Timcast Debate Aftermath with The Lore Lodge

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Shows avoiding Babylon, and it frustrates me
because I really like theproducer of the show but I can't
stand the host of the show.
The host, anthony, justconstantly says the absolute
dumbest I've ever seen.
Example one of his tweets wasthat the, the one criminal on
the cross who was saved, wassaved because Mary prayed for
him.
And I'm like I don't know ifhe's just trying to piss

(00:21):
Protestants off or if hegenuinely believes that or what,
but it's just constant with him.
I stand by that.
I stand by that.
That was what got me to say thething.

Speaker 3 (00:38):
We had to start with that, of course.

Speaker 1 (00:42):
I know.

Speaker 3 (00:42):
Thank you to Taffy for putting that little intro
together for us.
Um, yeah, that it's it is.
It is interesting because itdid absolutely start as a little
bit of a troll, so much so thatit got james white's attention.
And james white did like anentire two-hour sermon on my
tweet and it was like wait, Iwas just, this was just like a
throwaway line.

(01:03):
It was like here's what it iswhen you a throwaway line.
It was like here's what it is.

Speaker 2 (01:05):
When you even texted me you're like I can't believe
that throwaway tweet got thatmuch attention.

Speaker 3 (01:09):
It's because, okay, so my issue with the thief on
the cross thing, thatevangelicals I'm not going to
say Protestants there's a verybig difference in like
historical Protestantism andevangelicals and we'll get into.
You know, your um, what you,what you were saying with the uh
, anglo Catholics on the debateand stuff, we'll get into that.

(01:30):
But the evangelical approach tofinding like the lowest common
denominator and it's like, well,the thief on the cross was
saved, but, and it's like, well,okay, but just because the
thief on the cross was savedthat way doesn't mean you should
just base your entire theologyoff of one throwaway line in
scripture.
So it's like I just wanted toannoy a Protestant so I like I

(01:52):
just I was like, you know, thethief was saved because Mary was
praying from the foot of thecross and that freaking it
worked.

Speaker 1 (02:01):
It got all of us we were like what are you talking
about?

Speaker 2 (02:03):
man, the funniest part was is I was.
I was because you did that onone of your monday podcasts yeah
and I was listening to it thenext day and all of a sudden I
hear avoiding babylon.
And then, and then you rip onanthony.
I was like, oh, this is this is.

Speaker 3 (02:19):
Oh, we were so excited to play it on the show,
I'm sure.
All right, so you just were onTim Pool's show.
It was you, Jay Dyer, TimGordon and I said to you in the
green room like I personallywould not want to debate either
of those guys.
They both like regularly dodebates.

(02:39):
Tim, if he specializes in avery particular area, he will
like obliterate his opponent.
But Jay, I knew, I kind of knewJay was going to do what he did
where?
Jay?
Because he spent time intraditional Catholicism and then
went to orthodoxy, he knows theinternal arguments amongst

(03:00):
traditional Catholics, amongsttraditional Catholics, and
because Tim is like kind ofcaught in a position of having
to defend some of the thingsthat Catholics find
controversial within the churchsince the Second Vatican Council
.
Jay knew that was a tricky spotfor Tim to defend, so he jumped
right into that.
But he wound up going into suchminutiae that it kind of ruined

(03:22):
the conversation for the wholeshow.
In my opinion, like for thenormie listener, Like I don't
think the average person had anyidea what the hell you guys
were talking about.

Speaker 1 (03:30):
No, I mean also the thing was going into the debate.
My understanding was that itwasn't going to get so into
ecclesiology, that it was goingto be a lot more about sociology
and the church's place in themodern world.
You know, and I know that'swhere Tim was.
Tim Poole was going especiallywas how, how does the Catholic

(03:51):
church fit in?
How does the Orthodox churchfit in?
Which one is best for society?
Basically is, I think, whereTim was kind of at, and then Jay
and Tim Gordon used it just asan opportunity to go at each
other about very specific littlebits of orthodox and catholic.
Uh, it wasn't even theology, itwas ecclesiology yeah, yeah, it

(04:12):
was very esoteric.

Speaker 3 (04:13):
Uh, for for like, so it was.
It was entertaining for a guylike me because I understand
those debates and it'sinteresting to watch like a
catholic and orthodox and youknow both of them and I know
both like like we've had jay onthe show twice.
Tim gordon is like one of mygood friends, so it's like um,
like for somebody like me.
I was interested in it, but Iknow like the average listener

(04:34):
was like, what the hell am Ituning into here?
But I did.
I was interested um to know,okay, so like the everybody's
throwing around that you're afreemason like I'm, I am curious
like how you came about to youranglo-catholic position.
Was this was like?
Was this through study?
Like what?
How did you arrive at the, atthe conclusions you have?

Speaker 1 (04:57):
sure.
So, as I was telling you guysbefore the show, uh, I in
college studied medieval studiesand religious studies.
I also I got I had a wholebunch of minors because I just
had a very interdisciplinarymajor.
But while I was in college, Ihad grown up non-denominational
and after studying a little bitmore, I came around to Methodism
because I felt like it was theI like.

(05:18):
I like a lot of the theology, Ilike a lot of the way that it
views scripture, and I had someserious problems with Catholic
history, more than anything,more even than theology.
And then, as I got out ofcollege, I was a 2020 graduate,
so COVID year, and I was sittingaround watching National
Treasure in my parents' livingroom in probably like April of

(05:40):
2020.
And I went.
You know what?
I wonder what the wholeFreemasonry thing is about.
So I decided you know what'swhat better way to to learn
about Freemasonry than to becomeone?
My?
My curiosity, primarily, wascoming from a place as a
historian of oh, so there's the,the Templar connection.
How real is that?
Do?
Is there actually a connectionbetween what we know of as

(06:03):
Freemasonry today and theKnights Templar post-1314?
And I'll be honest, as I havegone through it.
I have not found much of aconnection to exist.
It seems like it's mostlysymbolic.
There is a very interestingpoem from around the year 1400
called the Regius Poem.
That might be the connectivetissue, but we don't know so far

(06:23):
.
But yeah, so I was a Freemasonfor a while, I still am, and my
priest doesn't like that.
He's not happy with me.
But no, over the last year or soI started, as I got a little
bit more into the apologeticsphere, as I started learning a
little bit more about how thechurch works and functions, it
occurred to me that there is areason that Protestant

(06:44):
evangelicalism, some of themainline churches, have fallen
so far away from whatChristianity was up until about
a hundred years ago and in myopinion that reason is that we
left behind the apostolicsuccession.
We left behind having an actualstructure of the church that
allows for a group of bishops, agroup of priests, when somebody

(07:07):
is out of line, to go and kindof pull them back in and say,
hey, you either need to stopteaching heresy or you're going
to be excommunicated from thechurch.
So I decided, all right, I wantto go and look at the apostolic
churches and I have to behonest, I have a long history of
not gelling with the romancatholic church, so that wasn't

(07:28):
exactly on the table.
But I started looking intolutheranism, orthodoxy,
anglicanism, and I was baptizedepiscopalian.
So when I I was like, oh, maybeI'll just go back to that.
It's methodism sprung out ofthat anyway, so maybe I'll go
back to the episcopal church.
And then I went and looked and Iwas like what happened here?
It's?
It's like the uh, the community, the TV show community, the

(07:49):
episode where Donald Gloverwalks into the room and I
everything's on fire and peopleare.
I was like what happened tothis church in the last 30 years
?
So I decided that couldn't beit and I was really frustrated.
And then somebody in myaudience was like, hey, have you
ever heard of AnglicanCatholicism?
And I went no, what's that?
Started looking into.
It Turns out there's a churchright up the street, and one of
the only three in Pennsylvania,I guess.

(08:11):
And I was like, well, that's asign.
So I went for Easter serviceand I was like you know what?
This is awesome.
I like that we have a lot ofthe Catholic aesthetic and the
liturgy.
I like that we have a book ofcommon prayer and the liturgy.
I like that we have a book ofcommon prayer.
I like that the priest is soopen and involved in the
congregation and it was kind ofcool to see a congregation that

(08:32):
was people my age, with kids upthrough, people who can barely
walk anymore.
So I decided that was somethingI really liked and I started
diving into it and at the end ofthe day that's where I feel the
most at home Did you grow upwith a lot of uh, anti catholic
is there's different types oflike.

Speaker 3 (08:49):
If you're growing up in the american church, there's
a lot of anti-catholic sentimentin the american protestant
church.
Is that, is that like?
Is some of that stem from that?
You think?

Speaker 1 (08:58):
no, I actually.
I had a very good relationshipwith catholicism growing up.
Uh, half of my family areItalian Catholics, half of my oh
, we don't like those here.
Well, so my grandfather and mygrandmother were very Catholic.
A lot of my aunts and unclesstill are.
About half of them ended upswitching over more towards
Protestantism and ended uppretty much non-denominational,

(09:20):
because I think they had thatexperience of Catholicism
growing up where they were likeI don't know that I like what
I'm doing here.

Speaker 2 (09:32):
So for me, most of my resistance to the Roman church
came about in college.
What was it about?
Catholic history?

Speaker 3 (09:37):
What is it about?

Speaker 2 (09:38):
Catholic history that kind of gave you that
opposition.

Speaker 1 (09:43):
There's a few key moments.
One is the donation ofConstantine.
I don't like that.
The church forged a document inorder to secure temporal
authority over the kings ofEurope and then, of course, the
Dictatus Pape just piling on tothat same thing and then it
turning out to be a forgery manyyears later.
Another one is I did not lovethe way that the church

(10:03):
conducted the European Crusades.
I felt like reading aboutspecifically the Siege of Bitsie
and what happened there, arnaudAmalric saying the admittedly
badass line kill them all, godwill recognize his own.
But when you realize what thatmeant and what happened there,
that bothered me a lot.
So I felt like looking back at.
And then, of course, the murderof Jan Hus and some of the

(10:25):
other early reformers.
It looked to me like there wasa period between the end of the
11th century and up through the16th century where I felt like
the Catholic Church fell away,like there was something going
wrong.
Maybe the schism had somethingto do with it.
But I looked at it and I said,ok, you have to admit, the
Protestant Reformation didn'tcome out of nowhere.

(10:47):
It was bubbling for 500 yearsbefore eventually, martin Luther
nailed 95 theses to a door.
So there were a few things, andI think most of all it's
probably the dogmatism aboutcertain things that just don't
seem like they shouldnecessitate excommunication and
things like that, like thebodily assumption of Mary.

Speaker 3 (11:09):
Okay.
So what convinced me?
Because, like you were saying,like a lot of the things that
you see, like you know, churchesfalling away from like their
historic Christianity, thingslike that One of the big things
that convinced me was seeing thechurch stand firm on the moral
stance on contraception.

(11:29):
It was like I watched everysingle Christian denomination
give into this, this thing,right, like it was like, oh well
, married couples.
You know it started with theLambeth conference in 1930, the
Anglicans allowed it first.
Then every single Protestantdenomination, one by one,
basically fell to it and said,okay, we'll allow for
contraception.
And it was only the Catholicchurch that stood firm and said

(11:52):
no, no, no.
You guys don't understand whatyou're doing here.
If you allow for contraception,what you're doing is allowing a
spouse to use their spouse.
You're separating theprocreative act from the unitive
act and once you do that,you're using sex just as an act
of pleasure.
Now, if a married couple canuse sex as just an act of
pleasure, who's to say anunmarried couple can't?

(12:13):
And it would.
Just, I see every problem wehave in modern society stems
from that issue, and part ofpart of me, seeing catholicism
as true, was like man.
It just took such moral courageto stand up in the face during,
during the sexual revolution,to not cave into the pressures

(12:33):
that were coming upon the church, because it was everywhere that
pressure, you know.
But so that was like the startof it, and then the further I
went back, just seeing how thechurch actually formed the
Western world and seeing howeven the church's stance on the

(12:55):
relationship between men andwomen.
So if you go back to like theRoman Empire, a lot of people
think like, because you'll hearpeople talk about how we get
democracy from the Greeks andyou know we all have this
Romanitas in us.
Like we still speak of theRoman, like this question that
goes around.
It's like, oh, how many times aday do you think of the Roman
empire, about men?

(13:15):
So we have this idea of likebeing Roman that makes us, makes
a lot of people in the modernworld think that the world we're
in today just kind of cameabout, but they don't recognize
how much of a part Christianityand the Catholic church
specifically played in that.
It's like, um, the like womenwere seen as, uh, a receptacle

(13:36):
for men to dump their fluids inin the Roman world.
Like they had the same name fortheir mouth, anus and vagina
Like a woman was just a a toiletfor a man.
It took the catholic churchactually starting to teach on
marriage and things like that.
That actually forms the westernmind and like gets men away
from that savagery.
But it, as you get further onand you start getting these

(13:59):
groups start breaking away.
You kind of do see exactly whatyou were saying with the
Protestants.
And it happens with everysingle group, including the
Orthodox, including, I mean,every group I can think of,
where they just find somethingthat they're willing to buckle
on, whether it's remarriage inthe Orthodox Church and
contraception or whatever it is.

(14:20):
It's just like it seemed likethe Catholic Church is the only
one who maintain that moralfoundation throughout all of
history, even after the crazychanges that happened in the
sixties that Jay and Tim weregetting into.

Speaker 1 (14:31):
Sure, yeah, and I I respect that a lot.
I, like I said, you knowthere's a reason I ended up
Anglican Catholic and I'm stilllearning a lot.
I've been talking a lot withpriests and and other faith
leaders in the community, tryingto understand more and more
where everything comes from,what our positions are on things
, because coming from aMethodist background, it's like
we have a lot of the same stuff,but also obviously it's a lot
more liberal.

(14:51):
Um, you know, I think and forexample, with the contraception
issue, I asked my priest aboutthat when, when I first started
looking into the church and hetold me that there is not.
The basically the AnglicanCatholic position on it is that
you should not avoid havingchildren in general.
So vasectomy is not a goodthing, hysterectomy is not a

(15:12):
good thing, using contraceptionall the time, even once you're
in a position to have children,not a good thing but also that
you know there is something ofpleasure to that experience.
God created it that way for areason, and that if you're a
husband and a wife, you know youdon't.
You don't have to be trying fora kid constantly, all the time,

(15:32):
just as long as you're notavoiding being fruitful and
multiplying.
So, like you know, don't havejust one kid, don't just have
two kids and then stop, but alsolike don't have 12 kids If you
can't afford to have them waskind of where, where.

Speaker 3 (15:46):
I think that's a slippery slope.

Speaker 1 (15:48):
I think that's a slippery slope, but, um, all
right.
So I will say also one thingthat I I think you might
appreciate about.
I don't know how much you knowabout Anglo Catholicism, but it
actually was a step back, it wasa step towards conservatism out
of the Episcopal church.
So the 1978 Missouri Synod webasically said, okay, ordination
of women, that's, that's abridge too far.

(16:09):
We're leaving a lot of thingsup to pious opinion.
But that that's too much.
So we're going to step away,we're going to separate, and we,
in doing that, maintained ourordination, going back to both
Aristobalus of Britain andAugustine.

Speaker 3 (16:22):
So that was kind of the way that we look at it yeah,
no, I know, because calvinrobinson's a uh, he's like an
anglican catholic, so that'swhat they were.
So that's why I was I wanted toget to like.
So they started bringing up thebranch theory and that's kind
of calvin robinson's position,where they it seemed like you
really didn't even know wherethey were going with that like I

(16:42):
wasn't familiar with theterminology.
Yeah, it's basically like it'sbasically what you're describing
, where they try to trace theirlineage back to a bishop and say
that the catholic churchbranches off into all these
different branches but theystill have valid ordinations and
things like that.
But there is something to evenwith calvin robinson when he got
ord, he wanted to make sure hewas ordained by a bishop whose

(17:08):
ordination was recognized by theCatholic church.
It's like because what it comesdown to for me essentially is
people can claim whatever theywant, but if you don't have a
valid priesthood, then even ifyou claim to believe in the
sacraments and stuff like that,you're going to run into
problems.
Now with Jay, I watched youbrought something up to Jay

(17:31):
where, um, you even pointed outto him that his bishop or
something recognized yeah.
You're right.
And what did he say to that?

Speaker 1 (17:39):
Yeah, I found a document that comes from the
Anglican Catholic Church and itbasically was going through in
1922 through 1936, I believe,there was a movement within the
Orthodox community to decide dowe recognize the ordination of
the Anglican Church?
And this is, of course, beforeany of the stuff that happened
to the Episcopal Church and theChurch of England, the Anglican

(18:01):
community as a whole church andthe church of england, the
anglican communion as a whole,and basically unanimously they
went yeah, we don't see anyproblem with the, the ordination
process of the anglican churchat all.
Uh, I so I posted that and itwas.
It started with the ecumenicalpatriarch of constantinople and
that was, uh, milletios at thetime.
And I posted that and I said,hey, jay, you know, I know, I
granted you had me during thebait, the debate, like I'll

(18:23):
fully admit that I will cede,you won that debate, but you
might find this interesting.
And I posted a couple ofscreenshots from that letter and
I think he only read the veryfirst one because he said
Maledios was a Freemason and theopinion of one ecumenical
patriarch doesn't matter.
And then I said well, youreally should have read the rest
of the thread where it goesthrough.
You know, the patriarch ofjerusalem, the patriarch of

(18:49):
alexandria, uh, the hierarch ofcyprus, the hierarch of romania,
they all agreed with this andhe just said goodbye and then
blocked me yeah, I think.

Speaker 3 (18:54):
I think there's a tendency now.
So this is kind of how I seeeverybody, everybody kind of
just wants to disregard what thehierarchy says and just follow
their own thing.

Speaker 1 (19:07):
So it's, it's which sounds a lot like branch theory
to me, to be honest.

Speaker 3 (19:11):
Yeah, I agree, I think I think jay, as much as he
wants to claim the orthodoxchurch is the one true church,
sounds to me like he's just aset of a contest.
Essentially like he's.
He's a set of a contest with acouple of differing opinions.
But, um, all right, we'll getoff this topic because I it's
just whatever.
But um what, uh what, unlessyou got stuff.

Speaker 2 (19:34):
Well, I was curious.
So you said you came, you.
You first came to um, uh, themethod.
You know methodism.
In college, what like what wereyou raised as what?
What did you grow up in?

Speaker 1 (19:44):
kind of non-denominational but with a
Baptist.
My stepdad was a Baptist.
My mom was a, grew up aCatholic uh, and probably
wouldn't call herself a Catholicanymore, but she's just kind of
the same kind of thing, likejust non-denominational
Protestant, um, because it'sjust, it's not that big.
They're like God's a big dealin their lives.
They're definitely Christians,they care quite a bit, but the

(20:08):
the church structure itselfhasn't really mattered.
And I've been trying toactually get them to come to
church with me.
Uh, start going back, cause theydidn't have the same church to
go to and my mom didn't love mystepdad's church.
My stepdad didn't want to go tothe churches my mom was okay

(20:29):
with, so it just was a wholething.
So I was raisednon-denominational for all
intents and purposes.
I went to a lot of differentchurches.
I've been to Catholic masses,I've been to Orthodox masses,
I've been to Protestant sermons,just kind of.
Once I got to college I waslike I think that there's,
there's gotta be a way of doingthis properly and I decided that
I just really liked what JohnWesley and Charles Wesley were
about.

Speaker 3 (20:44):
Yeah, I think you're going to keep.
Look, the reason I don't wantto keep pressing you is just
cause I don't want to have likean argument or a bait on here.
I think you should just keepkeep going, Like you, I think if
you just keep going and lookingback to like how, especially
cause you're a history majorlike if you, if you study the
early centuries of catholicismin the catholic church, like you

(21:07):
kind of see how, like thekingdom of heaven on earth is
very much a part of the gospeland what the church is actually
doing is spreading the kingdomon earth.
Yeah, so when the church isbuilding those cathedrals, like
those cathedrals are meant to bethe the kingdom on earth, you
know.
And and the the pope wearingall of his garb is meant to be
the kingdom on earth, you know.
And and the pope wearing all ofhis garb is meant to signify

(21:28):
the kingship of Christ and allthose things.
Like the symbolism ofCatholicism is unmistakable, and
I think even even the nonCatholics, like you, watched it
during the election of Pope Leo.
It's like the whole world waslooking to Rome.
It's like what the hell isgoing on here.
It's like like, regardless ofwhat any ecumenical patriarch in
the East says, or regardless ofwhatever an Anglican bishop

(21:50):
says.
Everybody still looks to theBishop of Rome, including, like
the secular West.
When Francis was in and hewould change something, they'd
be like oh that's it.
The church has changed.
Like everybody's waiting on theChurch of Rome to make a
decision on things even to thisday, and it has a lot to do with
how much the Church of Romeplayed a part in forming the
culture we're in today.

Speaker 1 (22:13):
Oh, definitely, and I wouldn't disagree with that at
all.
I think that what I findattractive about the Anglican
position is basically that upuntil the 1500s we're part of
the Catholic church and we wedidn't consider ourselves
Protestant, that Anglicans don'tconsider themselves part of the
reformation in the same waythat Lutherans and Calvinists do
, because it wasn't.
It really was just about thecouncil of Trent and some of the

(22:35):
issues of people supremacy.
Well, the Henry VIII was hisown thing, Okay.

Speaker 3 (22:44):
We don't look to him.

Speaker 1 (22:45):
We don't look to him we don't look to him yeah, no,
but he did start something hedid and I and, and then that
winds up coalescing in in hissuccessors, with mary coming
back in and then elizabeth afterher which and elizabeth's
interesting because we don'tknow a ton about what her
personal beliefs were it seemslike it at that point became a

(23:08):
very much, very much a politicalthing.
But I think what I appreciateabout the, the philosophy of the
time within the Anglican church, was basically then saying like
hey, we, our biggest problemhere is is the Pope claiming to
be just unquestionable in somany aspects.
Because if the entire catholicchurch just follows along with
whatever the pope says, thenthat early church formula of the

(23:32):
various bishops being able tohave opinions and argue about
things and kind of needing torespect the opinions of
everybody, if everybody's justin lockstep with the pope, that
that kind of takes away.

Speaker 3 (23:42):
the church ever functioned that way, Even after
papal supremacy was announced,though there's always, you know,
we still have church councilsthat we come to In anything.

Speaker 2 (23:50):
it's only functioned that way in the last 60 years,
yeah.

Speaker 3 (23:54):
It's been a bit rough in the past 60 years, but I
don't think even after papalinfallibility was declared,
things like that, like thechurch, has never functioned as
a total monarchy where the popejust unilaterally makes
decisions.

(24:14):
Until recent history it'salways been, you know, a
collegial type thing, andespecially when it comes to
doctrine and things like that.
But you know, the church itreally would come down to.
Does peter have a special gracegiven to him to not err?
I?

Speaker 2 (24:24):
mean the.

Speaker 1 (24:25):
The anglican position is that there is papal primacy,
but that it has gone too farinto people, at least as I
understand it, uh, but it's gonetoo far into papal supremacy,
where it should basically peterwas the the top guy, but an
entire church council wouldoverrule a pope, and I think
that that's kind of where wherethings got off the rails and why

(24:48):
the Anglican Church came about.
Was this this recognition of,even if it wasn't at the point
of being total yet, trying tostem that tide and say wait, I
think you'll, you'll see, a lotof Anglicans will say that,
especially Anglican Catholicswill say that they would be,
they would welcome communionwith Rome and returning to the,

(25:10):
the fold of the Roman CatholicChurch if a few things were
addressed.

Speaker 3 (25:16):
Do you not see the absurdity of that?
Though I don't like, we'll comeback to you if you do what we
want, it's like?
No, the seat of Rome is the onewho says what you need to do.

Speaker 1 (25:26):
But that's my point.
You know that it's.
If the seat of Rome is wrong,what are you going to?
And we believe it's wrong, Imean.

Speaker 3 (25:35):
Yeah, well, the thing is you are kind of new to the
whole, looking even deeper intoapostolic Christianity, so keep
going.
That's all I'm saying.
Like just because you feelcomfortable in a specific place.
Like because what, what itshould come down to is the truth
, like if something's true ornot, it shouldn't come down to,
um, I don't like this thing likethe, the hardest things in

(25:59):
catholicism, like even like youwere saying, like the um, uh,
the assumption of mary or theimmaculate conception, things
like that.
Like if you, if saying like the, the assumption of Mary or the
Immaculate Conception, thingslike that.
Like if you, if you think aboutthe churches that don't believe
in the Immaculate Conception orthe churches that don't believe
in the sinlessness of Mary, youlook at what, what, the actual
fruits of this, of the church'sbelief that Mary was sinless

(26:21):
were, and it is monasticismRight.
Belief that Mary was sinlesswere, and it is monasticism
right.
So, like the, the idea of holyvirginity actually spurts from
the belief that Mary was aperpetual virgin.
So these monks would go out tothe desert and take vows of
celibacy and go live out inmonasteries and you wind up
getting some of the, the mostprofound, um, uh, the profound

(26:43):
understanding of prayer and, uh,just the deepening of the
western mind into, into, intheology, things like that.
Then, once you break away fromthat, once you get to the time
of the reformation, that's whenfeminism starts encroaching in
and like it.
I mean, it's just whatever.
I'm not, I'm not a greatdebater, I'm just saying these
are the things that I hadactually.

(27:04):
These are the things that hadsparked me, like my thinking
along the way.
What did you so you got out ofcollege as a history major?
What made you start a podcast?

Speaker 1 (27:18):
COVID.
I was working a digitalmarketing job because that was
all I could really get.
I was waiting to go to gradschool.
I had actually gotten acceptedto Bangor University in Wales.
I was going to go get mymaster's and end up being a
professor.
I was sitting at work my lastFriday at work, I think it was,

(27:40):
and nothing to do, justscrolling on TikTok on my phone
and I saw a video that was likewhat's a conspiracy theory you
100% believe in but you can'tprove.
I had been working on a conceptfor a script, I think, for like
a TV show or a novel.
I can't remember exactly what Iwas working on, but it was the
idea that, like, the nationalparks exist because they're a

(28:02):
containment area for monsters,and so I made a little stupid
tick talk about it.
It got 7 million views and sopeople were like hey, you know,
you should start a YouTubechannel, you should start
talking more about this stuff.
And I did that and I at firstit was just hey, this is kind of
cool, we have extra beer moneyfor for going out to the bar on

(28:23):
the weekend, which isn't reallysomething we could even do that
much at the time, cause it wasJune of 2021.
Um, but no it was like hey, beer, money, cool.
And then after a few months itstarted to grow and then it got
to a point where my my bestfriend and I were like hey,
maybe, maybe we can do this,maybe this is something we can
actually do as a full-time job.
We were both working 40 hours aweek at the time, um, and yeah,

(28:46):
it just kind of grew.
We, we sat down and went isthis a risk that we can take?
And we decided to go for it andit was the best decision we
ever made what was the first onethat like blew up, besides that
tiktok oh man, um, it wasreally once we started diving
into Um.

(29:13):
It was really once we starteddiving into missing 411 stuff,
uh, when we were probably a yearand a half in um.
I can't remember if there wasany one big, huge.
I have to give so much creditto Wendigoon.
I don't know if you've watchedany of his stuff, but he took us
under his wing and exposed hisaudience to our stuff and that
just kind of all at once inNovember of I want to say, 2022,
just like skyrocketed itSuddenly.
We were getting, you know, we,we went from 75 to a thousand
subscribers to a hundredthousand in like three weeks.

(29:33):
Um, wow, yeah.
So it just right place, righttime, knowing the right people.
Um, I think that was definitelywhat it was was working with
him.
But, yeah, after that it wasjust kind of a steady growth
period and trying to do our bestand going from being a channel
that was just kind of talkingabout fun, scary stories to
basically doing academicresearch on them.

Speaker 3 (29:55):
So how much time would you guys spend?
How often do episodes come outand how much time do you guys
spend doing them?
Oh God, them.

Speaker 1 (30:10):
Oh god, I.
I I'd say probably, probably 80hours of work goes into each
episode between the two of us atleast, if, if not 100, really
depends on which one?

Speaker 3 (30:13):
what do you put about ?
Once every other week orsomething once every week, once
a week?

Speaker 1 (30:17):
yeah, so it's usually me doing, me doing about 30 to
50 and my co-host doing about 30to 50 uh, on either end of it,
depending on what we're lookingat, like the john benet ramsey
stuff, I'll sit there and stareat my screen probably for 70 80
hours writing a script, and thenhe has to go do the same thing
to edit it.
Have you guys had any?

Speaker 3 (30:35):
blowouts like video you guys been doing this since
2020 right.

Speaker 1 (30:39):
Have you guys had any 2021?

Speaker 2 (30:40):
2021 have you guys had any arguments, yeah, like
big blowouts where you guys arejust like.

Speaker 3 (30:45):
I don't know if we can continue with this.

Speaker 1 (30:47):
Honestly no, we trust each other a lot.
We've known each other since wewere 16.
So we're now 27.
There have been a few tensemoments, I'll say, but most of
the arguments we've had havebeen in our personal life.

Speaker 2 (31:04):
If I knew Anthony when he was 16, that would not
have been good.

Speaker 1 (31:09):
If most of the people I know knew me when I was 16,
they would not have liked me.
I've definitely become a lotmore mellow All right, they want
me to fight with you.

Speaker 3 (31:17):
Everybody, everybody's telling me they're
going to take my man card away.
Everybody wants me to get getruthless with you, all right.
Wants me to get get ruthlesswith you, all right.
So bobby asks all right, youguys want me to fight with him?
I'll fight with him a littlebit.
I don't like confrontation on ashow that I invited somebody on
, but we could do it.
We disagree on like this muchstuff bobby wants to know.
By what authority do yourbishops declare the successor of
peter wrong?
Okay, you guys want me to askquestions?

Speaker 1 (31:36):
ask them let's go, we'll fight with our guests, you
guys want it yeah, I think thatthe response to that would be
like well, why is?
Why is he the valid successorof Peter?
Is, if the successor of Peteris saying things that are
heretical, is he a validsuccessor?

Speaker 3 (31:53):
Who declares heresy?

Speaker 1 (31:54):
The church councils the church declares heresy yes.

Speaker 3 (32:00):
The church declares heresy and if they have a valid
successor from I mean we say itin the Roman canon like we've
had a continuous successors tothe chair of Peter since since
Peter.
So I mean I don't know how youcan.

Speaker 1 (32:15):
The manner of succession has changed a number
of times.
There's been times when therewere two popes.
There's been times there was atime there were three popes, and
then we get times when, likePope honorius, the first was a
an out and out heretic.
Um pope alexander the sixth,who we mentioned earlier, you
know, wasn't a heretic, but hewas a fornicator.
So I think I have no issue withthat, though, yeah, looking
looking at the, the catholicchurch, and saying like hey, is

(32:37):
this, is this person?
Is the direction things aregoing really the way that christ
intended it?
Because I I think that that'sreally where the, where the
orthodoxy splits off.
Where the Anglican split off is, is the chair of Peter and
sitting in that seat enough tomake somebody the successor of
Peter?

Speaker 3 (32:57):
I bet you there's some Catholics that would
declare that questionable too.
No, but I would say that thechurch, the catholic church, is
the only one who has the abilityto call a church council.
Right, so, even the orthodoxare like they.
They try to make the claim thatthey paused in the 11th century
and their liturgy is unchangedand all these things are
unchanged.
But yeah, but the world haschanged a lot and only the

(33:20):
catholic church is able to calla council to bring the world's
bishops together to addressthese issues.

Speaker 2 (33:25):
I think what you mean when you say that only the
Catholic Church is able to.
I think you're really sayingonly the Catholic Church has
successfully done so since theSeventh Ecumenical Council.
Right, Because I think theOrthodox would say they could,
but yet they haven't, they couldnot call a world council I, I

(33:49):
agree, I agree with you, butthey would, I think they would
claim otherwise is that becausethey can't?

Speaker 1 (33:56):
or because, if they did, the catholic bishops
wouldn't attend?
Um modern bishops probablywould attend that's the thing is
like if if leo the 14th saidhey, we're pulling together an
ecumenical council, we wantconstantinople there, we want
canterbury they did wantmissouri.
There they did go in the secondvatican council there were.

Speaker 3 (34:19):
There were eastern patriarchs at the second vatican
council, so it's like so theyhave a vote though I don't know
if they were voting members.
But that's not really how acouncil works either.
It's not like it's not ademocracy.
It's more like documents areproduced from the council and
then the Pope will sign off onthem after the.

Speaker 2 (34:38):
after the college of bishops.
The college of bishops sign offon also sign off on them.

Speaker 3 (34:42):
There has to be agreement upon what they're
putting forth.
But that's the thing.
It's like the times where thechurch actually, where the Pope
actually acts in the manneryou're saying, where he's
spouting heresy, like that wouldbe, when the Pope is speaking
infallibly is very, very rare,and when he's speaking ex

(35:03):
cathedra, so from the chair, andhe's saying this is binding on
all the Christian faithful.
So now, if you don't have thatposition in the church, how can
there be unity?
It's like cause.
I like Jonathan Peugeot a lot,but he's always talking about
hierarchy and how things kind ofwork up and they have to cut
Like if Christ doesn't have aprime minister upon the earth

(35:25):
who does get to say this isheresy, this is not.
Like I don't see how anyecclesiology outside of Roman
Catholicism could actually work.
And when I say RomanCatholicism, I don't mean the
Latin church, I just mean withthe Pope as head of the
government, you know, as thegoverning body over the entire
church.
It kind of it then comes downto oh, we don't like what the

(35:48):
Pope says, so we're going tobreak off and start our own
thing.
I'm not saying you don't have acloser relationship to
historical Christianity as anAnglo-Catholic, of course you do
than a modern evangelical,because modern evangelicals,
that theology is literally 100years old.
But I don't know how you canjustify just saying well, I
don't agree with this thing, sowe're going to go start our own

(36:10):
thing.

Speaker 1 (36:12):
I mean, I guess I can understand where you're coming
from, but at the same time, doyou understand the Protestant
position that if the CatholicChurch, under the Pope, says
something that really seems tobe at the very least improper,
if not heretical, why should werespect that office?
I mean, if the Pope were to,can you think?

Speaker 3 (36:33):
of something offhand that you could Give me an
example on that.
As a heresy that you think thatthe Pope is.

Speaker 1 (36:42):
The current Pope?
I can't think of one, but, likeI said, anoreous monothelitism
right, okay, uh, but hissuccessor corrected that right?
Yes, exactly.
But what if he had declared excathedra what, what he did, but,
but what?
But if he had?
That's my point is, and evenand even honorius.

Speaker 3 (37:01):
I don't know.
I don't know the history ofHonorius too well, but I don't
know.
I think his was.
I'm pretty sure it was morejust like a conceding to keep
for the sake of unity type ofthing, but he didn't pronounce
it or anything.
I don't know Honorius that well.
Yeah, he wouldn't declare it excathedra.

(37:22):
I got Tim Gordon texting me buthe could, you know, no, but he
wouldn't declare it ex cathedra.

Speaker 1 (37:25):
I got Tim Gordon texting me, but he could you
know.

Speaker 3 (37:28):
No but he couldn't.
Yes, that's the claim, right.
So the Catholic position isthat the office, like the
claiming, the Pope hasinfallibility when speaking ex
cathedra is not saying the Popecan declare anything to be
doctrine, it's saying that.
God prevents him fromproclaiming a heresy Right.

Speaker 2 (37:47):
It's a negative charism.

Speaker 1 (37:50):
And that just doesn't do it for me.
I don't know what to tell you.
Beside that, it's just sayingthat it can't happen.
Because it can't happen iscircular reasoning.
Well, it hasn't.
That's why I'm saying it can'thappen because god prevents it
but god didn't prevent thecollege of cardinals from
electing multiple popes who wereflagrant sinners yeah, but

(38:13):
that's not what.

Speaker 3 (38:14):
That's not what we claim like you can have.
That's.
The point is that you can havea guy like pope alexander the
six, who clearly had um, uh, hadmistresses and he had children
out of wedlock and all thesethings, but what he wasn't doing
is changing church teaching tosuit his lifestyle.
Sure, but again.

Speaker 1 (38:33):
somebody who is representative of Christ on
earth should be as Christlike aspossible, and like with Irvin
too, he was literally insane.

Speaker 3 (38:41):
They elected an insane man.
We've had gay pedophiles aspopes, but they didn't change.

Speaker 1 (38:46):
The teaching of the church is the point Until they
did, and that's when things likethe Council of Trent come about
and the Anglicans go OK, no.

Speaker 3 (38:55):
OK, so if the church council like Trent, because you
said the church councils are theones who claim heresy.

Speaker 1 (39:01):
The Protestants weren't given a vote there.
The Protestants didn't have asay at the Council of Trent.

Speaker 3 (39:04):
The whole point of the Council of Trent was to
correct the Protestant errors.
But it was still a valid churchcouncil, right?

Speaker 1 (39:10):
So like, I understand that, but if you're, if you're
going to have a council and say,hey, we need to discuss these
things, and then you don't givethe people who are arguing with
you a say that's not.

Speaker 3 (39:22):
They address their arguments specifically, though.

Speaker 1 (39:25):
Like.
That's what the Council of.

Speaker 3 (39:26):
Trent is is addressing the Protestant
arguments specifically andsaying this you, if you believe
this, you are cursed.
Right, so so, but like even youas an Anglo-Catholic right Like
well, that's a good question.

Speaker 1 (39:40):
Why?
Why is our ordination declaredinvalid?
Our ordination?

Speaker 3 (39:44):
declared invalid?
I actually think there's.
Isn't there a documentspecifically saying from the
Catholic Church that theAnglican ordinations are invalid
?

Speaker 1 (39:52):
Yes.
I can't remember it off the topof my head, if I remember
correctly, it came about in the1560s and the reasoning was that
we took out the submissivenessto the Pope.
That bishops must besubservient to the Pope.
That's about all.

Speaker 3 (40:09):
I believe that wouldn't invalidate their
ordination though, because theOrthodox ordinations are still
valid and their sacraments arestill valid.

Speaker 2 (40:17):
It was actually Leo XIII in 1896, and the papal
apostolate curé concluded thatAnglican ordinations were
absolutely null and utterly voiddue to defects in the form and
intention of the Anglicanordination rite, particularly
following changes made duringthe Reformation.

Speaker 1 (40:39):
I very much love Leo XIII because he's always
extremely vague.

Speaker 2 (40:44):
I bet the document is more specific.

Speaker 3 (40:45):
I'm sure if you've read the document, it's not that
big.

Speaker 1 (40:49):
I have read his uh.
I was it him that did inhumanumgenus?
Uh, or was that pious, uh,whichever one, when?
when pope leo generous yeah, uh,when that's yeah, that that's
that's the one I was thinking offor when they originally banned
freemasonry.
But when Pope Leo XIII comesalong and reaffirms the papal
ban on Freemasonry, hisreasoning came entirely from a

(41:11):
con artist who lied to him andeverything he said was like all
of these things, and then hedidn't actually give examples
and evidence.
More from a a logical point ofview than a theological point of
view is I.
I need to see the explanationof why something is wrong, not

(41:32):
just we decided this is wrong.
And I think that that's the waya lot of Protestants feel is.
There's a lot of churchdecisions that they just say and
we have declared this anathema,and then they don't explain why
I would take the oppositeapproach.

Speaker 3 (41:45):
I would say that the church is actually very thorough
in explaining why those thingsare wrong.

Speaker 2 (41:50):
So, for instance, in the papal bull about the
Anglican ordination, there wastwo main reasons given.
One is that the Anglican Riteof Reformation, as revised
during the Reformation, removedthe references to the priest's
role in offering the Eucharisticsacrifice, in other words,
removed the references to thepriest's role in offering the
Eucharistic sacrifice, in otherwords, removed the references to

(42:11):
the role in offering it as apropitiatory sacrifice.
And then the second was thatthere was not enough elaboration
to signify the order beingconferred in the ordination.
So in the Catholic ordinationit is specific whether that
person is being ordained adeacon, priest or bishop.

(42:33):
And it was judged that theAnglican Rite lacked that
specificity.

Speaker 1 (42:40):
But we do have deacons, priests and bishops.

Speaker 2 (42:42):
Right.

Speaker 3 (42:44):
It says that the phrase— it's the same reason why
they call deacons fathers inthe anglican church, like like
father calvin robinson wasfather calvin robinson when he
was just a deacon interesting.

Speaker 1 (42:56):
Yeah, to be honest, I'm I'm too new to it to really
argue on that, on the finerpoints of it um, hang on, let me
just say, uh, um, okay, so what?

Speaker 3 (43:09):
uh, what is your position?
What is your take on?
Have you ever read the ultimanida?
I can't say that I have.
You've never read the ultimate.
Indeed, rob, bring the ultimatenida, because I I've heard you
say um that catholics oh yeah Ididn't know by that name.

Speaker 1 (43:29):
But yeah, I, I've read some of it.
It's, it's nonsense.
It's not masonic, it wascreated by the church you think
the ultimate data was created bythe church and not by, not by
freemasons unless, hang on, Imight be mistaking it with
something else, but ah, yes,it's the 100-year plan to get

(43:49):
their own guy in, essentially sothat's the thing.
Freemasonry never had a problemwith the Catholic Church Like
actual, to this day regularFreemasonry, which is mainly
just the United States, canadaand Britain, has no problem with
the Catholic Church.
There's no ban on Catholics,there's no.
There was actually a ban ondiscussion of religion in the
lodge and the discussion ofpolitics in the lodge.

(44:11):
What the, what the Illuminatiand the French Masons and and,
to an extent, the Italian Masonswere doing in the the 18 and
1900s actually is why wedenounced them as a group.
So, and like I said on on theshow last night, if I come to a
point where I see something thatis essential to freemasonry,
that is a core doctrine offreemasonry, not just, you know,

(44:31):
personal opinion aboutsomething that were to
contradict christianity, I Iwould walk away, I would leave
in a heartbeat, I think I thinkthe god rob I was just gonna say
I do think, um, there is aconflation between, like english
and scottish right freemasonrywith, like the oriental lodges

(44:51):
yeah um, now I I would say thatthe, the, the big problems with
the oriental lodges are stillsomewhat there in in the, the
english and scottish right, sortsort of I'm in the scottish
right for that

Speaker 2 (45:06):
yeah, um, but in, in terms of those who you know were
responsible for, say, a lot ofthe, the violence against the
church, and like the frenchrevolution, yeah, and in, you
know, the italian freemasonsthat, like garibaldi and those
who fought against the church,those, yeah, those are the
Oriental Lodges and they are theextremists in a sense.

Speaker 1 (45:31):
I take a much more hardline stance on this than
most Freemasons that I know, inthat I don't think that Oriental
Lodges should be recognized asMasonic at all.
I think that anything thatisn't in perfect lockstep with
the English branch basically iswrong, almost in a very similar

(45:52):
way to the way Catholics viewProtestantism.
I don't think that the Frenchlodges are Masonic, because
Masonry has a few corerequirements.
You have to believe in a God.
The French don't require that.
You have to be a man.
The French don't require that.
You're not allowed to talkabout politics or religion in
the lodge.
The French actually encourageyou to foment insurrection in
the lodge.
All of that is disgusting to meand I hate it For me.

(46:16):
What I like about Freemasonry isthe stuff that goes back really
far.
I think that after the year1800, things kind of went off
the rails.
I think that the people whodeny that the Illuminati
influence remained withinFreemasonry and that it
permeated are insane.
I think that that's exactlywhat the Scottish Rite is.
I think that most Freemasonsprobably don't realize how bad

(46:39):
the things they're involved inare.
But on the other hand, ifyou're going to become a member
of the Commandery, the KnightsTemplar and Freemasonry you must
be a Trinitarian Christian.
So there's a very starkdifference between the kind of
almost more universalist Iwouldn't say Gnostic, but
universalist position of theScottish right, as opposed to

(47:02):
the explicitly Trinitarianviewpoint of the York right.

Speaker 3 (47:06):
As opposed to the explicitly Trinitarian viewpoint
of the York Rite To me even theidea of secret societies and
stuff like that are.
I don't know enough about this,but I would think this is why
the church was condemning them.
For hundreds of years.
The Catholic Church has beencondemning Freemasonry yes, in
1788.
The Catholic church has beencondemning Freemasonry yes, the
the.
The idea that Protestants wouldlike would mock the rituals of

(47:33):
Catholicism and then go intothese secret societies and then
have their own rituals.
It just seems so likecontradictory to me.

Speaker 1 (47:40):
I'm curious what you mean about mockery.

Speaker 3 (47:43):
The Protestants in general don't like.
I'm talking about americanprotestants, I'm not talking
about like anglican and stufflike that, like american
protestantism.
They don't like liturgicalchristianity, but then they came
here, like the puritans camehere and they started all these
secret societies with it anddoing all these rituals behind

(48:04):
closed doors.
But I think ritual is actuallyinherent in humanity, like God
made us to perform rituals andstuff like that.
But I mean, I just, I just knowthe church has explicitly
condemned Freemasonry for thepast 300 years or so.

Speaker 1 (48:18):
Yeah, and and, to be honest, in a in a weird way.
Like I said, if if I foundFreemasonry to be in
contradiction with my Christianfaith, I would walk away
immediately.
But in a weird way, one of mybiggest issues with Catholicism
has come through the way thatthey have responded to
Freemasonry over the years forit.

(48:48):
But what Pius wrote in 1738, ifyou read it, his reasoning is
literally just they meet insecret, therefore they must be
doing evil and perverse things.
But in reality it was amembership only organization.
You couldn't be in it if you.
You couldn't come into ameeting if you weren't a member.
It wasn't that they weredeliberately keeping secrets
from each other or from theoutside world.
It was like this is amembership society that helps

(49:10):
each other do things, thatdiscusses things that are kind
of close to the best for themembers, things that you know
might be private.
And so we you can't come intothe lodge if you're not a member
, because the lodge does thingswith its money, like to support
each other.

Speaker 3 (49:25):
So why would you be able to just walk in, you would
take an issue with the, thedocuments where the church was
trying to say we like, we viewthe Muslims with esteem, and
things like that.
So you're like, adamant thatMuslim, I agree, muslims do not
worship God.

(49:45):
But then you'll.
You're like adamant that muslim, I agree, muslims do not
worship god, they don't um.
But then you'll, you're in.
You're a freemason where you'respecifically in a group that's
saying like, because they pushhuman fraternity, like amongst
like, you're not allowed.
So how, how do you have thatcontradiction?
That and that like, you want tobe part of a christian church
that that explicitly says themuslims don't worship god.

Speaker 1 (50:04):
Then you're I don't know, oh no.
I think that is a majorcontradiction within Freemasonry
that developed later on.
When, in 1723, the MasonicConstitution comes about and it
says that Freemasonry is open toall faiths.
I think that there's somethingvery important to recognize
about that.
I think that there's somethingvery important to recognize

(50:25):
about that.
All faiths for practicalpurposes in England in 1723, was
Anglicanism and RomanCatholicism.
That was why they opened up toall faiths was because they were
in the midst of a severe seriesof civil conflicts over the
Protestant and Catholicpositions.
So what they were doing issaying, hey, we're not going to

(50:47):
let whether or not we'reProtestant or Catholic divide us
, because we're all Christians.
Over time, as the diversity ofreligion grew, there were
probably some moments whereFreemasonry should have stopped
and said no, we're not going tolet Hindus in.
No, we're not going to letMuslims in, no, we're not going
to let Norse pagans in.

(51:08):
And I think I can't.
There are things I can't defendabout the way modern
Freemasonry operates in a lot ofways.
There are a lot of people Iknow through Masonry who are
good people, but I don't thinkthat they belong in Freemasonry.
I think that they are bringingthings into it that they want to
see justified, when in realitythat's not what Freemasonry was

(51:29):
supposed to be about.
It was supposed to be a groupof Christian men working
together in concert to both keepeach other safe and provide for
one another in times ofhardship, and to also go out and
do charity and to work togetherto better their communities.
I think that was the originalintention and we've fallen away

(51:49):
from that.
So as far as Freemasonry goes,I'm a reformist.

Speaker 3 (51:55):
You're a Protestant Freemason, I'm a Protestant
Freemason.
Yeah, In a way.
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (52:01):
And I've gotten to a point recently where I feel like
if I get through and thisreally is where I'm sitting on
it If I get through up throughKnights Templar, and I'm sitting
up there, the tippy top of thatchain of Freemasonry, and I

(52:22):
look down and I see that there'sno hope for it, I'll walk away.
That's kind of how I felt foryears.

Speaker 3 (52:27):
Christian Marion wants to know if you'll debate
Freemasonry with him.

Speaker 1 (52:30):
Yeah, I'd be willing to.

Speaker 3 (52:35):
Yeah, I don't know.
Oh, man, I don't know.

Speaker 1 (52:37):
I think Albert Pike was the worst thing to ever
happen to Freemasonry.

Speaker 2 (52:43):
He was a weird one.

Speaker 1 (52:44):
Yeah, he's a weird, weird, incredible scholar, by
the way, like as far asethnography goes, like it as as
an ant I this is like an ancientanthropologist term, but as as
an anthropologist basicallyincredibly important figure,
very important in recording.
I think it was the language of,I want to say it was the
seminoles, some of the Muskogeeand Creek languages.

(53:05):
We know a lot of what we knowbecause of Albert Pike but at
the same time he got way toointo the feeder kid aspect of
Freemasonry and forgot thatyou're supposed to be a
Christian and he does say.
He says I'm a Christian, hesays I believe in God.
He's just a little too into themysticism, a little too into
the mysticism.

Speaker 3 (53:25):
What's your, uh, what's?
Your position on uh what's yourposition on the?

Speaker 1 (53:34):
people of the old covenant being involved in free
masonry.
Um I, I haven't had any issueswith any of them.

Speaker 3 (53:39):
No well, I mean a lot of people are saying that it's
very cabalist, Like so.

Speaker 1 (53:47):
I think that has more to do with Christians,
Christian mysticism, than itdoes Jewish influence.
Looking back through it, likelike Albert Pike, when he talks
about Kabbalah he's talkingabout Christian Kabbalah, which
of course is based upon JewishKabbalah, but he wasn't doing it
as like Judaism is you know,like Christian Christianity is
wrong Judaism is, you know, likeChristian Christianity is wrong
, Judaism is right.
Kabbalah, all of that, it waskind of the extension of it.

(54:09):
So I don't think that the, thechanges to Freemasonry are the
result of Jewish influence somuch as Christian mystic.

Speaker 3 (54:18):
And I, I just see, uh , I see the oh man, we can't do
this on this side.
We'll have to do this on theother side, because we'll talk
about world events too.
I think all of us are prettydisgusted with what we're seeing
happening in the world rightnow, so we can probably agree on
that.
All right, guys, have you got acouple last questions before we

(54:39):
jump over to locals?
Yeah, it was.
The thing is we wanted to haveAiden on just to shoot the crap
at him before the debate, justto talk about his podcast and
stuff, and then the debatehappened.
I do think that Tim Gordon didreally the best out of the three

(55:00):
of you on that debate.
I think you were kind ofoutmatched.
You didn't know what you weregetting yourself into.
I think you were kind ofoutmatched.
You didn't really.
You didn't know what you weregetting yourself into.
I think Jay jumped in way toodeep and got way too esoteric to
even make the the, theconversation like cognizable for
the average person watching.
But Jay does that when hedebates and then you know that's

(55:21):
just because we've had Jay ontwice and I refuse to have a
discussion about orthodoxy withhim Cause I know it'll just get
like that.
But I think Tim came outlooking like he actually
understood the arguments thebest and had the best replies
for everything.
And I think that Jay purposelychose the hardest things for a
Catholic like Tim, who'stradition minded to defend those

(55:44):
positions.
So let's see if we got anyquick questions before we go.
Does Aiden know that theDictatus Pape was never an
official document of the churchand has stuff that Catholics
don't believe in and have neverbelieved in?

Speaker 1 (56:01):
I'd say it was never an official document.
I feel like is is a cop out.
It was.
It was put together is a copout.
It was put together by GregoryVII.
It was the positions he held.
While the document itselfwasn't published, most of the
stuff in it was in otherencyclicals and indexes and
papal documents.
So, yes, the Dictatus Papaeitself wasn't published as it

(56:24):
stands in I think like 27articles.

Speaker 3 (56:31):
But most of those articles were published
elsewhere.
All right, let's see if youguys got any others before we
jump to the other side, becauseI want to talk.
I want to talk about the warthat we seem to be getting
pushed into right now.

Speaker 1 (56:42):
Yeah, I'm draft age.
Yeah to right now.
Yeah, um, I'm draft age.
Yeah, yeah, I'm, uh, I'mgetting closer to not being.

Speaker 3 (56:52):
I'm gonna be 28 in a few months, oh, all, right,
bobby's got one.
Uh, what's the point of thehidden teachings and veiled
symbolism restricted to masonsif it's just supposed to be a
christian fraternity like?
It sounds to me like you weresaying like, uh, what
freemasonry was supposed to be?
Just sounds like you guysshould all just been catholic,
and that's exactly what you had.

Speaker 1 (57:11):
I think to an extent the reason freemasonry became
possible, popular, was becauseit was a way for christians to
meet.
While you weren't supposed todiscuss religion as an official
business of the lodge inside ofthe lodge, like building
building you could meet asProtestant and Catholic and talk
about things.
Um, so it was a way to kind ofkeep, keep the faith together,

(57:33):
even with that that split goingon, which is probably more
popular with Protestants than itis with Catholics.
But when the organization beganaround 1400, in the uh, the
Regius poem, it's an explicitlyCatholic document.
Everybody, everybody, was stillCatholic at the time.
Um, so what they say is that,you know, a Mason must love God

(57:53):
and the Holy church with all hisheart.
It's a very explicitlyChristian fraternity at the time
and a lot of that, thesymbolism and everything wasn't
supposed to be hidden or secret.
Uh, it was more a matter of, wasmore a matter of teaching
lessons.
Without just teaching lessons,everything in masonry is a play.
All of the degrees andeverything are just play acting

(58:18):
that is meant to teach a lessonabout such and such thing.
And at least in the York Rite Ihaven't done the Scottish Rite
stuff, I've read some of it, butin the York Rite, there was
nothing in it that wasn't purelybased in the Bible.
Most of it's based around theTemple of Solomon.
Actually and I saw that on thescreen my grandfather was a
third degree knight of Columbus.
Realistically, for me, it'slike I think it's a little silly

(58:42):
to join the Catholic version ofthe thing that already exists.
It's like I think it's a littlesilly to join the catholic
version of the thing thatalready exists.
I would prefer to see masonryreturn to its roots and be the
be the organization it was meantto be, rather than be something
weird, which is what it'sbecome all right, all right,
we're gonna go over to the otherside.

Speaker 3 (59:00):
Um, yeah, I'm sorry.
Sorry, we didn't have a fightover here, guys.
I know you guys were all hopingI'm not gonna invite somebody
on my show and have a fight overhere.
Guys, I know you guys were allhoping for that.
I'm not going to invitesomebody on my show and have a
fight.
It's different if you set it asa debate, but we specifically
said we weren't having a debatetonight.
We were just having a moment totalk.
Yeah we all know what ourpositions are None of us are

(59:22):
theologians.
Yeah well, especially becauseyou are kind of just delving
into apostolic Christianity andyou've found the Anglican
Catholic communion, that's justwhere you are right now.
I don't think you'll stay there.
I think you're going to have tosee the preposterous nature of

(59:44):
breaking away from Rome alwayskind of devolves into sign.
You'll see it like even withinthe Anglican community it's like
oh well, they went too far,let's go start our own group.
Oh well, they went too far,let's go start our own group.
And that can only go on for solong, like it.

Speaker 1 (59:57):
There has to be a final authority in the end there
is a conservative movement inthe Episcopal church right now
and I was talking to somebodyabout it and I was like, well,
why not, instead of trying toreform the Episcopal Church from
the inside, why not everybodyswitch over to the Anglican
Church, the Anglican CatholicChurch, and just overwhelm them

(01:00:18):
with numbers?

Speaker 3 (01:00:19):
Well, that's my position on the Catholic.

Speaker 1 (01:00:21):
Church.
I guess the Episcopal Churchhas a really good job of like
keeping everything it owns.

Speaker 3 (01:00:27):
You should check out the Anglican ordinary and if you
like the, if you like the, the,the patrimony.
Yeah, yeah, the Anglicanpatrimony.
Check out the Anglican ordinary.
It's like the best of bothworlds.
You get to be in communion withRome and keep all of the things
you like about the AnglicanCatholic communion communion
with Rome and keep all of thethings you like about the

(01:00:47):
Anglican Catholic communion.
But all right, we're going togo over to the other side, guys.
Go to recusencesellerscom.
Use code BASE at checkout for10% off.
They have a fine assortment ofwines and fruit over there.
They're our sponsor.
We love them.
You have an obligation tosupport Catholic businesses that
support us.

Speaker 2 (01:01:03):
I don't care, it's a mortal sin to not buy wine from
them.
To clarify what Anthony justsaid you should support Catholic
businesses.
You don't have an obligation tosupport them.
That support us.

Speaker 3 (01:01:12):
No, you do.
Don't listen to Rob.
He's always trying to undermineour grift.
Don't listen to him.
All right, we're going to goover to locals If you guys want
to come over there.
I want to talk about currentevents.

Speaker 2 (01:01:32):
So we'll see you guys over on the other side, take us
out, rob, okay I'm just goingto remove the streams here for
those we don't need.

Speaker 3 (01:01:36):
Give me just a moment .
Yeah, I knew we were going tocatch crap from everybody on
that one.
They want.
They wanted us to like go foryour jugular, but it's like I
don't, I just didn't want to dothat I don't know why so many
catholics online seem to thinkthat you can convert protestants
by being mean to them butthat's, that's kind of the point
.
It's like and it's not gonnawork, it's not and I don't.

(01:01:57):
I don't know if thoseconversations are even like
fruitful for anybody like ouraudience is all catholic.
They all agree with us.
Like you're kind of preachingto the choir, and actually that
that is my girlfriend.

Speaker 1 (01:02:07):
I'm guessing she's just gotten home, which is
perfect timing.
God, do you think that's reallyquick?

Speaker 3 (01:02:11):
yeah um, the uh, yeah , he's got to go open the open
the door for his girl.
Um, I had tim gordon texting methe whole time.
He's like uh, saying the samething.
We were that a pope wouldn'tdeclare that ex cathedra.
Then he said St John Damascus,st Thomas Aquinas Pope, st
Gregory VII, all said Islamworships the one God.
So that's the thing.

(01:02:33):
The way those documents areworded are annoying.
But they but, because they area bit vague.
But yes, islam worships one god, but they don't worship the one
god and it's like they don'teven worship.

Speaker 2 (01:02:56):
You know what I mean.

Speaker 3 (01:02:58):
Like they don't offer sacrifice but they're
monotheists, right, in a naturalsense they don't believe in,
they're not like, uh, they'renot polytheists.

Speaker 2 (01:03:08):
So okay, fine, they worship one god, but I don't
believe the jews worship thetriune god like, like I get the
whole philosophy, philosophyaspect of it, where if there is
only one god, then anyone who isgiving worship to what they
believe is one God then has tobe giving worship to the one God

(01:03:29):
.
But how is that possible ifeverything they do is demonic?

Speaker 3 (01:03:33):
Demonic and they're giving attributes to God that he
doesn't have Right Like they'reclaiming he has attributes that
he just doesn't have.
It's like.
It's insane to me.
So I get what the church wastrying to do.

Speaker 2 (01:03:49):
And it would have been better if they had said
something like the Muslims andthe Jews attempt to worship the
one God or, you know, intend toworship the one God, or
something like that.

Speaker 3 (01:04:03):
Yeah, whatever, I don't want to discuss council
documents tend to worship theone God or something like that.
Yeah, whatever, I don't want todiscuss council documents.
Yeah, when he comes back, I dowant to talk about.
I want to talk about Israel andwhat the mess that they're
getting us into, because I'mjust like beside myself.

Speaker 2 (01:04:21):
It will be interesting to get his opinion
Cause, like obviously, you and Ihave long, well, not long ago,
but we've come around to well, Idon't know how to describe it.
What many people would describeas anti-semitism, you know, but
what is someone who is morenormie in that regard?

(01:04:41):
What do they think about what?

Speaker 3 (01:04:43):
yeah, because I think that.
I think that israel is the thekingdom of satan on earth at
this point.
So I want to see I want to seewhat he thinks.

Speaker 2 (01:04:55):
Tim gordon giving me crap on twitter see I'll be like
, I'll be honest, like so Ienjoy his channel, right, I
enjoy watching his channel.
I enjoyed the content he makeswhen it's about the missing
people and stuff like that.
Yeah, it's entertaining.
That's what I watch it for.
I would have never said weshould have a monitor.

Speaker 3 (01:05:15):
Well, no, look, the thing is I I didn't want it to
be a, uh, an argument the wholetime, because I'm hoping the
conversation leads to somethingthat sparks his, sparks, his
thought process that he's neverthought of before.
You know, it's like so okay,he's back.
I didn't want it to just be usarguing with him the whole

(01:05:36):
episode.
You know, yeah, um, I and aiden, I am curious what?
What is your?
What is your Like?
Because I'm seeing a lot ofyounger guys Starting to come
around on the Israel questionand starting to see how Israel
seems to be the one Provoking usinto all of these foreign

(01:05:56):
conflicts.
Like I do see that you wantnothing to do with war with Iran
.
Are you Like, is your positionthat Israel is getting us into?
That Is your position?
You just don't want us inforeign wars?
Do you think, like, do yousupport Israel's right to do
this?
Where are you at with thatquestion?
You're muted.

Speaker 1 (01:06:16):
For as long as I can remember, as long as I've really
been a conscious adult, as faras politics goes, I was a lot
more involved in politics incollege.
I was vice president of collegeRepublicans for a hot minute.
Um, as far as politics goes, Iwas a lot more involved in
politics in college.
I was vice president of uh,college Republicans for a hot
minute.
I got impeached for calling aneo-Nazi gay somehow, Um, but I
was vice president of collegeRepublicans.
I was president of youngAmericans for Liberty.
So I was very involved backthen and I had a very firm

(01:06:38):
stance that foreign wars are bad.
We should not be sending ourmilitary anywhere unless we're
actually threatened.
So I think the Iraq war was amistake.
I think Afghanistan was amistake.
I can't really think of a warwe've been in in my lifetime
that wasn't a massive error.
With this one specifically.
This is the first time thatI've really been able to see a

(01:06:59):
Middle Eastern war developing inreal time, because the Syrian
war was ending as I was gettinginto college.
What I'm seeing now is Iunderstand Israel is scared of
Iran having a nuclear weapon.
I get that.
If if we were next to Iran andthey were chanting death to
America, I would be terrified.
At the same time, that doesn'tmean that America needs to be

(01:07:21):
involved.
If Israel wants to go in andhit Iran, that's a regional
conflict.
The second we get involved,it's a global conflict.
We don't need that.
If Israel can keep around fromgetting a nuclear weapon on
their own, why do we need to beinvolved?
I think that it's just anescalation.
It's just going to see the samething, potentially worse than
what happened in Ukraine, wherethat war should have been over

(01:07:43):
years ago.
I mean, the UN should have comein and said hey guys, let's
have a referendum and end this.
Do you guys want to be part ofRussia or Ukraine?
Okay, cool, make your decision.
It's over.
That should have happened yearsago and I think with Iran and
Israel right now, I don't knowwhat Israel's motivation is here
beyond taking out their nuclearcapabilities.
I understand wanting to get ridof the Ayatollah and and get

(01:08:07):
rid of Islamic rule of Iran,especially because Persia is
such an ancient and beautifulcountry.
I mean the history of Persia isso rich and from a Christian
perspective, I mean Cyrus wasthe one who sent Daniel and the
Israelites back to Israel torebuild the temple.
Like Persia should be ourfriend.
You know, even if they're notchristian, they they were a
friend to the, the abrahamicfaith and prior to the mongols,

(01:08:30):
they were christian.
They were at the heart of a lotof christians there of a huge
christian civilization so we're.
We have no reason to befighting with them, aside from
islam and israel's handling thaton their own.
Why do we need to be involved?

Speaker 3 (01:08:45):
Well, the thing is they, they make it.
They make it as if this is awar against Islam, but in
reality, it's the Christians whosuffer there, right?
So before we went into Iraq,there was a very big Christian
population in Iraq that gotcompletely decimated.
After we went over there, thesame thing happened in Syria.

(01:09:05):
They told us all these thingsabout Bashar al-Assad, and as
soon as Assad got out, the newguy that came in literally went
around murdering all theChristians.
Assad said the only ones youcould actually trust were the
Christians.

Speaker 1 (01:09:18):
It's kind of crazy how, every time we kicked out
the secular ruler of an Arabcountry or a Middle Eastern
country, they started murdering.

Speaker 3 (01:09:23):
Christians.
It's Christians that wind upgetting killed.
From a theological standpoint,there is enmity between Jews and
Christians right so like youguys were arguing and I did this
on locals because I don't wantanybody putting it out there on
you, Like nobody's trying to getyou I know.

Speaker 1 (01:09:42):
I'm already taking flack because Sam Cedar took 30
seconds of stuff I said andmisrepresented it to his
audience.

Speaker 3 (01:09:47):
So yeah, no, well, from a theological standpoint,
like because my thinking on thiswhole topic has really changed
over the last few years, I mean,if you were to talk to me five,
10 years ago, I'd have been.
I mean, I, I supported the warin Iraq.
I freaking Israel's the onlydemocracy in the Middle East.
But theologically understandingthis issue, it's really come

(01:10:08):
down to seeing it like throughscripture and seeing how every
single story in scripture isabout the birthright supposed to
go to the older brother andthen it winds up going to the
younger brother.
So it's like, and it's justthis same pattern happens
throughout scripture, over andover, even when jesus is telling

(01:10:30):
the the parable of um, not eventhe power, yeah, the parable of
the of the um prodigal, theprodigal son, right, so the
prodigal son is the youngerbrother, goes off and spends all
his stuff, his birthright comesback and the father throws a
party from.
The older brother is the onethat's upset with them.

(01:10:50):
You have cain kills abel.
Yeah, it's about jacob and esauevery single one of these.
It's about the father giving itto the youngest brother, or the
younger brother, the one whowasn't supposed to get the
birthright, and that actuallyhappens with the gent brother,
or the younger brother, the onewho wasn't supposed to get the
birthright, and that actuallyhappens with the Gentiles.

(01:11:11):
Get the new covenant right Now.
That story plays out in realtime and after the Ascension,
and the Gentiles now claim theGod of Abraham, isaac and Jacob
has blessed us with the covenantand there's this enmity between
Jews and Christians for 2000years.

Speaker 1 (01:11:25):
And yeah, I mean I said on Tim cast IRL the default
position of the church in themiddle ages was antisemitism
Like it was, and it went theother way around as well.

Speaker 3 (01:11:34):
It had to be, though like the idea of and I'm not
going to get into like the, theconspiracy stuff of they control
this, they control that.
It's not even about that.
It's like, since they havegotten a foothold in Israel,
what they have done isinfiltrate countries and like

(01:11:54):
managed to set this thing up inIsrael.
That's dragged every singlenation into war in their land,
and it seems to me like whatthey're trying to do is set up a
davidic kingdom, like a kingdombigger than the davidic kingdom
, which is kind of like whatherod did.
Herod went and he actuallyexpanded the herodian empire
bigger than david did, and it'sjust what it seems like to.

(01:12:16):
I'm talking on a theologicallevel here.
I'm not even trying to get intoconspiracy.

Speaker 1 (01:12:20):
Well, I believe that they.
I believe the jew, jewishposition is that the Messiah
will be a human king, not Godand man as one.
Yeah, so that might havesomething.
They don't have a Davidic king,they don't have somebody to
fill that role.
So I don't understand what'sgoing on over there, what the

(01:12:42):
thought process is.
I wonder if it's just aboutlike restoring the old, what
they believe should be the trueIsrael.

Speaker 3 (01:12:52):
I'm just watching everything Trump's doing and I'm
like I voted for this guy.
I was so excited I rememberbeing so freaking excited that
like, oh, he's got Tulsi Gabbardin there and he's got he's got
RFK Jr in there and we're'regonna get all these changes and
every single freaking thing hehas done has been dick cheney.
It's like.

(01:13:12):
It's like you, literally, nomatter who you vote for, you get
dick cheney and it's just noneof his.
None of the things he said hewas gonna do has he done.
They have any?
I'm still whatever.
It's just to watch him thentalk.
He ran on ending the warbetween Ukraine and Russia.
He ran on ending the hostilitybetween Israel and Iran and he
gets in.
Ukraine and Russia are blowingup even worse and now we're

(01:13:35):
starting a war with Ukraine andI don't see how this doesn't end
catastrophically, with theentire world at war soon.

Speaker 1 (01:13:43):
I don't know.
I don't know what the goal is.
I mean it's.
I genuinely don't understand.
I don't, I cannot.
I'll give this to you guys.
Sorry about dispensationalism,our bad.

Speaker 3 (01:14:01):
Probably should have nipped that one in the bud, but
I don't know if the average likeamerican who is like into
politics, understands how muchof our foreign policy is based
on retarded protestant theologylike evangelical
dispensationalist theology likethat that we are being dragged

(01:14:22):
into this crap because like uh,what's his name's uh text to to
trump um like, bring that upbring that freaking.
Bring that off.
It is complete insanity.
If you guys have not seen this,it's um, I'll look for it.
Just keep talking.
Um, no, I have it.
Hang on.
Uh, here it is, I got it.

(01:14:43):
Um, this is mike huckabeetrump's uh, uh, m, m, m emissary
to israel, or whatever the hellhe is.
Mr president, god spared you inbutler pa, to be the most
consequential president in acentury, maybe ever.
The decisions on your shouldersI would not want to be made by

(01:15:05):
anyone else.
You have made many voicesspeaking to you, sir, but there
is only one voice that matters,his voice.
I am your appointed servant inthis land and I'm available for
you, but I do not try to get inyour presence often because I
trust your instincts.
No president in my lifetime hasbeen in a position like yours,
not since Truman in 1945.
No president in my lifetime hasbeen in a position like yours,
not since Truman in 1945.

(01:15:26):
I reach out to persuade.
I don't reach out to persuadeyou, only to encourage you.
I believe you will hear fromheaven, and that voice is far
more important than mine oranyone else's.
You sent me to Israel to be youreyes, ears and voice and to
make sure our flag flies aboveour embassy.
My job is to be the last one toleave.
I will not abandon this post.
Our flag will not come down.

(01:15:49):
You did not seek this moment.
The moment sought you.
It is my honor to serve you,mike Huckabee.
Mike Huckabee, who wants thethird temple in Jerusalem built,
because these people think thatif the third temple is built,
the Antichrist will come andthey will be raptured into
heaven before the great uh, uh.
What is it?
The freaking tribulation?
The great tribulation?

Speaker 1 (01:16:09):
yeah it's very funny.
When I was, I took an entire400 level college course on uh,
on the book of revelation, andit was taught by an orthodox
christian.
He was not a priest, but he wasan orthodox scholar.
I pretty universally agreedthroughout the class upon doing
a reading of it and goingthrough everything that

(01:16:31):
pre-tribulation rapture is notin there.
No, yeah, uh, you can't get itfrom the text.
You have to read things into it.
It's not a real concept.
It wasn't something insomething in Christianity until
like 1870, something I genuinelydon't understand why, why this

(01:16:53):
is so pervasive in the UnitedStates, but it's definitely the
problem and that's what I saidon Tim cast too is I was like
this this whole thing comes froma very specific form of
uniquely American Protestantism.
Um, and unfortunately I don'tknow if there's a way to put the
genie back in the bottle.

Speaker 3 (01:17:06):
I don't either.
I think like if you go back andyou read the early church
fathers, they talk about how,when the Antichrist does come,
there will be throngs ofheretics awaiting his arrival,
thinking they are followingChrist Like there's going to,
and I don't know, man, the stuffwith trump kind of scares me

(01:17:29):
also, that you know he's sittingthere reading that text from
mike being, like this guy's, gay.

Speaker 1 (01:17:39):
It's such a weird that that it makes me think of
like it's almost like a Lord ofthe Rings, like Wormtongue
talking to Saruman level ofpsychopathy.
It feels uncomfortable to hearthat and to hear a president
described that way.

Speaker 3 (01:17:56):
Watching like every single politician come out when
they it's like it's.
It's this crazy evangelicalsupport for israel that gives
them like a bloodlust.
Like they, they want to see thewar escalate so bad.
Bill mitchell, why do I supportisrael?
It's simple genesis 12 3.
I will bless those who blessyou.

Speaker 1 (01:18:17):
Like these people are nuts, as if and they really
think that they're talking aboutthe modern geopolitical state
of israel too.
Yeah, it's, he's talking.
That's about the moderngeopolitical state of Israel too
.
Yeah, that's about the church.
Yes, and it doesn't matter howmany times you tell them that
and this is a position I heldwhen I was a Methodist Like this
is something I've held foryears that Israel in the New
Testament is very obviously thechurch.

(01:18:37):
It wasn't even Israel as anation at the time, it was Judea
, it was Judah before that anation.
At the time, it was judea, itwas judah before that.
I mean, israel was not a thingafter like 720 something, dc.

Speaker 3 (01:18:51):
What was israel like?
What were the jews doing inthat initial diaspora?
Like where?
Because it's it's interestingthat, like you don't really hear
about them popping up into,like the like around the
reformation, like that wholeperiod between when they get
thrown out of jerusalem to thereformation you like do you mean
after the barkovka revolt inthe 120s, or that?

Speaker 2 (01:19:15):
what?
What do I?

Speaker 1 (01:19:16):
think so, yeah, after after 133 ad, okay, yeah, so
yeah, I mean the roman.
That's the funny thing too, isit's all I?
I don't say this in nextcompany, because I know how
it'll sound, but from a from atheological standpoint.
Like you look at it, jesuscomes, he does his work, he dies
, he's crucified, he dies, herises from the dead and then,

(01:19:38):
about 35 years later, romesmacks the shit out of the Jews
yeah.
And then another seven yearslater, they do it again.
And how do you like?
How, as an Israelite, as a Jewliving in the first century and
the second century, how do younot sit there and go?

(01:19:59):
Hmm well, the Christians areeverywhere and we're just
getting our ass handed to us byRome repeatedly.
It doesn't seem like God's onour side.
Maybe we were wrong to deny theMessiah.

Speaker 3 (01:20:11):
Maybe that was the time to come around.

Speaker 1 (01:20:14):
So I don't get that.
But yeah, to answer yourquestion about what was going on
, the Romans did not reallypersecute the Jews beyond
kicking them out of Israel,because the Jews would offer.
Uh, this is a reallyinteresting little bit of
minutiae about how Christianityand Judaism were perceived
differently in the early, theearly period of the church.

(01:20:34):
Rome did not have a problemwith Judaism, even though Jews
would not sacrifice to theemperor and to the roman gods,
because they were sacrificing totheir god on behalf of the
roman emperor and the romanempire.
So they took that and they saidall right, well, if you won't
sacrifice to our emperor, we'lltolerate this version of doing

(01:20:55):
things.
The christians, on the otherhand, don't, don't sacrifice we.
We eat our god on sundays, uh.
So they, they saw that a littlebit differently and they didn't
get it because to the Romans,religion involved sacrifice.
The gods demanded sacrifice.
So Christians were beingpersecuted, while Jews, as long
as they were doing theirsacrifice on behalf of the

(01:21:16):
emperor, they were tolerated,they were allowed to do whatever
.
And then, once the Roman Empireconverted to Christianity which
wasn't an immediate thing, thatdidn't just happen in 325,
didn't happen in 382.
It happened, I think, 395 or385, 395.
So once that happens and theempire slowly becomes completely

(01:21:36):
Christian, the Jews started tofill roles that Christians
didn't want or could not perform.
So banking, for example.
We couldn't do interest onloans.
I wish that we still behavedthat way.
But Christians couldn't chargeinterest on loans, jews could.
So Jews became the bankers.
A lot of Christians outside ofthe church did not want to
practice medicine, but, and partof it was that you weren't

(01:21:59):
allowed to perform autopsies,you weren't allowed to mortify
the flesh after death.
The Jews didn't have that.
So they could become surgeons.
They could practice things thatChristians couldn't practice.
They also got very involved inlaw.
So a lot of these things thatare stereotypically Jewish today
derive from Christians in themiddle ages not wanting to or
not being able to do these jobs,and the Jews performed them

(01:22:21):
throughout the medieval period.
But then every there are sometimes when, like we have
documentation that proves that,yes, the Jews were doing coin
clipping, uh like on mass.
And then there are other timeswhen the Jews just got blamed
for things because somebodyneeded a scapegoat.
Uh, you know, the whole 109countries thing is nonsense, but
there were a lot of times whereJews were kicked out of

(01:22:43):
someplace, uh, where Jews wereaccused of things, um, and times
when Jews accused Christians ofthings.
It was a lot of conflict andit's why you see them kind of
getting moved around so much andyou see them intermixing with
with European populations.
Yet what Ashkenazi Jews aretoday, um, and then eventually,
obviously, zionism starts tobecome a thing in the 1800s.

(01:23:03):
Yeah, for a long time there.
They were just doing whateverjobs we didn't want to do.

Speaker 3 (01:23:08):
Zionism.
I can understand if you'reJewish.
I just don't understand that ifyou're not Jewish.
What worries me is that,because the Jews do have this
2,000 years of what theyperceive as, because they see it
as enmity between christiansand them, and they finally do
have their land back, likethere's no scenario like we

(01:23:32):
talked about russia being backedinto a corner, like if, if you
know, if they're backed into acorner and the world puts them
in a tough like, they'll releasenukes, like israel will
literally do that.
If they think that they'regoing to lose this land that
they finally acquired, they willscorch the entire earth.
So I don't know how we get thisconflict to back down, unless

(01:23:53):
it's just really just a quick,easy thing.
Iran is incapacitated and thisjust is a quick war.
But if this thing escalates andIran really does try to do
something, crazy it's I justdon't see how this, this whole
progression, ends.

Speaker 1 (01:24:08):
I think the the only real solution to the Iran
situation is Christian missionwork.
The problem is that it's reallydangerous to do that.
I think the Iranians areprobably one of the most almost
genetically predisposed peopleto Christianity on the planet.
You see, you see the inner, theinter, the interplay for

(01:24:32):
thousands of years in Persia,with them being one of the most
multicultural accepting ofoutside influence places on the
planet and Zoroastrianism whatthey had before Islam and
Christianity definitely hadthere at some point along the
way, indo-european religion andJudaism mixed together to form

(01:24:55):
something interesting, which isZoroastrianism, which holds, is
very similar to Christianity ina lot of ways.
I very similar to the the waythat we perceive the heavenly
realm.
I think the answer to Iran isconvert them back to
Christianity.
Just how do you do it?
Yeah, it's rough.
You said I get it if you'reJewish Zionism.

(01:25:18):
I think you've got to look backto the 1800s and put yourself
in that mindset.
I think a lot of people weresitting around going well, if
they have their own country,they won't be here yeah, yeah, I
understand why people wereanti-semitic at the time.
It was just a thing like theyprobably looked at like well, if
we give them their own spot,they'll leave yeah, I think that
was like hitler wanted to dothat get rid of them entirely

(01:25:42):
hitler wanted to just banishthem from from germany, and that
plan didn't work out and he hadto go plan b.
Oh my gosh I wouldn't say hehad to go to plan b, I would say
that was, that was probably adecision he could have not made
um, what was your?

Speaker 3 (01:25:58):
uh, all right, because we're gonna wrap it up
in a few minutes, but, um, ifsomebody was gonna go and watch
a show, uh, your podcast, whichepisode would you would you
recommend to them?
Well, obviously, thefreemasonry one.

Speaker 1 (01:26:08):
Um, uh, no, I would say, uh, torteria was a fun one,
we just put one out on that.
Just the whole history is a lieconspiracy.

Speaker 3 (01:26:17):
Um, if not that, then I think the john benet ramsey
series is my best work that's athat's probably an interesting
one to check out, yeah,especially for the younger guys,
cause you guys don't most.
You probably didn't even knowthat story until you researched
it.

Speaker 1 (01:26:30):
Right, yeah, and I've been going into like extreme
depth with with everything weare five episodes in and they
average, I'd say, about 45minutes each.

Speaker 3 (01:26:46):
We have covered about 14 days of the investigation.
They never, they never, foundout who did it right.
Nobody was ever.
Nobody was ever convicted.
But was it the father, thebrother?
Who was it?
Who do you think?

Speaker 1 (01:26:53):
I'm working your way up to that my hypothesis right
now and this this is subject tochange as I go deeper and deeper
into it but my hypothesis rightnow is that, uh, burke hit her
in the head with somethingflashlight hammer, I don't know.
Burke is her older brother, hewas 10.
And then John who was thefather, I think found her,
realized that he either had totake her to the hospital or put

(01:27:18):
her out of her misery.
And if he took her to thehospital, there were going to be
a lot of questions.
So I think that he staged thewhole kidnapping thing.
I think Patsy, the mother,wrote the note.
So I think that all three ofthem were involved in some way.
I I don't think that how it wentthat night was necessarily evil
on the part of the parents.
I think they were in shock andpanicking and and not in their

(01:27:41):
right minds.
What I think is evil iseverything that happened
afterwards, the number of peoplethey blamed, the lives they
destroyed, rather than justcoming out and being like I did
this, I'm sorry.
So, yeah, that was evil of them, but there's little things like
John Ramsey, 30 minutes afterhis daughter's body is

(01:28:02):
discovered in his basement,calling his private pilot to
arrange a flight to Atlanta andthen saying, when the police
asked him like why are youtrying to go to Atlanta, he was
like I have a business meeting.
No, he didn't.
He didn't have a businessmeeting.

Speaker 3 (01:28:18):
He definitely didn't have a business meeting.

Speaker 1 (01:28:20):
I think he was trying to get his family out of
Colorado.

Speaker 3 (01:28:23):
Once he realized the FBI was getting involved yeah,
he was trying to get his familyout of Colorado.
Once he realized the FBI wasgetting involved yeah, that's a
really shady scenario.

Speaker 2 (01:28:28):
Anthony is shocked they're not in his right mind.
Well, that's just usuallycorrect.

Speaker 3 (01:28:35):
Yeah, did you ever read Tom Holland's book?
What the hell is it calledDominion?

Speaker 2 (01:28:43):
No.

Speaker 3 (01:28:43):
I've heard of it.

Speaker 2 (01:28:43):
Not the Spider-Man actor.

Speaker 1 (01:28:44):
No, I know.

Speaker 3 (01:28:46):
Tom Holland's book Dominion, because if you're a
history major, especially Roband I did a two-part series
based on his book.
That was really good, justgoing into the pagan world and
as Christianity starts coming inand how the Catholic Church
developed.

Speaker 1 (01:29:04):
I think I have one of his books on my shelf and how
the Catholic Church developed.

Speaker 3 (01:29:07):
I think I have one of his books on my shelf.
Well, he's got a couple of goodones.
His book on Islam is reallygood too.
Something Under the Sword orsomething.

Speaker 1 (01:29:17):
Yeah, I think I have one of his books on the Viking
era.
Yeah, he's a good historian.
I will say that was one thing Idefinitely had going for me.
The Viking era.
Yeah, he's a good historian.
Oh yeah, I will say that wasone thing I definitely had going
for me.
I had incredible professors atPenn State.
Utterly incredible historyprogram there.
It's a hard school to get into.
It's a hard school to get intothe main campus.

(01:29:38):
It's a very easy school to getinto overall.
Yeah, I did get into the maincampus when all four years, but
there is no better value for aneducation, especially if you're
in Pennsylvania and it's instate tuition.
Oh yeah, if you're in PA.

Speaker 3 (01:29:55):
Where in PA are you?
What area Outside of Philly?
Alright Aiden, it was funmeeting you, man.
I hope the Catholics are dyingdown with teasing you for
everything.

Speaker 1 (01:30:07):
They'll find somebody new to make fun of in a few
days.
It'll be fine.

Speaker 3 (01:30:11):
Yeah, things like this do blow over.
Thanks for coming on with us,man.
Yeah, thanks for having me, yeah, and what is it?
Lore Lodge, yeah, the LoreLodge.
Yeah, go check out the LoreLodge guys.
Outside of my theology, I thinkyou guys might appreciate what
I do rob does.

(01:30:32):
Rob watches your show regularly, so it's entertaining, yeah,
and I think that you're on atheological journey right now,
so I'm not.
That's why it's like I didn'twant to have you come on and
start fighting with you aboutstuff I've you had to talk about
the debate.
It was like, yeah, of course,kind of had to, but, um, yeah, I
don't know, we'll probablywe'll.
We'll, we'll talk in the future.
We'll figure some other stuffout.
It was nice meeting you, man.
Nice to meet you too.
All right, take us out, rob.
Thank you.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Cold Case Files: Miami

24/7 News: The Latest

Crime Junkie

.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;}Timcast Debate Aftermath with The Lore Lodge

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Cold Case Files: Miami

24/7 News: The Latest

Crime Junkie

All Episodes

Timcast Debate Aftermath with The Lore Lodge

Cold Case Files: Miami