Christian Values Vs. Civilization | Yaron Brook Show - Yaron Brook Show

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
A lot of them, fundamental principles of weedom actually self interest,
and the individual lots. This is the show. All right, everybody,
welcome to your one book show on this Saturday, December twentieth.

(00:28):
Thanks for joining me. We are you know I told
you that I'll devote my Saturday shows to three general topics,
uh kind of Christianity and civilization, uh, the search for
meaning and uh and capitalism just just different aspects of capitalism.
So today we're back to the topic of civilization and

(00:50):
UH and Christianity and uh uh yeah, well we'll keep
on this rotation. I do not have any views today,
but I do need to catch up on those, so
we'll probably devote a midweek show sometime to at least
catch up on reviews and get them all done and

(01:11):
get them all or most of them done by year end.
All right, Let's see, So I thought we talked today
about Christian values and what they are, and then how
they relate to Western civilization, to civilization, to where we

(01:31):
are today, to how we got to where we are today,
how civilization came about, and to what extent we can
attribute civilization to these, you know, co Christian values, to
what extent is Christianity responsible, But we'll look at it
through the lens of Christian values, of through the lens
of Christian morality. I want to say one thing. I

(01:56):
was thinking of calling this judo Christian values versus civilization,
but then I thought, God, then I'd have to separate
out what is exactly. I'd have to do the whole
theology of the separation between Christianity and Judaism, and that
seems ridiculous. Also, it just opens it up to the

(02:17):
argument of no, there is no judo Christian It's really
only Christian values and Jewish values are very different. And
to some extent that's true. So I decide dealt with it.
I mean, the reality is judo Christian values. The whole
idea of judo Christian civilization, judo Christian whatever is probably

(02:39):
a mid twentieth century concept. It is a post Holocaust concept.
It's a way for Christians to pretend that Christianity had
nothing to do with the Holocaust, for Christians to pretend
they don't know. You know, we've always been on the
Jews side, you know, when faced with the reality of

(02:59):
what happened in you juring the World War two. Uh So,
so there is no such thing as Judo Christian values.
The Jews and the Christians indeed disagree on many of
these values. They they they share common as well, see
we won't see, but they'll share common irrationality, that the

(03:19):
irrationality of religion, the originality of faith, that they share.
But they disagree on the particulars. And there's no point
in really getting into it. Uh, just to be clear,
just so nobody has any doubts, because I know a
lot of people are out to get me on this issue.
It's Judeo who cares. Judo is a martial art. I'm
talking about Judo. You thought I was talking about Jews.

(03:42):
Now I'm talking about Judo Christian. It's the it's the
there's a Judo Christian thing, Judeo Judeo Christian. Just so
we're clear, I don't think Jewish value said anything to
do with the civilization either. So everything I say criticizing

(04:03):
Christianity with some variations because the values are different, but
basically applies to Judaism. But why don't I and this
is a question I get all the time, right, why
don't I attack the Jewish religion and Judeo values as
much as I attack Christian values, primarily because they're just
mostly in America, in Western civilization. Arguably even in Israel,

(04:28):
they're not that relevant. We live in a world in
which the relevant, the relevant values, the relevant, the relevant
perception of morality, the relevant religion is Christianity. Judaism is
an asterisk. It's barely significant that what I don't know,

(04:51):
fifteen million Jews in the world, it doesn't count for anything.
And most of those, many of those yewser if not
most of those Jews a couple of secular and if
they have any values, if they've absorbed any values they've
absorted from the Christian culture around them. And indeed, arguably
Judaism is being Christianized quite a bit in the last

(05:12):
few hundred years. So it's just a waste of time
to criticize Judaism. Now, if I lived in Israel, where
Judaism is to a large extent a threat qua religion
is a threat to I think the existence of the
state of Israel, to the success of the State of Israel,
to the Western the civilized aspect of Israeli society. Then

(05:36):
it's spent a lot of time in Israel criticizing Jewish values,
but I'm living in America and my audience is overwhelmingly,
well not overwhelmingly not Israeli. It's overwhelmingly American and Canadian,
Australian and European. It's Anglo Saxon and European and a

(05:58):
small fraction Israeli. So why would I talk Why would
I spend time talking about Jewish values when it's not
relevant to the challenges and struggles that we are are
facing in America, the cultural issues that we face, and
indeed to the very evolution of Western civilization. Western civilization

(06:24):
evolved in the context of Christianity, you know, that's a reality.
It didn't evolve in the context of Judaism. It didn't
evolved in the context of this particular version of the
context of Islam. Although Islam played a much bigger role Muslims,
not Islam. Muslims played a much bigger role, arguably suddenly

(06:47):
in the in the in the push of of of
civilizing the West than Jews did it because they were
the transmitters. They were the people transmitted the knowledge of
the Greeks to the West, not Jews. Muslims did did that. So,

(07:15):
you know, religion, religion sucks and across the board, and
I'm not biased towards Judaism. You know, you could we
could have a discussion about the relative virtues and vices

(07:38):
of Christianity versus Judaism, and which version of Christianity, which
versions of Judaism and so on. We could have that discussion.
It could be an interesting discussion which one is worse
Christianity of Judaism. But that's not that important. It's not
that interesting from the perspective of I reject them both
from the perspective of the rejection of religion. All right, Uh,

(08:06):
just a few other things. Somebody says, the Golden Age Islam. Yes,
I'm you know. I read a book I told you
about this. I read a book about Central Asia, Islam
in Central Asia and the Golden Age, the Enlightenment in
Central Asia in the I don't know, ninth to eleventh century,
and it was amazing. It was a really incredible book.
And I'm reading a book now about Spain basically during

(08:31):
the Middle Ages, that is the Islami consequest of Spain
and then the erosion of that and and what happened there.
Not as good of a book to too engaged in
the politics of it. This King did that and rather
than in the intellectual it's not. Now, granted, the book
is focused differently, it's not focused on enlightenment, it's not focused,

(08:55):
but it still emphasizes the extent a where the the
the fact that Christians were welcomed into Islamic Spain, into Andalusia,
the south of Spain, which was which is which was
Muslim for a very long time, and and were allowed

(09:18):
into the libraries and therefore copied and translated the writings
of of the Greek Greek Greek philosophers, and and also
the the Asian Islamic uh Enlightenment was also being translated.
And then of course there was everywhere everyone is who

(09:41):
is the great Muslim philosopher in Spain, who was as Italian?
Who was translated into Latin. That is what's set off
the intellectual revolution that made that that that led to
the Renaissance, that led to Western civilization. So you cannot

(10:04):
you cannot understand Western civilization. You cannot understand the rise
of of of a Statilian ideas, the the even the
creation of universities and in Europe without an understanding of
what they were reading, what was being translated, what was
being what, what was being transmitted into Europe from the

(10:26):
Muslim world during this period, primarily from Spain Primelli, from
the from the libraries and places like Cordoba. Uh and
and later uh god, what's the what's the Toledo uh
in in for the North Toledo which was occupied by
the by the by the Christians pretty early and immediately

(10:48):
they started translating everything and moving it out. So yeah,
I mean, and Delicia was no paradise. So I gotside
recommended the myth of these in paradise one week ago.
I don't I don't know if that's the book I'm reading,
but I'm reading a book that basically says, yeah, it
was no paradise, and it certainly it was no paradise.

(11:09):
And I don't even know what you mean by paradise.
They were all killing each other constantly, and raping and
murdering and fighting and infighting, and and they were all
in on it, the Christians, the Muslims, the Jews, they
were all scheming and politically it was a complete disaster
and there was no stability, and there really was no
period of of of paradise. But there were periods of

(11:33):
great achievement, you know, not so much in the sciences,
but philosophy you get mimonodes and and Avicenna nos in
Asia and and mimonodes and and in poetry and and
other cultural culturally it thrived what politically it was It

(11:55):
was just a complete and out a disaster. And it
was never paradise in a sense that everybody was constantly
discriminating against everybody. You know, it wasn't everybody again was
slaughtering everybody. So very is very is all right? So

(12:15):
I want to say that's also relevant because relevant to
a discussion of where civilization comes from and how it involves,
and relevant to the discussion about Christianity. But but I
just want to fill you in kind of on the
books that I am that I am reading. God, where's

(12:36):
my phone? I didn't bring my phone into the office. Okay,
that is fine. Uh, I want to say something else, No,
I think that's all I want to say is in
a sense a backup. You know, introduction wasn't even really
an introduction. But okay, let's jump in. Let's talk about
Christian values, and we'll talk about the relations between Christian

(12:56):
values and civilization. And let's be clear. Hear what I
mean by civilization? What I mean by civilization. Uh is
a is a culture of achievements. Uh, it's a it's
a society, a civilized society, as a society where you
see great achievements in human life, that is in the arts,

(13:21):
in architecture, in sciences, in the advancement of human well being.
Civilization in a sense as a relative term, because it's
contextual to the peuit it was in We talked about
this last time we talked about civilization. Right, Egypt was
a civilization when it was a civilization. If you took

(13:41):
that civilizations and planted in today, it would be barbaric.
It would be primitive, barbaric, and and and and you know,
completely uncivilized. But in the context of its time, it
provided stability, it provided a legal system, It it proved
I did some you know, human achievement, pyramids, some dabbling

(14:07):
in primitive science, particularly astronomy, and and and some arts
in Egyptian sculpture and things like that. Right, So it's
relative to the time. Greece is exceptional in a sense
that much of that civilization would be civilized in any

(14:28):
period except for the fact that Greeks had slaves and
viewed slavery positively as a positive feature, you know, with
some exceptions or some Greek thinkers who condemned slavery, Greek
stated women, you know, awfully, democracy or political participation was very,
very limited. So it was civilized in some respects even today.

(14:52):
But for its time, it's a civilization. It's a great civilization.
It's one of the great civilizations ever because it has
features Greece that impacted all civilization following it, and indeed
would be considered civilized even today. So you know, civilization

(15:13):
is this threat that goes through history. Maybe it starts
in with Soopotamia, Egypt, Babylon and Persia, Greece, Rome, Central Asia,
you know, to some extent, you know, Andalusia, Baghdad, southern Spain,

(15:34):
and then I think comes to Europe as a civilizing force,
and Europe becomes civilized at some point, but it's not civilized.
There's no Western civilization i'd certainly say before the Renaissance,
and really no civilization in the sense of the achievements

(15:55):
of the modern world before the Enlightenment. So you know,
there's no there is a Mayan civilization, there is a
there are you know, American civilizations pre in in pre Europeans,

(16:16):
arriving here. Those civilizations are civilized only in the context
of the place and the time, but not in time,
because there were already much more dramatic achievements in other places. Uh,
you know, given the time, but given the place. They
were improvements, you know, for for and compared to the

(16:38):
culture surrounding them. They were improvements to the mining civilization,
the Aztec civilization, and so on. And of course there
was Chinese civilization, Indian civilization, who were kind of parallel
civilizations that in many respects got stuck and never really
never really advanced into the modern world, never really took
the next step, you know, beyond uh, an organized society

(17:03):
with the rule of law and a government, I mean
at least laws and and and a government and a
declining violence and UH and some technological and material achievements, right,
it got stuck. Those material achievements got stuck. They never
made political achievements. The philosophical achievements got stuck. That there's

(17:25):
you know, confuse Confucius and I mean there are a
few others, but it a philosophical culture doesn't evolve like
it does in Greece. And then ultimately UH in UH
in Europe, so so what we have is so that's

(17:46):
how we consider civilization. That's what I consider civilization. And
then the question is is civilization can we see a
causal relationship between civilization and the Christian values? And so
think about it this way, you know. Can we see
a relationship between the political achievements of the funding Fathers

(18:08):
and Christian values? Can we see a relationship between the
esthetic achievements of the Renaissance and Christian values? Can you
see a relationship between the incredible scientific scientific achievements of
the Renaissance through the Age of Science and the Age
of Reason and into the modern world through Christian values?

(18:31):
Can we see the material advancement that happens starting you know,
sometimes in the late eighteenth century, through the Industrial Revolution
through the twentieth century. Can we find those do those
have a root in Christian values? Can we see the
relative decline in violence that happens starting in certainly starting

(18:53):
in the early nineteenth century today in spite of the
Two World Wars? Can we see the decline of violence
during a certain period in Western civilization as anchored in
Christian values? So, you know, that's that's the that's the project,

(19:15):
that's that's what that's what I H. That's what I
want to talk about today. We can't cover the whole topic.
We'll take on a few a few elements, and you know,
maybe we'll talk about this again sometimes in the future.
Reminder to feel fee to ask questions about about this
or you know, anything else. But you know, it would

(19:37):
be particularly interesting if you ask questions about this topic
or generally about civilization, about history, the history of civilization,
you know, and all of that. That would be the
most interesting and I think useful if you could, if
you could do that. So we've got one question so far,
but it's a fifty dollars one, so that's cool. And

(19:57):
of course you could support the show with stickers all right. Now,
in order to figure out what what Christian values are,
this is important important, I turned to my UH, to
my UH basically UH, the companion theologian, the theodre, the

(20:18):
in house if you will, my in house theologian UH,
to ask about you what are coote Christian values? And
in my household the in house theologian is chat Gypt
five point two. That that that's uh, that is UH.
That is where I get my theological advice from. Now

(20:38):
I know for For some this will not be very satisfying.
They would rather I had an actual, you know, theologian here,
but you know, alas I do not know any and uh,
I've discovered that chat Gypt does a really decent job,
like if you ask chachipt about iron Man, which I

(20:58):
do you know? In view of this, I mean in
view that it does a really good job of summarizing
a philosophy of addressing it. Now, it's wrong on some things,
and there's some nuances that are wrong, and it's a
little skeptical of objectivism, but generally it's pretty damn good.
Now I don't I don't have groc although I guess

(21:19):
I could use it through through Twitter, but I think
checchiut seems to be quite good. Again, my measure quite
good is is asking about something that I know, and uh,
you know, I know objectivism. So I said about objectivism,
and and it does it does it? It does it
quite well. Jason says Moments will cook you dinner, Yeah,

(21:43):
but without want to eat it. I don't know. Momon
food does not strike me as advertizing. I apologize to
any moments out there who might be great chefs, but
but just generic moment food is not my thing. Uh.
You know, people are pretty just saying you know, Grock
is more straightforward. You know. I wonder if I ask
Groac what my core about core Christian values? Where they

(22:04):
get a different answer, significantly the same with Gemini. Anyway,
here we are. These are the core Christian values. It's
got ten. I get the associate with the with the
ten Commandments, and it's separating from the Ten Commandments. I
give it credit for not just giving me the Tin Commandments. Indeed,
none of these are in the Ten Commandments explicitly. Uh so,

(22:28):
uh you know Number one? Love charity, Love and charity.
So uh you know, love God and love your neighbor.
Love your neighbor as yourself. You know. This includes compassion,
self sacrifice, and concern for the vulnerable. Okay, so so
love love, you know, not so much as an emotion,

(22:51):
but as a as a as a kind of a
how do how does you know? As as actions as
a guide to action, faith, love, faith, trusting God, commitment
to his teachings. Not you know this is this is

(23:14):
about reliance on God, loyalty to God, and this is
where important truths come from. It's faith. The most important
truths come from three Humility, recognition of human limitations, and
dependence on God. Rejects pride and self exaltation. The last

(23:35):
shall be first. The last should be first. Forgiveness, forgiving
others as God forgives. Uh, you know, and I find
this weird. Forgiving others as God forgives. God is unbelievably unforgiving.
Now everybody tells me that that's true of the Old
Testament God. But the New Testament God is a very

(23:56):
loving God and is very forgiving God if you follow
his dictates to the letter. And even then it's not clear, right.
I mean, in the day of judgment, I go to Hell,
I mean, where's forgiveness? Like, Okay, I've sinned here and there,
But you know, where's the forgiveness to me? No, you

(24:17):
got to help because why because you were born Jewish
and you're an atheist. You got to help Hell. What
you actually did in life? Hell is for you. I
don't know. Forgiveness, I don't see that turned the other
cheek turn out the chief Christians are very good at
tuning the other cheek ah justice, which is more righteousness

(24:39):
and care for the poor, oppressed and marginalized mercy. It's
often paid with mercy. Justice and mercy are related, right,
And then another use of most is mostly in compassion.
This is a number six, I guess, showing kindness. And
again some of these repetitive ultimately because as we'll see,

(25:04):
honesty and integrity, truthfulness and would in action and living
consistently with one small commitments self sacrifice, willing it to
give up personal comfort for others. I like the way
Chadgypt puts it personal comfort person that self sacrifice. Jesus
gave up personal comfort to be put in a cross
and kneel to it and suffer an agonizing slow death.

(25:28):
I mean, that's a whitewashing of self sacrifice. How about
willingness to give up your life, to give up your values,
to give up what makes me happy, to give up
what's yours for others. And then it says the second

(25:49):
bullet point is modify modeled on Christ's life and crucifixion.
But the whole point of the crucifixion is it wasn't
just giving up a personal comfort. It was a lot
more than that. All Right, Maybe I'll try grock. Maybe

(26:09):
maybe groc won't won't sneak in personal comfort kind of
stuff in there? Obedience to God. Obedience to God, which
I think is part of faith. Alliging one's life with
God's will is revealed in the scripture and conscience and conscience,
and they finally hope, confidence and salvation although most of

(26:30):
you are not going to get salvation. You're not going
to get salvation, you know. And if you believe in Augustine,
before you were born, God already decided whether you were
saved or not, so forget it. Resurrection and eternal life,
so hope. All right. So here's the thing I mean, basically,
what does this all boil down to. It balls down

(26:53):
to faith. It boils down to faith, and under faith
you can put in a obedience to God and really hope.
If hope is confidence in salvation, resurrection, eternal life, those
all based purely on faith. Uh, providing meaning and suffering
in adversity. That's all faith, the faith that there is something.

(27:14):
So I would say, you know, one is hope, sorry,
one is faith. Faith captures much of this, right. A
second is self sacrifice. Self sacrifice includes justice and mercy
and forgiveness. Uh, they're all captured under self sacrifice, right,

(27:38):
self sacrifice, justice, mercy, and forgiveness. So that's that's true.
We got faith, which captures hope, obedience to God and faith,
and we've got and we've got we've got self sacrifice.
And what's the third one. What's the third one? I

(28:00):
mean third one would be I think humility or yeah, humility,
which is, you know, recognition of your own limitation. And
I would say this is also connected with love, although

(28:20):
love could be also related to self sacrifice, because that's
kind of the conception of love that they have. Their
love is self sacrificial. Their love is about compassion, about
concern for the vulnerable, about loving your neighbor as yourself.
Where they you know, so you know this humility, Yeah,

(28:40):
there's kind of they throw in here two things like
honesty and and what is honesty and integrity? Integrity, So okay,
they have that in there. It's in the same commandments
that shall not lie as duties. But you know, it
doesn't that that is really so different than all the
other ones. And you could add it, but I don't

(29:07):
think it's significant. I think the three that I want
to focus on really a faith, self sacrifice, and humility. Faith,
self sacrifice and humility. And the question is to what
extent the faith, self sacrifice, and humility encourage or discourage civilization?

(29:28):
To what extent did they play a role? These Christian values,
these essential I think Christian values that capture a lot
of the other Christians values. To what extent did they
really represent the striving towards and achievements of civilization. Think
of a civilization that is built on faith, self sacrifice,

(29:51):
and humility. I can't think of one. I can't think
of them because I don't think that these are compatible
with civilization. Indeed, if you think of an error in
human history, with faith, self sacrifice, and humility were elevated

(30:11):
above all else, we're elevated as the as the values
that should dominate human life and should dominate human organization,
you know organization. Then if you think about a period
like that, then you get the Dark Ages and maybe
part of the Middle Ages. Jennifer Sais Jennifer says, you

(30:33):
get twelve twenty Europe. Yes, you get you get Europe,
or you get you know, the Muslim world since it's
Golden Age faith. I mean, civilization depends on what I mean.

(30:56):
It depends on great achievements. It depends on hum human
flourishing and human success at living at creating the material
possibilities for living and and and improving materially and benefiting materially.
Human civilization depends on human creativity, things like arts and

(31:19):
architecture and uh and and you know, and beyond that
science and technology, and and they depend on being able
to create political forms that facilitate the betterment of human life. Now,
none of that comes from faith. There is no you know,

(31:44):
the Renaissance artists did not figure out anatomy from faith. Indeed,
the Christian Church made it very, very very difficult for
the Michelangelos and the Leonardo's and and the great artists
of them, of the of the Renaissance to figure out
anatomy because they banned dissection, They made it illegal, they

(32:09):
viewed it as a sin. Faith does not give you
Michael Angelo's David. It doesn't even give you a even
I mean, it doesn't give you a a a Donald
Tello's David. It doesn't give you a school of Athens.
It doesn't give you a uh kind of the the

(32:32):
amazing I mean, Leonardo da Vinci doesn't give you any
of his paintings where you know, where you can see
kind of the careful detail of an emphasis on on
things like perspective, but then of course on on expression,
an expression, on emotion, on individuation, on the idea of individual,

(32:53):
individuating the the particular, the particular people these painting. None
of that comes from faith that you know. It comes
from studying human beings. It comes from It comes from
you know, scientific analysis. It comes from experimentation with colors.
It comes from a mathematical geomagical analysis of human perception

(33:16):
and as a consequence, the discovery of perception. It comes
from a study of anatomy, even the anatomy of the
human face, the muscles of the face, the musculagy of
the face. It comes from reason, from the application of rationality. Now,
all these people might have been Christian, but in that

(33:40):
they were doing things that led to civilization, In that
they were in acting causes that led to the to
the effect there was civilization. They were not acting on
Christian values. They were acting on rational values, rational values

(34:01):
that they recognized, either because of the introduction of rational
values through Aristotle into the culture, you know, within Christianity,
or implicitly or through their own realization. But they were pursuing,
for example, the Renaissance. One of the things the Renaissance

(34:23):
is really pursuing as a value, as an important value
is beauty, beauty for its own sake as a value. Now,
even though the Christian Church in that period is doing
the same thing. It is pursuing beauty, but that's not

(34:47):
a Christian value. That is a pagan value. That is
a value they've taken from the Greeks. The cathedrals are
not meant to be beautiful. Indeed, the cathedrals are stark.
The cathedrals have gargoyles on them, the cathedrals have sharp edges.
That that there's so much about making you look small,

(35:09):
making you look insignificant as compared to the majesty and
grandeur of God. It is the discovery of Greek and
romanants and the introduction of even architecturally, you know, compare

(35:29):
compare you know, Renaissance architecture. Two these ugly cathedrals, and
you can see a different There's a certain harmony that
is being sought in the Renaissance. There's a certain sense
of beauty. There's this you know, edges, there's a lot

(35:51):
more rounding of things that domes rather than spires. There's
a lot more seeking beauty and harmony Beauty is a value,
it's a value in human life, but it's a secular value.

(36:12):
Then is n used by the church because the church
wants to embrace lots of secular values. Just want to
make science. Its only wants to make beauty. Its only
wants to make audits own for political reasons, for for
for power reasons. Right, I mean, why do they Why
do the popes make somempeter so amazing and beautiful and
grand and the higher the best artists. Anyway, Is this

(36:35):
because there following scripture? Or is it because they want
to show the world how rich and successful they are.
They want to show the world, you know, the power
that they have. And they also want to entice people
to come to church. So church has beautiful music and
has great paintings on the wall and and uh and
so on. So you know, it's it's for the church beauty.

(37:00):
It's not an end in any kind of sense, and
it's not to enhance human life. It's to project power
and to entice people in. To entice people in. It's
used for the purpose of the church, but it doesn't
come from the church. Again, when the church dominates, you
get goggo oyles. If you get any attempt at aesthetics.

(37:28):
You know, science. We've talked about this, and we'll talk
about it many, many times, because I find this so
damn condemning and so so stunning, you know, particularly given
the historians who want to rewrite history to pretend that
the Dark Ages didn't exist. But science science, when faith

(37:52):
is at the forefront, then science does not advance, it
does not succeed. That's why for thought and years there
was just no science. I mean really there was no
science in the West about four hundred to about fourteen hundred.
I mean, there was a little bit here in there,
but nothing of substance, not anything dramatic, and no culture

(38:15):
of science, no civilization. So faith, you know, it's anti science.
It's the idea. And so this is not an accident.
Faith is anti science. It's the idea. The truth comes
from God, from revelation, not from observation, not from experimentation,

(38:37):
but from revelation or from an ancient book. And they
were so it was so, I mean, the Christians were
so immersed in faith. Faith was such a dominant value
to them that when they discovered Aristotle and they had

(39:02):
you know, they they found him interesting and fascinating. They
took so much of what he said on faith, so
that Aristotle's scientific observations, which for the most part, are wrong,
they tried to defend as if it were scripture, because

(39:24):
their whole understanding was Aristotle couldn't be wrong. He was
inspired by a by a revelation, by by a holy whatever.
They didn't understand the methodology that he was using, which
was anti faith pro reason, but uh yeah, anyway, it

(39:45):
was it was faith is incompatible. It's it's incompatible with
the civilization of science and and and and beauty and
aesthetics and and and and the creation of those aesthetics.
So some other values had to be snuck in, some
of the values that enter in order to make the

(40:08):
civilization happen. Those values of beauty from the pagan world,
the value of reason from Aristotle, the value of logic
from Aristotle, and then the actual scientific work that the
Greeks had done and the Arabs had done, Asians or
whatever the Muslims had done penetrating and people going whoa, oh,

(40:32):
you can do this stuff. It's not just the Greeks.
Other people can do it. Maybe we can do it.
But those ideas, the idea of reason and rationality and
observation and the possibility of discovery. That is what makes

(40:56):
civilization possible. Faith is the anti civilizing force. And indeed,
as those values are entering, the Church is fighting them.
They're fighting against Aristotle, they're fighting against science, and to
some extent in early Renaissance, they're fighting against the artists.

(41:18):
It's controversial what the artists are doing. So faith incompatible
with civilization, incompatible with civilization. I'm going to go to humility,

(41:40):
will leave self sacrifice dand it's humility compatible with civilization.
Humility the recognition of human limitation and dependence of God.
I mean, really, where would we be without the arrogance
of a Newton or the Galileo. I mean, you have

(42:03):
to be pretty arrogant, self confident, self assertive to say
to the world you've all been wrong, You've all been
damn wrong. I have the truth, I have discovered the truth.

(42:25):
This is how the world works, and you guys are wrong.
Humility I mean was Michelangelo or I mean Michelangelo was
not humble. He could do with marble what he wanted

(42:50):
to do with marble, and he knew it, and he
knew he was the best and he told people he
was the best. And it's reflective in his work. He
is pushing himself, he is striving, he's perfecting, he's not
depending on God, he's not contemplating his limitations. I mean,

(43:20):
and you know you can argue that to the extent
that he rejects pride, he suffers for it. The last
should be first. What civilization was ever built by the last,
by the meek, by the poor. By the way, if

(43:46):
you want to ask a question or make a comment
or challenge me on something, super chat is open. That's
the way to do it. Don't just stick it in
the chat if you want me to see it. The
comments today are hysterical. Oh my god. All right. You know,

(44:17):
these the people who sold a civilization, the people who
build civilization, who create civilization, who have made the modern world,
which even if you reject you are massive beneficiaries of,
are not guided by humility. They guided by a passion
to seek out the truth, to change the world, to

(44:41):
create something beautiful. Civilization was created by men who reject
the value of humility and embrace their own capacity for genius,

(45:01):
their own capacity to shape the world, their own capacity
to understand the world. Free of faith, free of a
reliance on a god, on mysticism. I mean, do humble
men create the United States of America? No, These were

(45:24):
men were supreme confidence and self esteem. These are not
men that were the last. These were the men who
were first of immense intelligence, of a men's capabilities, and
they knew it. They were actors. In reality. They weren't

(45:51):
guided by faith to establish America. They weren't guided by
humility to establish America. They were guided by self estas theme,
love for this world, love for freedom as individuals. As individuals. Again,

(46:15):
they might have had, they might have had, you know,
presented Christian ideals because that's the world in which they live,
and that's all they thought. I'm saying. They acted against
those ideals. Oh, I mean Newton was deeply religious, Locke wise,
you know, Michelangelo was. No, No, not so much. But

(46:42):
they acted against that. I don't know exactly what Franklin
meant by humility, but religious humility, recognition of his limitations
and dependence on God and rejecting and self exultation and
the last shall be first. That's not Franklin. That's not

(47:04):
Benjamin Franklin. Even if he wrote in His Little Book
of Virtues, to be humble. This is not the humility.
It's not Christian humility that he's talking about. You know.
Don't be boastful. We all can agree, don't be boastful.
Don't take credit for things you are not responsible for.
Don't you know a lord of other people because of

(47:26):
your success. There are lots of things that we can
agree that might fall under something related to humility that
Franklin might be talking about. But in terms of what
it means in Christianity, no, no. And finally, self sacrifice,

(47:52):
I mean self sacrifice fundamentally means the giving up of
personal values, of your values, of values that you believe in,
necessarily for your life, your happiness, for your success, for
your flourishing, for the sake of others, giving up a
high value for no nothing in return, no something lower

(48:12):
in return. Again, that is not That is not civilization,
so civilization building. Self sacrifice is what you demand of
people who go to war for you. It's what you

(48:34):
demand of your serfs, it's what you demand of slaves.
But self sacrifice, self sacrifice is not a morality of
value seekers. People who are you know, you know, aggressively

(49:01):
pursuing passionately pursuing, aggressively and passionately pursuing the values, which
is what you need to build a civilization and to
sustain a civilization and maintain a civilization. You need the
creation of values, human values, values necessary for human life.

(49:23):
I mean a sacrifice would be to ask Michael Angel
not to sculpt David because I don't know there was
some charity work that need to be done. You need,
you need to go in and feed people in the
soup kitchen. I mean, none of the people who built

(49:43):
Western civilization, who created the civilization, Who who who created
the achievements right, the science, the art, the architecture, the
political freedom, political liberty that that characterizes modern civilization. Those
people didn't do it as an act of sacrifice. Even

(50:07):
when the funding fathers signed the Declamation independence, knowing that
they're likely to be killed because they're likely to lose
the war and the British will execute them. They don't
view it as a sacrifice in a sense of giving
up a high value for low value. They view their
freedom as a high value, a value that will interest
their life's for same goes for the soldiers who fight

(50:30):
to protect civilization, defend civilization, sustain civilization. It's not a
self sacrifice. It's not about mercy and compassion and a
willingness to give up stuff. And suddenly nobody's ever created

(50:50):
civilization by modeling Christ's life. Christ's life is stagnation. It's
not elevation. It's stagnation. It's not progress. The idea of
human progress, the idea that we can achieve more that

(51:13):
is not a humble idea, that is not an idea
based on faith. God doesn't promise that anyway. You promise
the salvation to some, but salvation has any doo with
achieving material prosperity or beauty or anything else in this
earth other than sacrifice. And sacrifice denies you the time,

(51:35):
the energy, the focus, the ability to make to achieve
great things. So there is there's no relationship between these

(51:56):
Christian values and the civilized in the civilized world and
civilization I mean compassion good thing, But compassion doesn't build civilization.
Mercy doesn't justice in a sense of care for the

(52:21):
poor and the press, and marginalized I mean finding fathers.
The declamation of Pendis doesn't talk about the poor, preston
marginalized talks about individual rights. Oh men are equal, equal
in their rights, politically free as individuals. Forgiveness. I'm just

(52:45):
looking at this, I mean, which of these? And I'm
not even gonna get to love because i think the
definition of Christian love is absurd and ridiculous because it
relies on self sacrifice. We can talk another time about love.

(53:06):
Jennifer's compassion for whom, compassion for the last, the last
shall be first. It's a compassion for the suffering, compassion
for the people who don't have compassion for anybody except you.
And of course hope. Hope is you know. Entrepreneurs are
not hopeful. They're doers. They go create the world that

(53:30):
they want. They don't sit around hoping for it. They're
not confident in this salvation. They go create, they go build,
they go make again. Entrepreneurs, you don't function on the
basis of faith. I mean confidence, belief based on based

(53:51):
on evidence in your own ability and in the market
and all that stuff, but not faith. And entrepreneurship is
not about self sacrifice. It's about working hard, it's about
trade offs. It's about giving up stuff. Indeed, faith self

(54:18):
sacrifice and humility anti civilization of values and to the
extent that they had taken seriously, we know what they
lead to in spite of the idea of love and
and uh and and forgiveness. I mean, did Charlomage forgive
those well they Frankish, well, I'm not even sure what
they were. But you know, the four thousand, five hundred

(54:40):
soldiers who refused to convert to Christianity who he slaughtered
in one day? Was that an act of charity, forgiveness, love?
What exactly was it? Certainly an act of faith he
believed God had you know, had not commanded, but in
trust to him to do the right thing. Maybe viewed

(55:02):
as a more active justice when heretics were burnt at
the stake for disagreeing about whether there was a trinity
or what the relationship in the trinity between God and
the Son where there was literally a son, whether they
were co equals, or whether they were all the same.

(55:26):
Like I mean, Catholic Church post what do you call it?
Nicea holds that it's a three that are one, right,
So they don't believe in a is a. The Catholic
Church does not believe a is a. They don't believe
a thing is what it is. They believe something three

(55:47):
different things can be one thing. So three different gods
can be one god. And if you disagreed about that,
or some implications of that, a minor explanation of that,
you were burned at a steak. I mean Calvin burnt

(56:08):
somebody who was very friendly with and he actually respected,
because of a disagreement about the trinity in Culvi's Geneva.
But there was no tolerance for people who misinterpreted the Bible.
There's only one interpretation, Calvin's in this case, and if
you disagreed with it, it was it. You were burned
at the steak. So Christianity incompatible with civilization, incompatible with freedom.

(56:46):
Now I say incompatible that is to the extent that
it is taken seriously, to the extent that it is
embraced fully, it leads to the opposite, it leads to uncivilized.
To the extent that it's just embraced at the margin.
Then yeah, civilization can still exist Christians. You're not adding

(57:07):
to it. It's subtracting from it, and it's subtracting from
human flourishing. But it can coexist if you will. Reason
and faith can coexist even though the opposites and they're
driving civilization in different directions right, one uncivilized, one to civilize,

(57:28):
and ultimately one has to win and one will lose.
But again to the extent that we are Christian, to
the extent we take it seriously, to the extent that
we're going to be consistent about it, to the extent
that we pursue it. To that extent, we are driving
ourselves a culture a world away from civilization, towards about barty,

(57:49):
towards twelve twenty or nine thirty or six sixty six,
there's go they go, six sixty six. That's a good number.
So my conclusion not surprising, I think to anybody out
there is Christian values is incompatible with civilization. They hold

(58:13):
civilization back, They undermine civilization and to fully, to fully
embrace the potential that is civilization, the potential that is freedom,
the potential that is science, The potential is beauty and
aesthetics and art. The potential it is human achievement in

(58:35):
any realm, The potential it is love, the potential it
is human relationships. One needs to reject the Christian values.
Now it's not enough to reject them. You have to
replace them. And you have to replace the values inc

(58:58):
it in reality discovered through reason. We are rational animal.
To live as nature in a sense, to live by
our nature requires us to banon faith in the name
of reason, to banon self sacrifice in the name of
our own thriving, in our own flourishing, and to bannon

(59:22):
humility in the name of pride, a commitment to our
own success, achievement, perfection. So yes, Christianity civilization, they don't mix.

(59:47):
I mean they mix, but the one is polluting the other.
Christianity is polluting the element that is civilized. All right,
thank you guys, thanks for joining me. That was an hour.
All right, We're good, super chat is good. Thank you.

(01:00:10):
I appreciate that we're on a good track. A lot
of questions, all right, I'll just to get through all
of them. Let me remind you of a few things again.
You can keep asking questions, that's great. And if you
don't want to ask questions, you can you can do
you can do stickers. December thirty first, we'll be doing
an extended show review of twenty twenty five and looking

(01:00:32):
forward to twenty twenty six from one pm East Coast
time until who knows four plus hours. We'll also make
that a big fundraising push fundraising events, So please, if
you're not a regular live listener, please consider coming live
just to participate in the fundraising aspect of it. It'll

(01:00:54):
also be fun and engaging and we'll have some fun
banter and back and forth. I might have some guests
show up to take some of your questions. I'll try
to let you know in advance once I know who's
going to come, so that might also be might also
be installed. But generally we'll try to make it fun
and interesting, and there'll be the suspense of can we raise?

(01:01:18):
Can we raise the money? Which is always fun. If
you'd like to contribute and don't want to use YouTube
because it's limited by five hundred dollars, or you just
don't don't want to do it on YouTube, you can
do it on PayPal. Just write in the notes of
PayPal under your run book show PayPal, just write in
the notes that it's for the New Year's You've show,

(01:01:40):
so I know to attribute that money for that show.
All right, let's see if there's anything else I wanted
to mention before we jump into your questions. You know,
we've got a bunch of sponsors that're down there. You
can you can you can find the links down there.
I'll give them full credit nixt show and yeah, Patreon,

(01:02:04):
don't forget to become a monthly supporter of the show
on Patreon. If you are to ten dollars, you get
the audio version of the podcast with no ads, with
no ads, right. If you get it the normal way,
you get it with ads. But if you do ten
dollars on Patreon you get a separate feed still through

(01:02:25):
Apple Podcasts or whatever, but now you don't have any ads. Also,
I didn't even know this, but it turns out that
if you are if you support this own Patreon at
five dollars above, you have access to all the all
the members only shows. You can't watch it live because
that technically YouTube doesn't allow me to do. You have

(01:02:48):
to be a member on YouTube to watch them live,
but you can't watch them after the fact. You can
watch all the shows the members only shows after the
fact on YouTube, you know, I guess, I guess, No,
you can't watch them. You get a podcast version of them.
So you get a podcast version of all the members

(01:03:10):
only shows that you can listen to. So that's another
poke that exists on Patreon beyond the regular pooks. Those
are unique to patreons, So please consider becoming a monthly supporter.
As we enter into twenty twenty six, it'll be great
to increase the number of people supporting on a monthly basis.
And of course, the the the dollar amount. All right,

(01:03:37):
let me turn to your questions. Let's doing this, all right,

(01:04:01):
let's stull with Andrew. Fifty dollars, Thank you, Andrew. Advice
for serious believers of Catholicism in their youth who now
consider themselves subjectivists. To avoid the ranscid premise of suffering
on the earth as a supernatural value, one must first
come to know that acknowledging one's pleasure is safe. Yes,

(01:04:27):
acknowledging one pleasure is safe, and pleasure is good. Pleasure
is to be enjoyed. Embrace pleasure. I mean, make sure
it's not a sacrificial pleasure, that you're not giving up
a higher value for it. But pleasure, core, pleasure is good.
It's a sign of life. It's a positive sign. So

(01:04:49):
it's the knowledge you know. Pleasure is safe, it's good,
it's a value. It's pro life, pro you there's no
sin involved. Also to those of you who were once

(01:05:09):
Catholic and a now objectivist or Christian generally, I highly
recommend Iinman's essay, and you can find it in the internet.
You can find it for free on Air's website. Duty
versus causality, because I think that what happens to many

(01:05:31):
people who come to objectivism from religion, any religion, but
primarily Christianity, is they then approach the objective's ethics as duties.
Iin Ran rejects duty through and through completely. She calls

(01:05:54):
it an anti concept. It is a destructive idea that
un minds morality, undermines ethics. I mean, we'll have to
do a show on this. So you've got to reject duty.
And this is the sense of which objectivism is not
a religion. You do not act out of duty in

(01:06:18):
order to live your morality, And she talks about the
objection's morality is causal. You act out of an understanding
of causation instead of acting on duty. You act based
on values that are pro life, and what causes those values,

(01:06:42):
the actions that are necessary to achieve those values, those
become your virtues and values. So morality, you know, religion
tells you thou shalt, thou shalt that your duty to
do it. And by the way, the more you suffer

(01:07:02):
doing it, the more virtuous it is. Because you know,
religion fundamental leans anti individual human life. It's not a
pro life ideology religion, it's an anti life ideology. But
objectivism says, no, don't do it out of duty. You

(01:07:22):
must discover your values. You must figure out what's good
for you. Here's some philosophical ideas, but you must make
them your own. And those abstractions don't give you concrete
guidance in terms of what to do in your life.
You have to figure that out. So you know, rationality,

(01:07:43):
reason is a cordon of value in objectivism. Okay, what
do I do with that? How do I apply it?
What does that mean in terms of career, love, a
pursuit of anything. Well, you have to figure that out,
not subjectively, not out of emotion, but through a process

(01:08:04):
of causation. If reason is a value, what causes my
must I affect in the world in order to achieve it?
What must I do in my life in order to
achieve the value of reason? If you want to be

(01:08:26):
successful in your career, If that's a value, what must
I do? How must I act? What should I cause
in my life? To achieve successive work. So you act
on the basis facts, evidence, reality, and on the basis

(01:08:49):
of values that are oweent it towards your life. And
if you have a sense of thus shall be h
You know, objectivism says that honesty is a virtue, and

(01:09:10):
and you you have this thing in your head that
says that I shall be honest. I need to be
honest honesty you know, you know, then you haven't. You've
got to understand how honesty affects your life. How honesty
is just an application of rationality. How it's a means

(01:09:30):
to achieving the value of reason, It's a means to
achieving the value of self esteem, it's the means to
achieving the value of happiness. It's not a commandment, it's
not a duty. And suffering and pain mostly signals, with

(01:10:00):
exception of exercise, that something is not right, something is
not working, whereas on the duty premise, pain is suffering
is a sign of positive So yeah, I mean, when

(01:10:21):
you come to objectives and from religion, there's a lot
of baggage. There's a lot of baggage, and you've got
to be aware of that. And I think Andrew's right
in one of the baggage is one of the ways
to you know, realize you in a new world now,

(01:10:42):
It is to come to terms with the idea of
the of the goodness, of the value of pleasure molten splendor.
Why does so many think that a charismatic objectives leader
will help socialism fuentes to all have large followings, But

(01:11:02):
aren't they just reflections of the culture. In my opinion,
a reflection of an individualist culture, a reflection of individual's culture,
is more important than a new tribe. Yeah, I mean absolutely,
I don't think a charismatic objectives leader will help. There's
no harm. Be great, but it's not going to make
a big difference. It'll attract a few more people, it'll

(01:11:27):
increase maybe leadership of bne Rand. But this is the point.
To be a follower fuentis. You don't have to do
a lot of thinking, you don't have to do a
lot of integrating, you don't have to do a lot
of work on yourself. It's pure emotion. The same with socialism.

(01:11:47):
I mean, you just it's easy to follow a leader
in that respect because you just follow the leader and
you follow your emotions, and you get angry when you
when it's appropriate. Objectivism requires that you think, integrate, understand,

(01:12:12):
and the most charismatic leader can do is prompt you
to do that. But then you have to do the work,
and there's nothing to indicate the culture. People in the
culture are ready for that work, ready to actually do
the thinking, to actually do the integrating. But look, the

(01:12:33):
reason they think that is because everybody wants a shortcut.
Well frustrated by the fact that we don't yet have
an objectivest world, well frustrated by the fact that evil
and bad people succeeding politically certainly as much as they
are and culturally as much as they are. And we

(01:12:54):
want a solution, and we want a solution now, and
we're not willing to wait. And if only a great
charismatic leader came about, but the only way he would
gain large audiences is you're right, if those audiences became
a tribe, and I'm thinking following tribe. What we need

(01:13:16):
is cultural change. Cultural change takes a long time. It's
a lot of work. People have to do the work themselves.
Nobody can do it for them. No charisma can do
the work for you. You have to do the work.
You have to change, and it takes generations. It just does.
There's no shortcuts, no shortcuts, sadly or not sadly. I

(01:13:42):
mean this is it's hard to be saddened by It's
hard to be sad by the metaphysical, the very nature
of reality. There's just no shortcuts. People have to do
the work, and work takes time, and for people to
realize they have to do the work is going to
take a long time. Andrews says, I've observed something, and

(01:14:06):
wonder if you think it's ominous. Christian aesthetics has improved lately,
just one example, in a series in a In the series,
Martin Scorsese is directing the Saints much more compelling and
even beautiful at times. What does this portend, you know,

(01:14:29):
a rise in in in Uh, you know, I don't know.
I'd have to see the show and to see to
what extent is it really Christian right? To what extent
is it really uh enforcing Christian values? But look, the
reality is that we live in a world dominated by
Christian values in many respects, certainly in the in the

(01:14:49):
realm of ideas and in the realm of esthetics. I mean,
socialism is fundamentally Christian. You know, for interests of course,
doing it in the name of christiananity. So we are
surrounded everywhere by Christian values. And did the fact that
did the fact that, I don't know, Michelangelo sculpt the

(01:15:13):
pieta Christian theme. You can even say the theme of
the sculpture, which might be, you know, resignation, Mary's resignation
to the fate of her son. You know that that

(01:15:34):
make Christianity stronger, maybe at the margin, but it also
there's also such a strong secular aspect to it that
I think it also weakens it at the same time.
So it depends what people responded to, and I think
they they much more responded to a humanized Jesus, a strong,

(01:15:58):
powerful man, a beautiful woman mourning who lover because Mary
in it is just as young as Jesus is uh
And and there's a real there's a real secular aspect
to it, even if ultimately the theme is she's resigning
to the loss right. So it depends on exactly what

(01:16:23):
the art form is actually doing. But look, Christianity in
some respects is on the rise. More people are taking
it seriously. It seems to be gaining influence politically generally,

(01:16:44):
I think we need to be worried, you know, and
I don't know. You know, Christian music is kind of silly.
It's just it's just a form of either rock or
pop or country. Uh. You don't have a bah, you
don't ever a mot are doing a requiem, you don't
None of that exists. So even if it's goes directly

(01:17:04):
in the Saints, it's one element that, you know, to
really have pro Christian aesthetics, you got a long way
to go, particularly if you compare it to the Renaissance.
And the Renaissance is a period of de Christianization, not
of intensifying Christianization. So I'm not too worried about any

(01:17:25):
particular a TV series, but maybe it's a broader phenomena.
But all the themes of almost all the movies are
altruistic and collectivistic, and in that sense anti civilization. And
your civilization just survives as wider then how long I
don't know, but it survives. Pick axing pick axing in Europe.

(01:17:50):
On Europe, he says, Finnish Bernstein's a splendid exchange recently,
incredible real heroic gems like ancient wheat being traded by
up to the euphrates for copper and lapis and lazuli
all the way to the fallacy of the corn laws.

(01:18:11):
I was shuffed. Yeah, I mean it's a really really
good book. I mean there's some things later on when
he gets the twentieth century and and current events that
I think he's compromising. But his history stuff is just amazing.
And yes, the idea of trade in a very very

(01:18:34):
primitive society when you know, when they didn't have even
have wagons and wheels and they still manage the trade stuff,
you know, and the amount of trade that was going
on internationally early early in human existence, early in human civilization,

(01:18:56):
because this is kind of is just stunning. It's just amazing.
And uh and and Bernstein's it's called It's a Splendid
Exchange is the book by the author's name is Bernstein.
It's on Amazon and gained audiobook. You get it a
book form or kindle. It really, really, really is a

(01:19:20):
good book, and it gives you a perspective on trade
and how it's been part of human life pretty much forever.
That is incredibly valuable. Sea's bad. What would iron Ran
think of Chernobyl disaster if she lived to see it?
What would she think of the current regime. Well, I

(01:19:41):
don't know. I mean, look, let's be very clear, I
do not channel lining rand. I don't know what she
would think, really, I mean, I can I can guess,
or I can give you my my But she was
an original thinking and always had perspectives and ways of approaching,
and she was a genius in ways. I'm not. So

(01:20:02):
there's just no way for me to tell you what
Iran would think. You know, But but I think it's
the obvious, right she she would think Chernobyl was expected
in a consequence of socialism and communism. I think the
way was the way it was depicted in the miniseries Chernobyl.

(01:20:24):
I think it was an HBO or something like that. Chernobyl.
I think it's very much aligned with I think the
way Iran would have imagined it happening. If you read
Atlas Shrugged. It's almost like some scenes in Atlas Shrugged,
like the train, like the training and the tunnel and
other things. So, you know, I think I think what
happened there is very consistent with what she did, right

(01:20:47):
with what she she believed in what she she believed,
how evil functions, the way evil functions the evasion that
the not taking push responsibility to anything. I think she
she saw that, she understood that, she understood that that
was very much in the nature of communism, and so

(01:21:07):
what she would think of the county regime, she would
she would again, I don't think she'd be surprised. She
believed that that Russian culture was was very much mystical,
superstitious and mystical, and and very much relied as a
consequence on a powerful authoritarian leader. And I don't think

(01:21:30):
she'd be surprised that Putin's authoritarianism and that there were
alti passivity of the Russian people. I mean not all
of them. Many of them left and many of them objected,
but most of them there were alter pacivity of the
Russian people, just like they were passive under Communism, that
passive under Putin. So I don't think she'd be surprised
at all that Russia became authoritarian in a different way

(01:21:52):
than Communism, but still essentially authoritarian with the fall of Communism.
Molten's splendid kindness rocks altruism. Guilt, self sacrifice sucks, yes,
and kindness rocks to people worthy of kindness. I mean,

(01:22:13):
there's some people I would not be kind to I'm
a big believer in you know, some people deserve hate,
some people deserve to be treated badly. So kindness rocks
to people you don't know, or to people, to people
you have, to people of whom you have no reason
to think ill of, But to people who you think

(01:22:35):
ill of, you shouldn't be kind. Yep, thanks Moulten, not
Chavi Jagorithm. Some days I think the Enlightenment is just
too vigorous for ideas are silly and primitive as Christianity
than do it. But when I see what the Republican
Party is devolved into in such a short time, it's

(01:22:58):
hard to say yeah. I mean it is to say
I have this strong sense that the Enlightenment has been
weakened dramatically over the last twenty years. And it's it's
we're living through times right now that are truly scary
and and I mean I've been watching some of the
turning points us say stuff. I'll talk about it on Monday,

(01:23:22):
God and and and the on Twitter a lot. So
I see a lot of these stupid heritage Americans, I mean,
the the barbarity, the primitiveness of this idea of heritage Americans.
My eleventh grand parents, it's eleven generations earlier, came on

(01:23:43):
the main flower, my tenth. This family was a funding
father and this is you know, like what have you done?
And and what does that have anything to do with you?
They and and how many of them were slave owners?
And how many of them were criminals? And how many
of them did horrible things? Because if you go back

(01:24:03):
eleven generations, that's a lot of grandparents. There a lot
of grandparents. That's a lot of people. Some of them
were really bad. So what does it mean? And yet
they take it so seriously, they're so intent on it,
they're so committed to it. I mean, I couldn't imagine

(01:24:23):
just a few years ago that America would become this collectivistic,
this tribal, this racist. I mean, I guess should have
known better because it has a racist past, but I
did not. I think that was something America powerfully had overcome.
And to see it revoting back to it, unbelievable. Uh,

(01:24:46):
swish up. Excellent show and presentation today. Happy holidays to
you and yours. Happy holidays to you too, Merry Christmas,
Happy New Year, and all the rest. Lourie, please talk
about the process challenges in writing your book and how
you overcome them. Came them? Oh, the process challenges. I'm

(01:25:08):
not sure what process challenges are. By the way, we
just signed to deal with an agent. I'm excited. I
don't know. I think most of the challenges intellectual. Most
of the challenges intellectual, and someday I don't think there's
really I mean, Don is a good writer, I'm a
good editor. We both can hash out these things. So

(01:25:31):
process is I think pretty down. You'd have to ask
Don if he feels differently. I think the main thing
is that the intellectual stuff is hard. So how do
you how do you conceptualize Christianity? For example? Like there

(01:25:52):
are a million different types of Christianity? Right, every little
Protestant sects has a different interpretation. What's the essence? What
are the essentials of Christianity? And how do you do
it in a way that doesn't come off dismissive of
all the different christian variations? How does it? How do you? Yeah?

(01:26:12):
But even Jesus, they're like multiple interpretations of Jesus. Jordan
Peterson has an interpretation of someone in the amount which
is different than I think Pope X's and Pope Wis
and Pope Ce's, they all have different ones. So what
is the essence? What are you criticizing Christianity? So you
have to do that again. You have to do it
unless you're just writing for an objective at audience. You

(01:26:33):
have to do it in a credible way that a
Christian audience or mildly Christian audience, because I don't think
we'll convince anybody who's thoroughly Christian, but a mildly Christian audience,
so somebody raised in Christianity would recognize it. And then
how do you untangle the fact that in the same
geographic area at the same time you have these opposite

(01:26:57):
forces functioning. You have Christianity functioning, and you have call
it Greek ideas or Ristatilian ideas functioning, and Christianity at
least nominally seems to embrace some of the Greek ideas.
So what extent does it embracing Greek ideas because of

(01:27:20):
the nature of Christianity? And to what extent is it
embracing idea Greek ideas in spite of its nature of Christianity?
And I think it's in spite of Christianity. But how
do you show that you know, and because a lot
of Christians will say, see, we embraced Abstotle, we brought
reason into the West. And it's like you did that

(01:27:41):
in spite of being Christian, not because you were Christian.
Christianity fought against it, or Christianity Quai ideas fought against
so all of that untangling, that's the most complex. I
think that the layout of stoical the sequence historically of

(01:28:03):
you know, the introduction of Greek Austatilian well, the decline
of Greek ideas and early Christianity and the going into
the Dark Ages and the rediscovery of Greek ideas in
in the Late Middle Ages or the early Middle Ages,
and then more so in the Late Middle Ages. It
leads to the Renaissance, leads to the Enlightenment, leads to
the modern world. That I think we have right that

(01:28:25):
that I think is lays it out and I you know,
I think we've I think we have a deep understanding
of that. But even there, what is important, what is
not important, you know, is complicated. But I think it's untangling.
How do you separate that from the story of Christianity.

(01:28:48):
So yeah, I mean a lot of people claim that
Christianity is all answer for a conception of the individual. Uh,
but but you know, I don't. I don't think that's
even true. I think there's a that conception of the individual,

(01:29:11):
the conception of ie, a conception of a of an
individual mind already exists in Greece. So I don't think
that was invented by Christianity, you know, I really So.
There are a lot of things that people throw at
you as the different virtues of Christianity, dignity, I don't
know the equality of man. And yet Christianity abided by
slavery for a very long time. And and but then

(01:29:34):
the many of the leading abolitionists are Christian, So how
do you how do you do that? I mean, all
the southern slave owners are Christian and use Christianity justify slavery.
But then all the abolitionists, or significant number of the
abolitions were like Quakers, and and and I mean committed Christians,
not not just moduling Christians. So how do you how

(01:29:55):
do you explain that? So it's that's the complication. It's
an intellectual issue of figuring out what's the saying, show
what's not, and how to untangle it? All right, all right, Andrew,

(01:30:15):
do you agree that this. With this as a general
point regarding pity, an emotionally connected person allows himself to
access all emotions, including pity, but Christianity says to maximize it.
Pity is an intense emotion. Don't play with it. I
don't know what playing with an emotion is. But you

(01:30:38):
know what does pity mean? Right? I mean to feel
sorry for somebody. I mean, if you're rational, you only
feel sorry for somebody when they deserve that feeling. That
is now, because you have baggage, you might feel it
when it's undeserving, when you shouldn't feel it in a sense,
but you feel it. So what objectivism teaches you use

(01:31:01):
Your emotions are what they are. You feel them, you
recognize them, and then you evaluate whether they deserve taking
action or not. Based on Christianity says it's it's pity
is a essential emotion on which you should always take action.
It's an essential emotion that should guide you in life.

(01:31:21):
You should pity the poor, you should pity the weak.
But I don't pity the poor. I pity some poor.
I don't have the emotion of pity towards the poor.
I have an emotion of pity towards the unjustly poor.
But if I see about a you know the example
I always use, if I see a white beating drunk

(01:31:43):
who's poor, I don't pity them. I mean, if anything,
it's a sense of justice the poor because they deserve
to be poor. So there's a deserving poor and there's
an undeserving poor. And to the extent that you're going
to respawn emotionally, it's you should You should be responding

(01:32:05):
emotionally in a sense of I guess pity is a
is you're feeling sorry for them. You feel for them,
you you, you, you, you, You have empathy for them.
In some sense, you only want to do that for
people who don't deserve to be poor. So Christianity doesn't discriminate.

(01:32:27):
I don't pity my enemy, you know so, So while
you take your emotions as they are, you also should
evaluate them in a sense of do they come from
from the right place? Do they come from from the
place of love or from a place to us gin Rooni,

(01:32:49):
I guess terminology from the place of fear Andrew the
impassioned part of Rand's answer on how we can teach
our children not to be ashamed of success do not
teach him to be humble? Yes, yeah, take credit for
your work. Take credit for your success. Again, it doesn't

(01:33:11):
mean to be boastful. It doesn't mean to the lord
of others over your success, because it's not about other
people's about you. I succeeded, I did it, I built it,
I created It's exactly the opposite of what's his name, Obama's.
You didn't build that. You should be humble. You didn't
build it. No, I didn't build it, and am. If

(01:33:40):
a Christian today is being overall good and rational, why
do I need to pick a fight by telling them?
Or those oh those aren't? You aren't your Christian values?
If a Christian to today is being overall good and rational,
why do I need to tell well? Because they might
not be tomorrow. That is, tomorrow, they might hear a

(01:34:03):
different sermon and it too, put those values differently and
become more Christian and therefore become worse. And as long
as you're Christian and you hold faith, there's only so
much happiness you can attain. There's a cap on your
ability to be rational, and they're for successful and happy.

(01:34:23):
So you're doing them a favor by telling them. Here's
the real nature of the values you're pursuing, and you
should be more consistent about it. It's good for their life.
And secondly, you want to arm them not to be
captured in the name of Christianity by the values that

(01:34:45):
would do you home and all of us home. So
truth is a good thing. Reality is a good thing.
Knowing what people really you know, people knowing themselves is
a good thing. Liam says, will you be on the panel,
Stephen pikat this SoCon? You know? I don't know. I

(01:35:06):
assume not because I haven't heard, But I just don't know.
I don't know who's going to be on, and I
have not heard anything one of the others. I assume
the answer is no, because I assume that they've already
planned it. But you know, I don't know. I'm not
involved in the planning of it. Hapacampbell thoughts on retiring
in Santa Barbara, California versus Orange County. God, I mean,

(01:35:31):
I don't know. Santa Barbara strikes is more expensive than
Omige County. Orange County has a lot more variety in
terms of housing and places to live. Santa Barbara is
smaller and probably more expensive. Santa Barbara is more beautiful

(01:35:51):
if you can, particularly if you can get something on
the hills overlooking the ocean. It's gorgeous. It really is amazing.
Orange County to get a house overlooks the ocean is
very expensive, but it's probably very expensive in Santa Barbara.
I get a sense that Orange County has more stuff
to do, but I'm not sure. I don't know Santa

(01:36:13):
Barba that much. There's a symphony, it has upper coming
there once in a while. La is not that far,
particularly if you can drive off hours, off rush hours,
you can get to La and less than an hour
sometimes and then there's all the benefits of La. Uh.
There's a lot more, probably a lotmo restaurants in Orange County,

(01:36:33):
particularly given that you can get to La. So, but look,
whether in both places is great. Ocean is right there
views the great expensive places to live, but yeah, wonderful
in many regards, many respects. And you have to tolerate California.

(01:36:55):
James on hundred years. So now will AOI be bigger
than the church? You know, my powers of prophecy are
very limited. Powers of prophecy are very limited. So I
don't know. I hope so I hope so, and there's

(01:37:16):
a chance. I don't know how to put a probability
on it. One hundred years is a long time, but
there certainly is a chance we will be Andrew. Materially,
the year twenty twenty five standard of living in America
like living in heaven on Earth. The citizens the civilized
world wasn't built for the sake of teaching heaven, but

(01:37:39):
for the betterment of man on Earth. I'm not sure
what you're getting at, Andrew, but I'll just say, yeah,
it's nobody satisfied, and nobody should be. The point is more,
more and more. We're greedy human beings. Rational human beings
are greedy. Healthy human beings. Put it this way, healthy

(01:38:03):
human beings are greedy. If greed beans, you want more,
and we want more. We want flying cars, for God's sake.
We want materially more we want spiritually we want more.
We want more success, we want more prosperity, we want
more fun, we want more pleasure. We want more. So

(01:38:23):
twenty twenty five was like living on was living in
an amazing world materially, and it could be much much, much,
much much better, and we should strive for that. Yeah,
I don't think it's well worded because I didn't quite
understand it, Robert. Every year, every one of these values

(01:38:45):
is reimagined by the better among contemporary American Christians. I know,
faith is risk tolerance, humility is knowing your limitations and
avoiding second handedness, and fake pride. Love is benevolent and
embracing values, which makes discussing the underlying contradiction within these
issues challenging at best. Yeah, but when you push them,

(01:39:08):
when you push them, the altruism comes out. The Yeah.
At the end of the day, you know, they believe
in a God, and God has certain things that they
must do. At the end of the day, it affects
the epistemology and it certainly affects their ethics and their

(01:39:29):
ability to experience pride, their ability to gain self esteem,
the ability to to be, you know, even more ambitious
than they are. So yes, I think it's hard, but
a lot of that is rationalization. And what you need
to do is ask them questions that help kind of,

(01:39:53):
you know, reveal what is being rationalized and and and
and what is behind it all. And the fact that
no they accept they accept these definitions. They just have
they know their anti life at some level, and they
don't want to live that life. So they've they've redefined them,

(01:40:16):
they've they've put them to the side, but they haven't
completely given up on them, because otherwise they'd have to
give up on being Christian. God is still there in altruism,
is still there that undermines them, and that's what you
need to help them. See Moulten's Splenderism. Sorry I missed
you're missing link talk, but I did enjoy listening to

(01:40:36):
it later. Please do more of these, Yeah, I intend
to thanks Moulton's Splendi intend to I like numbers. When
did you have become civilized? I think during the Enlightenment.
I think in the mid sixteen hundreds. You know, you

(01:40:59):
can't certainly the Thirty Year War was not a civilized thing, Sully.
The Inquisition was not civilized. So I'd say post thirty
Year War, early seventeen hundreds, laced sixteen hundreds somewhere around that.
The Enlightenment. Basically, that's when it becomes civilized. It becomes

(01:41:20):
a little bit, it becomes more peaceful. Of course, it
becomes much more peaceful. In the nineteenth century. You know,
rulers are viewed with a lot more suspicion. In Britain
you get a much more sort of parliament and a
significant reduction in the power of the king. And there's

(01:41:45):
a certain tendency around Europe for a little bit of that,
although not in France they have to go through a
revolution to get that, but it certainly becomes it's becoming
civilized intellectually, scientifically, peace wise and politically. And of course
you could say it's civilized in seventeen seventy six. Now

(01:42:08):
that doesn't mean bad things don't continue to happen. Slavery,
for example, that only gets but it's on a path
starting in the late seventeenth century. It's on a path
for progress, for progress materially, in progress, spiritually and progress politically.
So the America is the consequence of that. JJ. Your

(01:42:32):
thoughts on the film A Man of All False Seasons.
I rewatched it recently. I thought it was great. I
tried to imagine how you would interpret it. Yeah, I mean,
I love that movie. It's a really great movie. It's
a movie about integrity, now integrity to false values, but
still integrity and the evil of kind of an authoritarian king,

(01:42:57):
a whim worshiping authoritarian king, and a man standing on principle.
So it's the story of Tom'smore and can Hang Me
the eighth and Yeah, and it's really well acted and
really well directed, and the dialogue is excellent. Yeah, I mean,
I really like that movie. I haven't seen in a
long time, but I remember it's it's up there, and

(01:43:18):
it's up there in my movie lists Andrew. Does integrity
to self sacrifice? Suicide? Is that? In that sense? Do
the monks who set themselves on fire for social cause
achieve the utmost moral good? Well, I mean by their
sick morality, Yeah, but that's not morality, so they don't.

(01:43:40):
They achieved them all good. But you know, some people
would argue that by dying it doesn't allow them to
help more poor people, So probably not right. So the
ideal is suffering through life well, wanting to commit suicide
and help helping other people while hating helping them. That's

(01:44:03):
the ideal. That's utmost mal good. The outbros male good
is staying alive in spite of the pain, the suffering
that you experience in order to help other people and
to eat and take care of yourself just enough so
that you can keep staying alive, so you can help
other people. That's the ultimate good. That's why Mother Teresa

(01:44:27):
is a saint. Robert. Oh, this splitting along question with
multiple super chats like I just did is definitely cheating.
You're very charitable for not criticizing it. Why would I
criticize it? It was completely legit. I mean, if you'd
done it in one question as a twenty dollars question,

(01:44:48):
I would have answered it earlier sooner. So, if anything,
it was it was hurting you. No, it wasn't cheating.
Who suffered from the cheat? Who did the cheat? There's
the expense of all right, Jeff. If we support freedom
of speech and separation of church and state, how do

(01:45:09):
we achieve the removal of religion from government and schools
without silencing them. Well, you don't remove it in the
sense of that the president is religious. The president can
be religious. What it means to remove it from government

(01:45:33):
is that it affects it should not affect legislation, that
it should not affect governing. And there's a sense in
which that's almost impossible. If you know, particularly in a
democracy where people can vote anything, in the sense that

(01:45:56):
people are influenced by their values, and if their value
is a christian and a vote Christianity. But a court
could say the prime the reason this, the reasoning for
this law is fundamentally religious, and therefore we strike it
as unconstitutional. Now, you can silence people in the context

(01:46:21):
of schools and in the context of lots of things, right,
I can silence you on my here, on my on
my chat. So if you perceive government schools as at
least in the functioning pseudo private property, the private property
of I don't know, the parents or whatever of the

(01:46:44):
school board, then the school board gets it in the curriculum.
They can decide who to platform and who not the platform.
It's absolutely not the responsibility of a school board to
maximize speech to allow for all perspectives to be presented. No,
they have to make a decision about in the name
of educating the kids, what should be and should be presented. Now,

(01:47:07):
ideally there are no public schools, you know, government schools,
and then private schools get to the side what should
and shouldn't be in the curriculum. Free speech is not
a contradiction to deplatforming, as long as the deplatforming happens
in the context of private interaction like numbers. Was walk

(01:47:37):
wrong to pity Keating. Look, there's a sense in which
the whole relationship with doing keyting and rock doesn't really
make sense to me, Like what keeps helping keyting to
what end? You know, he's being benevolent, but it's sometimes

(01:47:59):
there's a friendship there that doesn't quite make sense. So
the only reason I think that work with pity Keating
is that he sees something in Keating that I don't
see that is a source of their friendship, that is
a real value, and he is he pities him because

(01:48:19):
he can see his potential if he taken a different route,
if he had if he had uh not made committed
the errors or it's not errors, the evasions that he
did when he was young. But I don't pity Keating.

(01:48:43):
I think he gets exactly what he deserves. Jason in
the two thousands Peacock on his podcast pointed out how
concerning and un settling the mere notion of motorcycle bikers
have their own Christian ministries was now it's normal in
my town and on TV. Yeah, and it's everywhere, and

(01:49:04):
then many ministries everywhere. It's these you know, Christianity catering
to every little group, every little tribe, that comes about
they develop their own theology for them. All right, we
are only thirteen dollars short of our goal. Let's try
to make it. We've got ten minutes. Ten minutes is

(01:49:25):
hort stop anyway, So you know there's somebody come in
with thirteen dollar question and so we can there we go.
That's ten and we're just the ten. So we just
need three now. FJ fang. I've just realized I don't
like my parents or have anything in common with them.
I'm struggling with this, Yeah, I mean it's normal to

(01:49:46):
struggle with it. The question is do you have any
feelings towards them because they raised you, because they gave
you life? Is that a value to you? The fact
that they raised you and gave you life. Did they
raise you well? And so to what extent is that

(01:50:08):
a positive that that you want to recognize and accept
and and and and therefore, you know, give them a
certain minimal level of respect and appreciation for that. But
if you don't like your parents and you don't have
anything in common with them, then you've got you should
adjust your relationship accordingly. I mean, you don't hang up

(01:50:30):
with him a lot, don't spend a lot of time
with him. You know, whatever it is your valuation your
parent is and your emotion and your commitment to them,
figure out what that is and adjust your interaction with
them to that. So if you appreciate them because they
raise you, okay, and you appreciate the fact that they
gave you life, but you know, it's not that you

(01:50:51):
dislike them, it's not that you hate them, it's not
but you just don't have anything common with me. You
don't like them that much or not, they're not your
kind of people, then minimize your interaction with them. Don't
cut them off completely, because you still have that basic
appreciation for them. But if you don't, then cut them
off completely that is I'm not against that. But in

(01:51:12):
other words, adjust your relationship with your parents to the
extent to which they are value to you, and don't
feel that you have to do more than that, because
they're your parents and you should honor your father and
your mother, so says the Bible. Andrew, I think you

(01:51:34):
should use this show to organize your material for the book.
It was really well structured and impactful. Thank you, Lincoln.
I mean, I'm doing that in a sense because this
really helps me think through some of these issues, and
then I go back to the book and verbalizing it
really makes it. It clarifies it to me. Don listens

(01:51:57):
to it. I think it helps clarify to him. At
least it clarssfis what I'm thinking to him, and then
we can have a discussion about it. Lincoln, why is
Christianny more common in America than Europe even though the
US was founded by large secular Enlightenment thinkers. I think because,

(01:52:18):
I think because it wasn't a state religion, it was
allowed to morph, and it's all kinds of sects and
all kinds of interpretations and develop in a way that
made it consistent with America as it emerged in the

(01:52:39):
nineteenth century. So the conflict between Modernity and Christianity didn't
become as evident because it kind of Christianity kind of
absorbed America or incorporated America into its theology. This is
the point that Robert was making earlier. Most of Americas

(01:53:00):
the theology is American. I tell them often that they
love Jefferson more than Jesus, and they loved the and
they love the Constitution more than the Bible, so they
made it part of it. I think that also there
were no really leading intellectuals in America were kind of

(01:53:22):
really secular and pushed the secular agenda until kind of
the pragmatists, whereas in Europe, I think there was a
real secularization among the intellectuals very early on. There was
kind of a diminishing of religion to some extent, or
secularization of religion. And of course there was this massive

(01:53:46):
secularization of religion that was done by Marx, you know,
basically secularizing religion into into his view of communism. There
are other things. I mean, Europe really secularized after the
First World War. First World War was such a horrific
event for them. It was so disorienting. The idea that

(01:54:07):
it could be a god and the First World War
happened was just beyond them. It was similar to the
Thirty Year War, which led to the Enlightenment. I think
the First World War led to secularism but also to cynicism.
But it's a good question. I don't have a full
answer to it. It would require real analysis. Lincas is,

(01:54:29):
how can a career in the military be self interested?
I like the idea of being in the military part
time by the national guard. But it feels a bit
and I didn't I don't have the second part of
the question, but let me just answer that. Look you
can it feels a bit the military at the current
administration is against my values. Yes, I mean, I think

(01:54:50):
you'd you really have to be questioning about whether to
join the military under the conditions of this administration or
any other administration because of all against your values, you know,
in in this modern world, and what are you fighting for?
You know, it's not clear, So it's it's I think
it's a difficult, much more difficult decision today to join
the military than would have been in the past because

(01:55:11):
of the nature of the country, the people, and and
and and our politicians, our leaders, uh and and and
including by the way, the generals and what they will
tell you to do or not do, and which is
which I think really damaging. But to make a career
of it in a rational, rational world, I don't see

(01:55:34):
a big issue there. I mean, it's it's a challenging position.
It's it requires a lot of thinking, it requires action.
It's yeah, it requires you know, uh, strategy, It's it's
a challenging, interesting profession. You know, how to how to
defend how to defend military, how to use the military

(01:55:56):
to defend values. Andrew, my manager gave me a good
advice regarding a person who apputs to me, who's objectively
not doing her work, and I was defending her. She said,
you said, you're not her savior. Andrew, that is very
good advice. Yes, yes, you can't save people. It's not
your job as a manager to save people. Your job

(01:56:18):
is to objectively evaluate them and give them that objective
feedback and treat them with justice, which means you know,
positively if they're doing good job, and negatively if they're
doing a bad job. Lincoln says thoughts on LDS moment Church,
I don't have a lot. I don't know that much
about them. I mean, it's a crazy story. If you

(01:56:39):
listen to the story of how the church came about,
you know, anybody believes that has to be a little cuckoo.
But that's true of all religion. They just are modern
people believing in that is just bizarre. Modern people coming
up with that theology is bizarre. But generally, if you
go to if you interact with Moments, they're hard working,

(01:57:01):
they're honest, they're quite productive, they're nice, people. You know,
they seem quite friendly, So yeah, I mean they seem
pretty normal in spite of the Kooki theology. And the
question is, my guess is most of them just don't

(01:57:22):
take that theology very seriously. You know, they very quickly
abandoned polygamy when it become when it became politically inconvenient
for them, so they obviously don't take theology. That's eviously right.
I mean, polygamy was part of the theology. And then
they were told if you in order to become a state,

(01:57:42):
you would have to embrace monogamy, and they did in
order to become a state, So they rewrote the rules,
just like Christians do all the time. The moments I've
interacted with mostly being positive people. But I also know
a lot of people who left the church. Actually there's

(01:58:04):
a number who become objectivists, and they have a much
more negative view of the church, right because they've lived it.
So I'm sure that if you live it, it's not
pleasant at all, and if your parents take it seriously,
to an extent that it's taken seriously, it's not pleasant
at all. The extent that it's taken seriously is bad,
just like all religion. All right, guys, have a great

(01:58:26):
rest of your weekend. I will see you on Monday.
I schedule got a little screwed up, but anyway, we
don't have an interview on Monday, so we'll just have
a show on Monday. The Nicos interview is a week later,
so yeah, I will see you then. Thanks all the
super shadows. We made our goal, just squeaked in perfectly.

(01:58:46):
Thank you, and yeah, have a great weekend. By

All Episodes

Christian Values Vs. Civilization | Yaron Brook Show

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

The Burden

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Christian Values Vs. Civilization | Yaron Brook Show