policies progress.

00:31:04.172 --> 00:31:11.492
So lots of people know who they are, kind of work together, but at least follow orders to some degree.

00:31:13.772 --> 00:31:16.352
So, are they as innovative?

00:31:16.352 --> 00:31:17.072
No.

00:31:17.072 --> 00:31:18.712
Are they as creative?

00:31:18.712 --> 00:31:20.192
No.

00:31:20.192 --> 00:31:25.852
Do they have the history of being a military power in the same sense as the West?

00:31:25.852 --> 00:31:27.012
No.

00:31:27.012 --> 00:31:29.792
I'm not saying they have no military history, of course, because they do.

00:31:29.792 --> 00:31:30.952
They certainly have fought wars.

00:31:30.952 --> 00:31:38.412
They've won some wars, usually against themselves, but they are certainly a threat today.

00:31:38.412 --> 00:31:48.412
And the biggest reason they are a threat today is because of not the technological advantage, but the technological foundation.

00:31:48.412 --> 00:32:02.532
It's very important to note that basically, the entire world today is reliant on chip manufacturers, fabs, located in Taiwan, which isn't China, right?

00:32:02.532 --> 00:32:04.712
Except it is China, let's be honest.

00:32:06.112 --> 00:32:13.252
But the issue is, if China went to take Taiwan, we can't stop them, not reasonably.

00:32:13.252 --> 00:32:18.172
Now, we could stop them, but it's in a way that we don't want to do.

00:32:18.172 --> 00:32:21.372
China knows that, but China is a rational actor.

00:32:21.372 --> 00:32:28.012
Another reason that they're sort of a threat, because they're one of the only handful of rational actors on the stage at this point.

00:32:28.012 --> 00:32:49.532
So they recognize, if they go after Taiwan right now, or if they'd gone after Taiwan the past handful of decades, it would possibly precipitate a major conflict, a potentially nuclear conflict, because it's worth remembering, the parties involved in nuclear powers, and more nuclear powers will get dragged in.

00:32:49.532 --> 00:33:01.332
And there's always the risk of a chain reaction with Taiwan kicking off a nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan, which is just two groups of Indians nuking each other, but it is what it is.

00:33:01.332 --> 00:33:07.592
And China being rational actors, they don't want to do that.

00:33:07.592 --> 00:33:45.472
They would much rather take Taiwan and have Taiwan be intact, because the biggest point of taking Taiwan from the Chinese mindset, and I don't sort of want to go into a full graduate level political history and political science course here on China, but the biggest thing for the Chinese with regard to Taiwan is that the fact that the nationalists took Taiwan, were able to flee, and set up shop on Taiwan, take sovereign Chinese territory, is a major loss of face.

00:33:45.472 --> 00:33:51.552
And that is still a thing in Chinese society, all traditional Asian societies.

00:33:51.552 --> 00:33:52.652
There's some nuance.

00:33:52.652 --> 00:34:00.832
The Chinese and the Japanese aren't exactly the same when it comes to losing face, and neither are the Koreans, but losing face is a big thing in Eastern politics.

00:34:00.832 --> 00:34:02.892
It's not as much of a thing in Western politics.

00:34:03.792 --> 00:34:10.412
We used to have it, to some degree, with regard to honor and loss of honor and slights to honor.

00:34:10.412 --> 00:34:13.372
It's different in the Asian context.

00:34:13.372 --> 00:34:14.712
Now, there's also the mandate of heaven.

00:34:14.712 --> 00:34:19.652
I could get into that, but it's sort of tangentially related here.

00:34:19.652 --> 00:34:23.872
But they lost face because the nationalists were not totally defeated.

00:34:23.872 --> 00:34:35.592
The nationalists took a very important part of China for China's international reputation in their eyes, and their own view of themselves.

00:34:35.592 --> 00:34:38.852
Now, mind you, the island was not very good when the nationalists took it.

00:34:38.852 --> 00:34:41.632
They have built that up into what it is today.

00:34:41.632 --> 00:34:46.072
Hellscape that the cities are, they've still done something impressive.

00:34:46.072 --> 00:35:14.432
And so, China needs to take that according to their own mindset, but also according to their calculations for ongoing conflicts with the West and others, because they don't simply want the influence of being right next to Taiwan with guns that can shoot Taiwan from the mainland and other things like that, and certainly a massive army that could overwhelm Taiwan.

00:35:15.592 --> 00:35:27.692
They want to have actual control, immediate control over those resources, particularly all of the chip manufacturers, because that controls the modern world.

00:35:29.592 --> 00:35:34.572
The chips in basically everything you're using were probably made in Taiwan.

00:35:34.572 --> 00:35:39.292
Handful of other places in some cases, but probably Taiwan.

00:35:39.292 --> 00:35:46.892
Some of the things I have here are German made, but the phone on my desk, Taiwan, the chip in it.

00:35:46.892 --> 00:35:50.332
My iPhone, probably Taiwan.

00:35:50.332 --> 00:35:57.472
So the stuff on which we rely, relies on hardware made in Taiwan.

00:35:59.012 --> 00:36:10.572
And so China, if they take Taiwan, is in a position to have a continuing supply of these chips, whereas we would not.

00:36:10.572 --> 00:36:19.652
And this is not something where we can just spin up a new fab and have it ready in five years, or ten years, maybe ten years.

00:36:19.652 --> 00:36:35.612
But even ten years would be a challenge, because the number of men on the planet who actually understand what is going on in those fabs and how to rebuild them would fit on a double-decker bus.

00:36:35.612 --> 00:36:37.652
It is a small number of men.

00:36:37.652 --> 00:36:41.352
China, incidentally, also knows that and has contingency plans.

00:36:41.352 --> 00:36:46.932
You can imagine what they are if they don't manage to take Taiwan.

00:36:47.992 --> 00:36:56.032
So, yes, China is our biggest actual threat in terms of, you know, near-peer.

00:36:56.352 --> 00:37:00.372
They're not really a near-peer, but it's sort of an interesting dynamic.

00:37:01.192 --> 00:37:03.072
They're powerful enough to be a threat.

00:37:03.072 --> 00:37:06.052
So, they are the biggest threat in that sense.

00:37:06.052 --> 00:37:07.132
After, of course, the Jews.

00:37:07.132 --> 00:37:09.092
The Jews are a threat for a different reason.

00:37:09.092 --> 00:37:12.552
Because the Israeli military is not a threat to us.

00:37:12.552 --> 00:37:16.992
We could wipe them out in three hours if we really felt like it.

00:37:16.992 --> 00:37:18.372
They are dangerous for other reasons.

00:37:18.372 --> 00:37:19.552
Yes, they have nuclear weapons.

00:37:19.552 --> 00:37:21.772
Their nukes aren't great, but they do have them.

00:37:22.272 --> 00:37:25.392
And they have enough to cause serious damage.

00:37:25.392 --> 00:37:37.272
China is more of a threat because of the industrial might, the population, the ambitions, and a number of dozens of other things.

00:37:38.592 --> 00:37:43.652
The ambitions are sort of a change from the history of how the Chinese viewed the world.

00:37:43.652 --> 00:37:47.732
Because for a long time, and I said I wouldn't get into the political science stuff, but here I'm going anyway.

00:37:48.612 --> 00:37:51.612
For a long time, they sort of viewed themselves as the center of the universe.

00:37:51.612 --> 00:37:52.472
That was their mindset.

00:37:52.472 --> 00:37:54.092
And so why would I go anywhere?

00:37:54.092 --> 00:37:55.452
I am the center of the universe.

00:37:55.452 --> 00:37:56.092
I am China.

00:37:56.092 --> 00:37:58.492
I don't need anyone else or anything.

00:37:58.492 --> 00:38:11.252
And then, of course, being conquered by the West a number of times, they recognized that, oh, maybe we're not the center of the world, and maybe there is a rest of the world out there, and it's relevant, and it matters.

00:38:11.252 --> 00:38:15.272
So they shifted to have international ambitions.

00:38:16.472 --> 00:38:18.472
That's playing out a number of ways.

00:38:18.472 --> 00:38:36.072
Another way that China is a threat, of course, is that China has a lot of stuff in our, for instance, electricity grid, that's a huge vulnerability for us, incidentally, where they could sabotage us at the offset of a war.

00:38:36.072 --> 00:38:37.592
They could shut down our grid.

00:38:37.592 --> 00:38:40.832
That would be a major disadvantage for us.

00:38:40.832 --> 00:38:46.552
The problem with that, and China recognizes this as well, because again, they're rational actors, they've thought this through.

00:38:46.552 --> 00:38:48.992
Well, what's the game theory here?

00:38:48.992 --> 00:38:57.792
What happens if you're the United States, and you get dragged into war with China, and China shuts down your electrical grid?

00:38:57.792 --> 00:39:16.012
Well, now you have a huge problem, because from the US perspective, a long war now gives China an advantage, because our infrastructure is damaged, and we probably can't bring it back online, incidentally.

00:39:16.012 --> 00:39:23.992
If they manage to blow enough transformers and things, we literally do not have the stockpile or the manufacturing capacity to replace them.

00:39:23.992 --> 00:39:26.252
What does that leave us as options?

00:39:28.232 --> 00:39:30.992
Long war gives China the advantage.

00:39:30.992 --> 00:39:33.452
Short war gives us the advantage.

00:39:33.452 --> 00:39:42.772
Well, now you have to go 100%, because now you have to win before those problems with your infrastructure actually become problems for your military.

00:39:42.772 --> 00:39:46.192
It raises the risk of an actual nuclear exchange.

00:39:46.192 --> 00:39:47.492
So the question is, will China do that?

00:39:47.492 --> 00:39:49.332
Do they want to do that?

00:39:49.332 --> 00:40:01.452
I don't think they want to, but they might run the calculation to decide, we'll roll the dice, because it maybe looks to them like it would be advantageous.

00:40:01.452 --> 00:40:17.132
So yes, China is a major problem, and trying to address that problem is extremely difficult, because we have allowed them to become the problem they are, because we have invested untold billions of dollars into China.

00:40:17.132 --> 00:40:20.372
We gave them all the technology they have.

00:40:20.372 --> 00:40:22.892
We built their infrastructure.

00:40:22.892 --> 00:40:28.492
We have created this monster, and it is a monster we will eventually have to confront.

00:40:28.492 --> 00:40:33.572
So is there a way to avoid the conflict?

00:40:33.572 --> 00:40:35.312
The only way to avoid it is China collapsing.

00:40:37.012 --> 00:40:40.552
Their ambitions do not stop unless they collapse.

00:40:40.552 --> 00:40:43.532
So, there are a number of ways to do that.

00:40:43.532 --> 00:40:52.112
That is sort of a high-level political issue, and I don't know that we have the men currently in positions of power who are competent enough to do that.

00:40:52.112 --> 00:40:55.112
But the reality is that, yes, China is a major threat.

00:40:55.112 --> 00:40:58.432
And I know some people are probably listening and thinking, well, about Russia.

00:40:58.432 --> 00:41:01.172
Russia is not really much of a threat.

00:41:01.172 --> 00:41:08.932
Russia has a lot of nuclear weapons, so Russia could cause an immense amount of damage to the world with those nuclear weapons.

00:41:08.932 --> 00:41:12.252
But absent that, they're not much of a threat.

00:41:12.252 --> 00:41:14.232
Their military is not very strong.

00:41:14.232 --> 00:41:15.852
They can't project power very well.

00:41:15.852 --> 00:41:18.712
I mean, look at what's happening in the Ukraine.

00:41:18.712 --> 00:41:22.132
That's not very impressive for the Russian military.

00:41:22.132 --> 00:41:25.512
So the reality is that Russia is just not that much of a threat.

00:41:25.552 --> 00:41:29.672
They fund PSYOP campaigns and cause problems and sow division and things like that.

00:41:29.672 --> 00:41:33.112
But, you know, the Jews are a lot better at it.

00:41:33.112 --> 00:41:35.272
They're a much bigger threat than the Russians.

00:41:35.272 --> 00:41:40.492
Maybe Russia deserves to be in the top five, but they are nowhere near China.

00:41:44.052 --> 00:41:46.052
Yes, the next question is also sort of related.

00:41:46.052 --> 00:41:55.752
Do you think there is a genuine chance of victory, which is to say actual states, he says ethnostates here, but obviously, it's almost a little redundant.

00:41:55.752 --> 00:42:11.812
The case of states is not truly, ethnonationalism is, but anyway, ethnostates arise and triumph globally, the reduction of the Negro invasion, the radical left finally no longer a threat, no more trans agenda, et cetera.

00:42:11.812 --> 00:42:16.012
Yes, I do think we have very good odds of victory.

00:42:16.012 --> 00:42:23.392
I don't know about global victory for other peoples as well, but I'm not as concerned about them, honestly.

00:42:23.392 --> 00:42:24.352
I'm concerned about my people.

00:42:24.352 --> 00:42:26.232
I'm concerned about us here in the United States.

00:42:26.232 --> 00:42:30.292
I'm concerned about Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and Europe.

00:42:30.292 --> 00:42:31.592
That's basically it.

00:42:31.592 --> 00:42:35.232
I'm concerned about the European parts of the world, because they're my people.

00:42:35.232 --> 00:42:37.732
They're the ones for whom I should have concern.

00:42:37.732 --> 00:42:41.752
Again, concentric circles of care for people.

00:42:41.752 --> 00:42:42.512
They're my cousins.

00:42:42.512 --> 00:42:43.112
I care about them.

00:42:43.112 --> 00:42:46.312
I want what is best for them.

00:42:46.312 --> 00:42:49.752
So do I think that we have chance of a genuine victory?

00:42:49.892 --> 00:42:52.012
Yes, absolutely.

00:42:52.012 --> 00:43:09.372
And I think that God is on our side, because even if it were not true that we were the only actual Christian part of the world, which we still are today, it would still be true that God made promises to Japheth and to his children.

00:43:09.372 --> 00:43:11.012
And God's word never fails.

00:43:11.012 --> 00:43:13.272
His promises never fail.

00:43:13.272 --> 00:43:16.352
He cannot do otherwise than preserve us.

00:43:17.032 --> 00:43:23.732
That doesn't mean he preserves us as masters of the entire world, which is where I want us to be again.

00:43:23.732 --> 00:43:37.172
That is our rightful position, but is only our rightful position if we are Christian again, if we obey God, if we deserve that position, because we are faithful to God's commands.

00:43:37.172 --> 00:43:43.352
God's promise does not entail that we will be masters of the entire world.

00:43:43.352 --> 00:43:51.612
It entails that we will be Christendom, and so we have to have control of some sort of territory to actually be Christendom.

00:43:51.612 --> 00:43:57.852
But I want a grander victory than mere survival.

00:43:57.852 --> 00:44:03.572
I want a restoration of everything that we once had, and perhaps more.

00:44:03.572 --> 00:44:07.332
That is the position in which our people should be, and so that is what I want.

00:44:07.332 --> 00:44:13.072
But yes, the short answer to the question is, I do believe that there is a chance, and I do believe that we will win.

00:44:16.512 --> 00:44:19.072
The next question, I'm actually going to take a sip of tea.

00:44:19.092 --> 00:44:22.092
I'll mute my mic so you don't have to listen to me sip tea.

00:44:34.088 --> 00:44:38.668
I guess there's another irony here, I'm sipping tea and now I get to talk about the Constitution.

00:44:38.668 --> 00:44:46.548
Little more tangential that time, more abstracted, but how should Christian nationalists view the Constitution?

00:44:46.548 --> 00:44:49.568
How should we go about convincing people to stop idolizing it?

00:44:49.568 --> 00:44:52.888
I think that second part sort of answers the first part a little bit.

00:44:54.728 --> 00:45:00.408
But my problem with the Constitution is exactly what is asked in the second question there.

00:45:00.408 --> 00:45:01.268
People idolize it.

00:45:02.028 --> 00:45:04.168
They have made it into an idol.

00:45:04.168 --> 00:45:19.028
And it's almost an idol in the sort of traditional, you could call it, but the sort of ancient sense of people are praying to, worshiping this thing with no real thought behind it.

00:45:19.028 --> 00:45:21.128
They're just doing the thing.

00:45:21.128 --> 00:45:29.868
They're going through the motions because in this Constitution case, how many men who say they love the Constitution have ever read the thing?

00:45:30.888 --> 00:45:35.108
I'm not even saying understand it, or have studied it.

00:45:35.108 --> 00:45:38.268
I'm saying simply sat down and read it once.

00:45:40.208 --> 00:45:43.428
Ask the next one who tells you he really loves the Constitution.

00:45:43.428 --> 00:45:45.928
Ask him the last time he read it.

00:45:47.008 --> 00:45:54.568
Watch him stumble around and fumble to try and find an answer that isn't an outright lie, because he probably hasn't read it.

00:45:54.568 --> 00:45:59.228
I'm not saying that you can't say that something is good, or you believe it's good.

00:45:59.668 --> 00:46:05.708
You can't say, I know it's good, because you haven't read it, but if you haven't read something, you can still believe that it's good.

00:46:05.708 --> 00:46:06.008
Right?

00:46:06.008 --> 00:46:07.428
There are classic novels.

00:46:07.428 --> 00:46:08.548
Men haven't read.

00:46:08.548 --> 00:46:10.048
They believe are good.

00:46:10.048 --> 00:46:14.248
So can you believe the Constitution is good without reading it?

00:46:14.248 --> 00:46:28.348
Yes, but if you are going to be one of those men who is so dedicated to the idea of the Constitution, you should probably read the document and at least know what it says, or at least try to understand it, because some of the language is old.

00:46:28.968 --> 00:46:30.768
Men are going to have trouble understanding it.

00:46:30.768 --> 00:46:32.528
Some of the language is legal and technical.

00:46:32.528 --> 00:46:34.748
Men will have trouble understanding that.

00:46:34.748 --> 00:46:40.448
So, how do we deal with the issue is sort of a more difficult question there.

00:46:40.448 --> 00:46:43.188
Obviously, I sort of answered the question with how I view it.

00:46:43.188 --> 00:46:44.228
I think that it is an idol.

00:46:44.228 --> 00:46:45.328
I think that it is a problem.

00:46:45.328 --> 00:46:47.148
I don't think that it survives.

00:46:47.148 --> 00:46:50.008
It's not good for us, for our future.

00:46:50.008 --> 00:46:51.788
It's inadequate.

00:46:51.788 --> 00:46:52.808
Is it per se bad?

00:46:52.808 --> 00:46:58.168
I would even go so far as to say yes, because some of the things that it enshrines do run contrary to Christianity.

00:46:58.788 --> 00:47:02.568
At least in terms of their interpretation.

00:47:02.568 --> 00:47:09.268
I think also in terms of their essence for some of them, because they are an outgrowth of the Enlightenment.

00:47:09.268 --> 00:47:14.328
And the Enlightenment was very much anti-Christian.

00:47:14.328 --> 00:47:19.608
I know Woe is called it the enluciferment, which is kind of more difficult to say, which is why it makes me feel bad.

00:47:19.608 --> 00:47:22.088
But when you write it, it looks very nice in writing.

00:47:22.088 --> 00:47:24.168
It's just a little difficult to say.

00:47:24.168 --> 00:47:31.308
But really, it's the same name, because what is Lucifer, the morning star, the light bringer, right?

00:47:31.308 --> 00:47:34.588
So he masquerades as an angel of light.

00:47:34.588 --> 00:47:40.228
Well, the enlightenment, I don't even need to tell you what that means, because it's the same words in English.

00:47:41.548 --> 00:47:52.408
So that's sort of the problem with the Constitution, is that it's an outgrowth of those views which were almost explicitly, and in some cases, particularly in the French cases, explicitly anti-Christian.

00:47:52.408 --> 00:47:59.468
And so I don't think that Christians can preserve it in good conscience once they recognize the reality of it.

00:47:59.468 --> 00:48:04.148
And so how do we go about disabusing people of these beliefs?

00:48:04.148 --> 00:48:09.908
How do we go about getting people to stop idolizing the Constitution?

00:48:09.908 --> 00:48:13.488
I think part of it is a generational thing.

00:48:13.488 --> 00:48:21.108
Boomers generate, you know, boomers, again, it comes back to that so often, but boomers love the Constitution, they think.

00:48:21.108 --> 00:48:23.288
It's the same problem, as I said before, where they haven't read the thing.

00:48:23.808 --> 00:48:27.048
But boomers love the Constitution.

00:48:27.048 --> 00:48:29.108
Right-wing boomers, of course, I'm not talking about the left.

00:48:29.108 --> 00:48:32.468
The left pretend to love it when they can use it as a cudgel against the right.

00:48:32.468 --> 00:48:33.688
That's it.

00:48:33.688 --> 00:48:37.288
But they're always mercenary with their beliefs because they have no beliefs.

00:48:37.288 --> 00:48:42.148
However, younger generations don't care as much.

00:48:42.148 --> 00:48:47.608
I know that I always say GenX doesn't exist, which I still say, GenX does not exist.

00:48:47.608 --> 00:48:50.268
GenX is split.

00:48:50.268 --> 00:48:52.888
You have the older GenX, they're young boomers.

00:48:53.308 --> 00:48:57.268
And you have the young GenX, they're old millennials, basically.

00:48:57.268 --> 00:49:03.788
There's nothing that really defines GenX in such a way that I think they should be divided into an explicit generation.

00:49:03.788 --> 00:49:11.268
Also, incidentally, I think chopping people up into generations is an artifact of modernity, and I don't think it's good.

00:49:11.268 --> 00:49:21.288
It is the reality, though, because the boomers were a distinct generation, developed in a distinct time with distinct beliefs and all these things that set them apart from everyone else.

00:49:21.868 --> 00:49:30.328
In fact, from everyone else, because they're set apart from their entire history, because they rejected and denigrate it.

00:49:30.328 --> 00:49:32.988
So, the boomer's the one to love it.

00:49:32.988 --> 00:49:37.368
Millennials and younger don't care as much, I say, as a millennial.

00:49:37.368 --> 00:49:45.648
So, do we have a real problem with getting rid of the idolization of the Constitution?

00:49:45.648 --> 00:50:02.168
I don't think that we have as much of a problem as some might think, because millennials and younger, the men who are going to be open to our ideas at all, who are going to come over to our side, they want to win.

00:50:02.168 --> 00:50:06.708
They want a good future for their children and for their grandchildren.

00:50:07.828 --> 00:50:13.228
They don't care about preserving this particular document or that particular document.

00:50:13.228 --> 00:50:21.808
If it's standing in the way of what needs to be done, and what we need to accomplish for our people, I don't think millennials love any problem burning the thing.

00:50:21.808 --> 00:50:23.328
I wouldn't.

00:50:23.328 --> 00:50:29.768
In fact, I've said publicly, that's what I do, because burning idols is what God commands.

00:50:29.768 --> 00:50:33.248
So I don't think it's going to be a real problem.

00:50:33.248 --> 00:50:49.288
There are those where you kind of have to slow walk them through, well, look at this part, and then look at what scripture says, and then look at this part, and look at what scripture says, and you can kind of get them to recognize, well, maybe there are some problems here, because it's saying the exact opposite.

00:50:49.848 --> 00:50:52.168
That's troubling in some ways.

00:50:52.168 --> 00:51:14.428
So you can get some people to understand the reality of this thing in which they have invested a mistaken belief, but in many cases, it doesn't matter, because it's that generational divide, the boomers will die off, to be blunt, or at the very least, retire and live a life in retirement, not involved in this stuff.

00:51:15.328 --> 00:51:21.548
So, yes, the Constitution has become an idol, but it's not going to last, so it doesn't matter that much.

00:51:23.788 --> 00:51:26.628
Take another sip of tea before I get to the next question here.

00:51:36.941 --> 00:51:45.501
So the next question is about, let me see this here.

00:51:49.961 --> 00:51:57.941
Next question, similar to Gettl's ontological proof, is there an absolute proof for Christianity specifically?

00:52:00.841 --> 00:52:08.021
So I'm not going to go into Gettl's ontological proof, modal ontological proof, because, well, there are a number of reasons.

00:52:08.021 --> 00:52:09.021
I just won't go into that here.

00:52:09.021 --> 00:52:13.561
But is there, in essence, that proves the existence of God?

00:52:13.561 --> 00:52:16.141
Okay, so that's, absolutely it does.

00:52:16.141 --> 00:52:18.141
It proves the existence of God, it's entirely sound.

00:52:18.141 --> 00:52:20.421
We can prove God exists.

00:52:20.421 --> 00:52:22.001
And so there are a number of arguments for that.

00:52:22.001 --> 00:52:23.801
There are probably six or seven that I like.

00:52:23.801 --> 00:52:25.301
That's one of the ones I like the most.

00:52:25.301 --> 00:52:31.761
But is there a proof for the Christian God specifically?

00:52:32.861 --> 00:52:41.901
Because there is a difference between proving God exists and proving Jesus Christ is God, right?

00:52:41.901 --> 00:52:44.621
We all recognize those are two different claims.

00:52:46.561 --> 00:52:49.101
So, I would say yes.

00:52:49.101 --> 00:52:56.121
And the issue is, I don't know if I want to get into the argument right now, because it takes a while to present.

00:52:56.121 --> 00:52:57.961
But I can give the basic outline.

00:53:00.481 --> 00:53:02.061
There are really two arguments I would make.

00:53:02.061 --> 00:53:10.001
The first argument is the scriptural argument, which is just pointing out all of the things that people who are interested in this sort of apologetics will already know.

00:53:10.001 --> 00:53:13.241
Scripture is very clearly not written by men alone.

00:53:13.241 --> 00:53:20.681
There is an organizing intelligence behind it that exceeds human capacity.

00:53:20.681 --> 00:53:29.761
And so, you have to recognize that Scripture was written by a being that is greater than man.

00:53:29.761 --> 00:53:42.561
That doesn't prove the Christian God, because it just proves God of some kind wrote Scripture, because you could have a God who wrote Scripture is not the Christian God, right?

00:53:42.561 --> 00:53:48.781
That's sort of getting into the weeds a little bit, but you can at least prove that Scripture is supernatural.

00:53:48.781 --> 00:53:55.621
And in proving that Scripture is supernatural, you certainly lean toward the Christian God very heavily.

00:53:55.621 --> 00:54:04.121
This is something, for instance, that you cannot do with the Book of Mormon, or with the Koran, or with the Talmud.

00:54:04.121 --> 00:54:06.841
So that would be my first proof.

00:54:06.841 --> 00:54:14.261
And I know that many atheists and agnostics and others, they don't like that argument, but quite frankly, if they're an atheist, they can't understand Gödel anyway.

00:54:14.261 --> 00:54:17.541
So at this point, you've already lost them.

00:54:17.541 --> 00:54:19.241
You're going to need to convince them with some other proof.

00:54:21.241 --> 00:54:38.361
The proof that I personally like the most, and this is actually one that I've sort of developed, but the proof that I like the most for the Christian God is that you can actually build up from first principles to the necessity of the Trinity.

00:54:39.441 --> 00:54:56.621
And I do believe that in doing that, coupled with traditional philosophical arguments, so for instance, with regard to God being the good, God being the true, coupled with that, you can prove the existence of the Christian God, the Triune God.

00:54:56.621 --> 00:55:02.021
The basis of the argument would be just sort of an outline form.

00:55:02.021 --> 00:55:15.321
You go starting from probably the infinite regress, I think that's probably the best one, just to get quickly to the proof of there being an ultimate being, an absolute infinite, which is the best way, I think, to describe God in that philosophical sense.

00:55:16.181 --> 00:55:28.521
Well, once you get to that, then you start asking the question, okay, if this God is unitary, would he ever do anything outside himself?

00:55:28.521 --> 00:55:42.321
And I think the answer necessarily is no, because I think a unitary God would be perfect and contained within himself in such a way that nothing would ever be externalized.

00:55:42.401 --> 00:55:46.861
He would simply exist and be all of existence for all time.

00:55:46.861 --> 00:55:50.181
Time also not existing, but speaking in human terms.

00:55:51.401 --> 00:56:07.241
So then the natural extension from that would be to ask, and I'm giving obviously the rough sense of this, not the full philosophy, but the next question obviously would be, okay, we don't have a unitary God, do we have a dual God?

00:56:07.241 --> 00:56:08.901
Do we have a God in two persons?

00:56:09.841 --> 00:56:20.241
And I think, again, the answer is necessarily no, because I think that you have the same problem, but abstracted one level when it is only two persons.

00:56:20.241 --> 00:56:31.161
Because with two persons, you have the inner relationship of the persons, imperfection, self-contained, wholly within itself, never externalizing anything.

00:56:31.161 --> 00:56:34.181
It's simply a back and forth between the two persons.

00:56:34.181 --> 00:56:35.621
So I don't think that solves the problem either.

00:56:36.861 --> 00:56:50.761
But I think once you get to three persons, you inherently, in the nature of that jump from two to three, solve the problem of the fact that external things exist, which is really the problem I'm getting to.

00:56:50.761 --> 00:56:55.141
And anyone who's versed with philosophy is going to recognize the problem here.

00:56:55.141 --> 00:57:01.641
But, and by problem, I mean the problem to which I'm offering the solution, not the problem with the argument, which I don't believe exists.

00:57:04.121 --> 00:57:16.141
With regard to that jump from two to three persons, you have an externalizing of the relationship, because basically you have an imparting of what is in essence movement, sort of a metaphysical movement in this case.

00:57:16.141 --> 00:57:25.861
But you have a movement inherent in the relationship between and among three persons that is not there in the simple back and forth between two.

00:57:25.861 --> 00:57:33.241
And so the three persons of the Trinity explains why we have anything external to God.

00:57:33.241 --> 00:57:50.381
And so if you have the necessity of a triune God for the existence in order to explain the existence of a universe, because the universe being external to God in a certain sense, we know the universe exists, how do we explain that?

00:57:50.381 --> 00:58:44.501
If you can build up that philosophical argument to saying that a triune God provides an explanation for that, and then you sort of come along side that with the argument that God is good, God being the absolute infinite, good having existence in itself, having proper existence, not being sort of parasitic like bad or evil is on other things and getting off of the philosophical weeds, but it's the nature of the subject, if you can come alongside it with that argument, that it is only the good that has that substantial existence, and then you have the triune god, necessarily a god who is good, god being goodness, we've already established that at this point in the argument, you're dealing with this hypothetical person, then necessarily he is going to leave proof of his existence in creation.

00:58:44.501 --> 00:58:55.441
You are going to be able to find him because the deus absconditus or the hidden god, whatever argument you want to use, that's not a good god.

00:58:55.441 --> 00:59:04.341
A god who hides himself from his creation, who does not make himself known in some way to the things that he has created, is not a good god.

00:59:04.341 --> 00:59:06.221
That's the demiurge.

00:59:06.221 --> 00:59:17.541
I don't believe that exists, and I don't think it's philosophically coherent either because you're saying that evil has a substantial existence, which evil is a deprivation of the good, not an essence in itself.

00:59:17.541 --> 00:59:20.681
And so once you've established that, well, then you start looking.

00:59:22.621 --> 00:59:24.641
Are there other triune gods?

00:59:24.641 --> 00:59:28.041
Have there ever been any other triune gods?

00:59:28.041 --> 00:59:30.081
The answer is no.

00:59:30.081 --> 00:59:33.261
The god of scripture is the only triune god.

00:59:33.261 --> 00:59:53.941
And so if you can establish philosophically the necessity of the Trinity, and you can establish philosophically, this one's the easier part, that the absolute infinite is necessarily good, then you look for the consequences of that in creation, in the world as we find it, and you find only one triune god.

00:59:55.701 --> 01:00:04.181
And I think that that necessarily leads to the conclusion that the Christian god is the only god, is the true god.

01:00:04.181 --> 01:00:15.001
I think it's absolutely unassailable philosophically, logically, and so anyone who understands Gettel's proof for the existence of god is going to be able to follow that as well.

01:00:15.001 --> 01:00:22.021
I believe, I firmly believe that, since it takes a certain sort of man and a certain sort of mind to understand Gettel in this case.

01:00:22.021 --> 01:00:25.301
So someone who can do that can certainly follow that proof.

01:00:25.301 --> 01:00:31.561
At some point, I'll outline it more formally, but that's the brief version of it.

01:00:34.821 --> 01:00:44.501
So the next question, I think we've been going about an hour, so I don't know if I'll do one more question or maybe two or three.

01:00:44.661 --> 01:00:52.261
I don't, apparently OBS does not actually have a running timer.

01:00:52.261 --> 01:00:54.721
That's a neat feature.

01:00:54.721 --> 01:01:00.181
So, at any rate, I will move on to the next question, at least do one more.

01:01:09.611 --> 01:01:14.911
Do you consider Mark 16, nine through 20 to be inspired text?

01:01:14.911 --> 01:01:23.311
If Mark 16, 16 is regarded as not inspired, does this weaken the Lutheran doctrine of baptism?

01:01:23.311 --> 01:01:33.591
Well, I do think that they're inspired, so I'm not sure that it would be relevant with regard to weakening the case for baptism.

01:01:33.591 --> 01:01:36.571
I can answer it in the hypothetical, I guess.

01:01:36.571 --> 01:01:43.811
If that part of Mark, and I'll read the verse, so people who are unfamiliar with it know what I'm talking about here.

01:01:43.811 --> 01:01:45.551
Many of you will already know it, of course.

01:01:45.551 --> 01:01:50.271
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

01:01:50.271 --> 01:02:04.691
Of course, we use that in our apologetics for the sacramental understanding of baptism, because it says whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, which of course leads into the Lutheran position of, is baptism necessary?

01:02:05.191 --> 01:02:09.091
Yes, but not absolutely so, but yes.

01:02:09.091 --> 01:02:12.371
I've explained that before, so I won't go into that now.

01:02:12.371 --> 01:02:30.811
If, as some argue, some try to say that the longer ending of Mark is not actually inspired, Lutherans don't believe that, Roman Catholics don't believe that, I don't think Anglicans believe that, I don't know how many have it in their confessions that the longer ending is part of Mark, or things like that.

01:02:31.391 --> 01:02:39.331
We don't have a canon in our confessions as Lutherans, so, which sounds weird to some people, but it's just how we've always done things.

01:02:39.331 --> 01:02:50.531
If you assume, for the sake of the hypothetical, that this is not in scripture, this is something that was added by someone else at some point, and it's not inspired, it shouldn't be there, right?

01:02:50.531 --> 01:02:52.331
I don't think it weakens our case for baptism at all.

01:02:52.331 --> 01:03:10.711
I don't think that this verse is necessary to the Lutheran case for baptism, because there are many other texts that deal with baptism specifically in a more expansive fashion than this one, because this sort of mentions it almost in passing, right?

01:03:10.711 --> 01:03:16.511
It's important, because it's straight from the mouth of Christ, and of course, all scripture is breathed out by God, right?

01:03:16.511 --> 01:03:23.191
But some portions are more valuable to us in certain circumstances than others.

01:03:23.191 --> 01:03:25.131
Some are more important than others.

01:03:25.131 --> 01:03:26.371
I'm perfectly comfortable saying that.

01:03:26.531 --> 01:03:31.031
Some books of scripture are worth more than others.

01:03:31.031 --> 01:03:40.231
But in this case, there are plenty of other places that address the doctrine of baptism, the nature of baptism as a sacrament.

01:03:40.231 --> 01:03:43.371
I don't think you need this one to build the argument.

01:03:43.371 --> 01:03:48.831
Because, yes, there's something to the power of cumulativeness, right?

01:03:48.831 --> 01:03:58.891
That's what I was doing with James White in that debate and why he got so uncomfortable when I kept asking those questions about things God cannot do, because it's hammering home the point.

01:03:58.891 --> 01:04:10.031
And so that's part of the tactic when dealing with baptism, of course, because you can just keep listing these verses about baptism that very clearly teach it is not just water.

01:04:10.031 --> 01:04:11.611
It is not something that man does.

01:04:11.611 --> 01:04:14.351
It is something that God does.

01:04:14.351 --> 01:04:19.431
This one is important, but it is not necessary.

01:04:19.431 --> 01:04:21.971
There are other verses that do more for our argument.

01:04:22.111 --> 01:04:23.471
So, I don't think it weakens the argument.

01:04:23.471 --> 01:04:25.071
It's the short answer.

01:04:25.071 --> 01:04:33.911
If this were hypothetically not part of scripture, we could lose this and still have our doctrine be the exact same thing that it currently is with regard to baptism.

01:04:36.251 --> 01:04:38.511
Let's see what the next question is.

01:04:38.511 --> 01:04:39.611
Next question is a short one.

01:04:39.611 --> 01:04:41.251
I'll answer this as well.

01:04:41.251 --> 01:04:43.431
Were the Khazars ethnically Jewish in any way?

01:04:43.431 --> 01:04:46.971
I did touch on this in a previous episode.

01:04:46.991 --> 01:04:51.071
But we'll answer it again, and then just link to that as well.

01:04:52.831 --> 01:04:55.751
The short answer is no.

01:04:55.751 --> 01:04:56.751
They were not.

01:04:56.751 --> 01:05:00.591
Now, did some Jews integrate into the population?

01:05:00.591 --> 01:05:02.471
It seems like yes.

01:05:02.471 --> 01:05:08.291
And did some of the upper class convert to Judaism?

01:05:08.291 --> 01:05:09.651
Yes.

01:05:09.651 --> 01:05:14.731
Do we have any evidence for a wholesale conversion of the people to Judaism?

01:05:14.731 --> 01:05:14.831
No.

01:05:15.591 --> 01:05:20.831
Do we have any evidence for a wholesale migration of that group?

01:05:20.831 --> 01:05:21.771
No.

01:05:21.771 --> 01:05:26.011
And are the Jews Kazarian?

01:05:26.011 --> 01:05:26.711
No.

01:05:26.711 --> 01:05:34.651
You can look at their genetics, you can look particularly at Y DNA, you can look at all of this evidence, and incidentally mitochondrial as well in many cases.

01:05:34.651 --> 01:05:38.031
So it's not just the male line, it's also the female line in some cases.

01:05:38.031 --> 01:05:47.511
Although with admixture, largely actually from southern Europe, Italy, in many cases, not from Eastern Europe, not from Kazzaria.

01:05:47.511 --> 01:05:57.211
But you can look at the DNA, you can look at the hard evidence, and they actually come from the Middle East, the Near East.

01:05:57.211 --> 01:05:58.011
That's where they're from.

01:05:58.011 --> 01:06:01.751
So they are related to the ancient Israelites.

01:06:01.751 --> 01:06:03.191
And you can see that also in their behavior.

01:06:03.191 --> 01:06:06.591
They behave the same, it's the same people, they're doing the same things.

01:06:06.591 --> 01:06:10.591
They're still giving God the middle finger and trying to ruin everything around them.

01:06:11.211 --> 01:06:13.111
That's who they've always been.

01:06:13.111 --> 01:06:14.411
And it is who they will always be.

01:06:20.343 --> 01:06:22.803
Let's see what else we have here.

01:06:28.528 --> 01:06:32.408
I think that may be it for this episode.

01:06:32.408 --> 01:06:47.588
There are more of the questions here that I have, of course, but I will not get to all of them tonight since we got through a handful here, not quite half of the 40-some-odd questions that I have going.

01:06:47.588 --> 01:06:51.048
But I think I will call it here for tonight.

01:06:51.048 --> 01:06:56.408
It's been over an hour so far, and I try to keep these to, you know, an hour, hour and a half maybe.

01:06:56.408 --> 01:06:59.708
Just depends on the questions and how long I go.

01:06:59.708 --> 01:07:05.868
If it's a more complicated answer, then I like to answer a few more questions so that it's not just one really long answer.

01:07:05.868 --> 01:07:14.968
But I will prepare answers to some of these because some of these are going to take a little bit longer, and some of them I think I have to look at some things.

01:07:14.968 --> 01:07:19.248
I have some questions about things where I haven't, like translations of scripture I've never looked at.

01:07:19.248 --> 01:07:22.608
So those I'll have to prepare the answers for next time.

01:07:22.608 --> 01:07:24.848
But I think I will call it here.

01:07:24.848 --> 01:07:26.668
Don't want to keep any of you too long as well.

01:07:26.968 --> 01:07:32.088
So, thank you for your time, and thank you for those who submitted questions.

01:07:32.088 --> 01:07:34.888
Again, questions can be submitted on the forum.

01:07:34.888 --> 01:07:36.148
That is the preferred method.

01:07:36.148 --> 01:07:41.488
The link should be in the description for the video, regardless of which platform you're using.

01:07:41.488 --> 01:07:45.048
And it's also linked in my Telegram chat and elsewhere.

01:07:45.048 --> 01:07:48.788
So, I think that is it for this week.

01:07:48.788 --> 01:07:54.468
I will be back next week, probably right about the same time, to answer more questions.

01:07:54.468 --> 01:07:55.528
That'll be episode eight.

01:07:56.388 --> 01:07:57.568
So, again, thank you for your time.

01:07:57.568 --> 01:07:58.528
Thank you for the questions.

01:07:58.528 --> 01:08:02.248
Thank you for those who submit questions for the next episode.

01:08:02.248 --> 01:08:11.128
I don't know if I will get to them necessarily, if there are additional questions, because I still have so many to answer, but I will just keep adding them to the list.

01:08:11.128 --> 01:08:16.308
And if you submit them on the forum, then other people can vote on them, and so they can sort of rise to the top.

01:08:16.308 --> 01:08:19.908
I'll try to prioritize those ones, unless they're, again, something insane.

01:08:19.908 --> 01:08:22.268
But it's mostly been avoided thus far.

01:08:22.268 --> 01:08:23.568
The questions have been very reasonable.

01:08:24.208 --> 01:08:30.488
They've been good questions that I think it's important to answer them and have the answer available for people.

01:08:30.488 --> 01:08:36.648
As always, the audio will be available probably tomorrow, maybe Saturday.

01:08:36.648 --> 01:08:38.868
Just depends on when I get that done.

01:08:38.868 --> 01:08:44.528
The audio is a little bit higher quality than the stream, simply due to bitrate restriction and things like that.

01:08:44.528 --> 01:08:51.128
But the audio-only version can be found at podcast.coreyjmoller.com.

01:08:53.328 --> 01:08:57.408
That's also my website, incidentally, without the podcast in the front.

01:08:57.408 --> 01:09:00.148
And I think that pretty much covers it for this week.

01:09:00.148 --> 01:09:03.188
Again, thank you to all of you, and have a great evening.

01:09:03.188 --> 01:09:04.768
I will see you next week.

01:09:04.768 --> 01:09:05.128
God bless.