Biblical Texts and Mistranslations with DM Blackwall and Mat Moura (PART 2)

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome back everyone for part two of our episode on
the Judaic texts, Hebrew texts, Biblical texts, their meaning and
possible mistranslations. Thank you for joining us again. Enjoy part
two of two.

Speaker 2 (00:22):
Hey there, did you know that this podcast as a
supporters club. By becoming a supporter of the show, you
gain access to exclusive content and play an active role
in helping me to continue producing the content you love.

Speaker 3 (00:37):
See the link in the episode description for more details.

Speaker 4 (00:41):
Now let's get back.

Speaker 3 (00:42):
To the episode.

Speaker 4 (00:45):
As we call the work.

Speaker 1 (00:52):
We stand one, begun.

Speaker 5 (00:58):
In hand, strike down the poe, protect this land.

Speaker 1 (01:03):
Oh it's all Father, secret of whist.

Speaker 6 (01:06):
Guide our souls to the sacred rhythm.

Speaker 1 (01:10):
Frick, Queen of the Heart's home with love and grace.
Make a hole, sir, just with your eye.

Speaker 6 (01:18):
Might guide us through the dark night hell.

Speaker 3 (01:23):
The mistress of life, Banta, show us the path with
every breath.

Speaker 2 (01:28):
Pray up You're some love and more We honor you
know and.

Speaker 3 (01:34):
Forever more.

Speaker 4 (01:37):
Hurdles to Leasus.

Speaker 3 (01:40):
Call we see jo goals uncles, Right, Okay, we say,
guide our half light away.

Speaker 6 (01:49):
Loco's had the last not.

Speaker 3 (01:51):
Say spirit rise on the windsor if ger trust the last.

Speaker 5 (02:03):
Which is the other piece. That is why I would
say that there is no way it can be ramses.
The second it's too late, it doesn't match Egyptians writing.
But as it relates to did the ten plagues take place? Well,
the Egyptians describe some of them in the Ipwer papyrus.

(02:28):
Now the papyrus itself is not short. Particularly I had
to read earlier this week, and it basically describes social collapse.
Complete social collapse, in which slave masters are now chained
up and forced to row boats. In which previously prosperous
people are starving to death, in which slaves have usurped

(02:51):
their masters homes, mass chaos. That's the general description of
what's going on right, complete social upheaval. But there are
some very interesting quotes describing what's going on or what
caused the social upheaval. The first quote is this, and
you guys will probably recognize this if you've if you've

(03:14):
read the account of the Exodus. There is blood everywhere
low the river is blood. This is from an Egyptian papyrus.
One thirsts for water. They're talking about the Nile being undrinkable, yeah,
and being blood. That's that's literally what is being said, yeah.

(03:36):
The next one is a description of what's going on
with the vegetation. So here's a couple a couple quotes low,
the trees are felled, branches stripped low. Grain is lacking
on all sides. Birds find neither fruit nor herbs. So

(03:59):
they're describing mass loss of at least edible vegetation, and
of this of the branches being stripped off the trees. Now,
in the Biblical account, of course, you have both hail
wrecking the trees and a bunch of the crops, and
then locusts coming through. Now this isn't describing I freely
admit the locusts or the hail. This description, however, does

(04:19):
align with what with what would have happened, which is
mass starvation, including in this case of the birds, which
is an odd thing to note. The next quote is
also quite specific. The land is without light. You may
recall the darkness. The next one is a little more poetic.

Speaker 1 (04:43):
That's mass death. Yeah, probably caused by well, among other things,
by starvation, lack of clean drinking water. I mean, yeah,
that that ship will kill you quick. Not as quick
as you'd like, probably, but still you know.

Speaker 5 (05:02):
And again, if the Bible's true. With the death of
the firstborn, this then would be literally true. He who
puts his brother in the ground is everywhere because every
family would have a dead brother or would be dead
because they'd be the only kid.

Speaker 1 (05:18):
Yeah, yeah, okay, And then just.

Speaker 5 (05:20):
Kind of a general all is ruined. Now the last one.
I didn't want to read the quote because it's kind
of confusing, so I just want to explain it. But
you can read it. I encourage you to do it.
It's pretty cool stuff, Like it's really clear a disaster
had struck and that these people, when they originally wrote it,
are just their author I should say hipwor I think

(05:40):
is the guy's name, like his name's in the papyrus
when he originally wrote it. This was clearly a time
of great trouble for Egypt. But the next the last
quote that I wanted to point out, basically talks about
female slaves wearing gold, silver, bronze, and precious stones. Now,
obviously this could simply be more of the up ending

(06:01):
of the social order, right of people seizing power this
kind of thing. However, this also aligns with what the
Bible says happened, which is that the Israelites essentially looted
the Egyptians. That the Egyptians were so eager for them
to leave that they gave them gold and jewelry to
go away.

Speaker 1 (06:20):
Yeah.

Speaker 5 (06:20):
Now obviously you don't have to agree with me on that,
but my point is the idea that the Egyptians like
have there's no evidence at all that they ever talked
about the plagues. That's simply not true. They did talk
about at least two or three specifically identifiable ones, and
I would argue four or five in this particular thing,

(06:42):
but two I think are pretty clear. The darkness thing
I think is quite clear, and the river is blood.
Those aren't Those aren't ambiguous terms.

Speaker 6 (06:53):
There's a very interesting idea coming from that Egyptian and
like Israel connection. There's a from a book I don't
know you read for It's called Berosus and Genesis. It
talks about this Manesto guy as well Maniso.

Speaker 5 (07:09):
How do you say?

Speaker 2 (07:10):
So?

Speaker 6 (07:10):
It's Bettosus and Genesis, Manisto and Exodus, Hellenistics stories and
the date of the Pentatope, and it's very interesting. It
talks about how the I think it's called like Hiksus
with an eye.

Speaker 5 (07:24):
Yes, the sea people's I think is another way to describe.

Speaker 6 (07:28):
Yeah, yeah, the on the it talks about then, I'm
pretty sure around the same time.

Speaker 5 (07:36):
Yeah, give or to take a century. That's quite Yeah,
that's correct.

Speaker 6 (07:40):
It's a very very interesting, interesting read as well, like
three hundred something pages on it surch Yeah.

Speaker 5 (07:46):
Yeah, the if I recall correctly, the Hixos are just
just before this dynasty, So this would be we're talking
about the eighteenth dynasty. That at least that's what I'm
what I'm saying, right, and so this would have been
right before the eighth teenth dynasty would have been the
ex So yeah, not look for it all. And I
want to reas real quick.

Speaker 1 (08:07):
You know, this is this is all very very interesting
and but something that's been been said in chat by
Milton Life is dream that is an awakening. This is
like a book club, right, there is no real evidence
of anything or philosophy and speculation. And I mean he

(08:29):
he mentioned it on a like just now, on a
in a telegram group that we're both in that he
sure started and I was like, you know, let's throw
it up, throw this up in the Life chat. You know,
let's let's let's discuss this because there is a lot
of evidence from a lot of these things and taught
like as you mentioned before, you know things like papyrus

(08:51):
and just texts and you know.

Speaker 5 (08:54):
The harvings on stone, writing on plaster.

Speaker 1 (08:57):
Yeah, and you know a lot of those things. You know,
time is a cruel mistress when it comes to those things.
You know, texts on stone will fade, buildings will crumble,
Papyrus doesn't fossilize that just you know rots.

Speaker 5 (09:13):
Yeah, one of the so the broader plan, I'm sorry,
go ahead, and.

Speaker 6 (09:18):
Matt, yes, it's just to just to give a little
bit of compict somemilar to speak this on the earlier kitchen.
But I think now that you bring it up, it's
a nice one as well. So that's the to me
one way. You can also look at how the knowledge
is kept basically, again, if you have a way to
keep the symbols going, eventually people can decoll the symbols again.

(09:41):
So one way, for example, is through stories. So you
can tell a story and you keep telling the story
until people realize, okay, teaching of the stories is behind it.
You have games like you have card games, the ice games,
a bunch of things which people use to like Eventually
at some point they unders said, Okay, I can use
this as some kind of venison or whatever, but this

(10:01):
necessarily has to be done as a diminish to It
just tells you a story. Again, the cards hold like
why is it, for example, that many cards are not
much more and not much less? Why is it this
symbol and not that symbol? And when you reflect that,
you can understand how how the knowledge is kept like games, music,
just a bunch of things. So it's something that lives
through the culture, even though you may not have something

(10:25):
or like like a paper or whatever, and you may
not have someone that heard the stories as in they
heard that they had the transmission, the or transmission you
have someone read playing that teaching most of the times
unknown be And that's the That's my idea was I
was trying to bring with the secret size is that

(10:45):
when you do get the code, when you do get
to understand it, it's like, oh okay, now we see it.

Speaker 2 (10:50):
Now.

Speaker 6 (10:50):
That makes a lot of sense when they are making
for example, when you see them the territory cards, for example,
Sampole says, we have one from the it's like fifteenth
century in Italy or Vio sure but then you go
to like older similar card games and you see the
same symbology or and even in other cultures like you
see in India and China, then you can understand, okay, even

(11:13):
though maybe they didn't necessary connect as in like not
necessarily the Chinese went to India and show, hey, this
is how it's done or whatever, there is some underlying
again this idea, this notion of our SERTs, this notion
of something that came that people continue to use. And
sometimes it's likely different, sometimes it's well more than different,

(11:34):
but you can see the patterns. That's that's the idea
behind it. You can see through the numbers, through the symbols,
through the whatever whatever. It's the foundation of it. How
how the knowledge persists.

Speaker 5 (11:47):
Basically, Uh, I am curious man, if you'd be, if
you'd be up for it anyway, and maybe it would
you be? Would you be? Because there's a bit about
prative symbolism in different ancient cultures in that book I
mentioned earlier, the Age of Revelation. It is written by

(12:11):
an American, but we're talking Founding Father's era. He was
like the first out of the US mint but he
was writing a direct response to Thomas pains the Age
of Reason and is basically arguing against him. But over
the course of the argument, he basically talks about many
of the symbols in some of the oldest pagan religions

(12:34):
as known at the time. I mean, this book was
printed eighteen and much of much of its content, especially
in that area, is still true today. The stuff he
was talking about is still correct, And I wondered if
you guys might be willing to read that and let
me know when you'd be up for discussing it, because

(12:55):
he's basically making the argument that all ancient religions, or
the oldest ones at least that he knew of in
his day, which broadly speaking, is still correct. There are
some other ones that we know of now that they
all show evidence of knowledge of the triune God, he argues,
Not that they knew about one god he knew. He

(13:16):
argues that they specifically knew about three and one.

Speaker 1 (13:20):
Yeah, that is that is a very very common theme
in paganism.

Speaker 5 (13:26):
Yeah, so you guys would look at that, especially that chapter, right,
I mean, talk about the whole thing if you want.
But at some point and later set up a time
to talk about it, because I found that to be
a very fascinating argument.

Speaker 1 (13:42):
Interest. We can do that if you we have this
just the small like you know, spreading on three three.

Speaker 6 (13:50):
Tridio chat.

Speaker 5 (13:53):
On.

Speaker 1 (13:54):
I think the easiest is in the that's what of
the gems. If he'll just like send the the title
of the of the book or the text or whatever.

Speaker 6 (14:02):
I'll be very much interested.

Speaker 5 (14:04):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (14:04):
Absolutely, I mean.

Speaker 6 (14:05):
If you want a quick answer, like I showed really quickly,
if you go through, there goes the live system. You
have it here, right, you have the the first let's
say form energy. So before this you have more things,
but they are firmous. It's like the Greek would call
the ocean, right, like the primorial ocean. Then you get

(14:25):
into cosmogony I think the Sumerians would call it or
whatever that you have this idea, this notion of like
a nocean or like this formless you cannot see this void,
this idea of there's no form.

Speaker 5 (14:36):
You know that you're just now they use slightly different language.
I'm familiar with the bit but just the.

Speaker 1 (14:41):
Concept in the dramatic mythologies that would be a ga
noonga gap, the void where the two realms came together,
where you know, everything.

Speaker 6 (14:49):
Exactly the other then created. First of all, there's nothing.
Let's say that that's cosmogony, right, that there's nothing there,
and then first first emanation, second emination, third emination, or
from that orders, and then from that and thing else comes.
So there is this like from here that trinity as
it comes to be in a lot of systems. Understand
how they correlate.

Speaker 5 (15:09):
I see what you're saying. That's not quite what Elius
is arguing, nor is it what I would be saying,
of course, but I am I am curious what you
guys would make of his argument. If you guys would
like to talk about that later, I think that would
be really cool. But the Christian view, right, is that
the triune God is there at creation, and if you
read it, you'll you'll get that. Get that too from
the text a bit as well. For example, in the beginning,

(15:33):
God created the heavens.

Speaker 6 (15:34):
And the earth.

Speaker 5 (15:35):
Now the earth was formless and empty, and the spirit
of God was hovering over the waters. Right, this is
this is how Genesis begins. And then God basically speaks
things into existence, right, speaks speaks the various aspects of
the world that we see today, the universe we see
today the including the lights in the sky.

Speaker 6 (15:57):
Yeah, and have similar notions even in the ves with
the the primordial sound, right, you have the own sound
that is the the creation of things. It's not one
person that's in what one entity saint, but it's the
sound creating. And again come back to this idea, you
have the Greeks.

Speaker 5 (16:13):
And the Greeks everything a similar term called the logos
for yeah. For basically some of their older writing for
philosophy and also talking about the Greeks seem to have
had an idea of a supreme god. I don't reckon
all the name, but I can find it for you.
This is something that they were that they they basically

(16:35):
phased out over time, like the old further back you go,
the less gods the Greeks have.

Speaker 6 (16:40):
You had that cosmogony as the.

Speaker 5 (16:42):
Romans even kind of mocked them about this, by the way,
because the Romans were like, well, our religion is the
pure one, because look how many made up gods you have,
We have just a few. It was like they actually
like that. They actually wrote that about the Greeks and
specifically accused the Greeks of adding to their religious beliefs
with plays that the Greeks kept adding basically additions to

(17:05):
the mythology in plays, and you can read Roman writing
basically arguing that they have the real Greek religion and
the Greeks are all wrong, and it's very interesting stuff.
But the point is further back you go, both in
Greek writing and from people who are interacting with them,
the less and less gods they have. This is broadly
true for Canaanite writing as well. Their religion is definitely

(17:29):
less organized. I would say, one cool thing, one thing
to bear in mind. Right, it shouldn't surprise you that
some of the earliest writing matches what the Bible has
to say. One. I believe the Bible to be true,
so it shouldn't surprise me if there are some things
that are close. But it shouldn't surprise you because Abraham
is from or of the Chaldeans. Abraham is from Samaria.

(17:52):
So when you read the Epic of Gilgamesh, and Gilgamesh
goes and talks to the oldest man he can find
after a rather long journey, and that old man tells
him about the global flood, about the Tree of life.
This actually aligns quite well with scripture, and obviously in
the Epic of Gilgamesh. You have polytheism, and Gilgamesh is

(18:16):
claiming he, of course is the son of a god.
He is the author this is and as a king.
This is not a big shock, but I do think
it's very interesting that Gilgamesh's contemporaries included several people who
were involved, according to the Bible, in the War of
the Five Kings, which would make Gilgamesh and Abraham contemporaries.

(18:36):
They would have been alive at the same time. And
this is further attested in trade records from the city
of Elba, who were selling weapons to both sides. Yeah.

Speaker 6 (18:47):
See how Sturn repeats itself.

Speaker 5 (18:49):
Oh no, no, the same incident being described by two
of them and shown to be at the same time
by the other.

Speaker 6 (18:56):
Yeah, I mean the someone selling weapons to both sides.

Speaker 5 (18:59):
Like but not to answer your say, to answer your
friend's question stein about physical evidence. Right, let's take Can
we take one example? Okay, so are you aware of
the maybe having heard it as children or something. Are
you aware of the story of Jericho, the Fall of Jericho.

Speaker 1 (19:20):
The walls of Jericho.

Speaker 5 (19:21):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Speaker 1 (19:22):
Of course.

Speaker 5 (19:23):
Okay, So if you would like to, I can point
you in the direction of YouTube video to to like,
actually see footage of the area around it if you
want at some point. But actually I can tell your
audience how to look it up if you want to.
This will of course be from a Christian perspective. But
if you want to see the video, I mean, you
can mute it if you want. I guess there is

(19:45):
video of Jericho that you can watch on the YouTube
channel Expedition Bible. All you have to do is find
the right video and you'll be able to see him
walking around the ruins and you can actually see video
of what the place looks like. And it's important because
if you want to know if the text is telling
you the truth, when it describes something physically, it should

(20:06):
have all the details.

Speaker 2 (20:07):
Right.

Speaker 5 (20:08):
So in the Fall of Jericho, it describes firstly that
the walls collapse, right that that's the beginning of the
Fall of Jericho. I mean, they've been marching around and stuff,
but you wouldn't expect to find physical evidence of people
marching several thousand years ago.

Speaker 1 (20:26):
I believe I lapped walls. I believe I've seen the
video that you're referencing. I've seen it years years ago.
But I've seen something like it. There is indeed physical
evidence of it.

Speaker 4 (20:36):
The Gray Horned Pagan's podcast is proudly sponsored by Dubby Energy.

Speaker 1 (20:43):
So what exactly is Dubby and what is Dubby all about?

Speaker 4 (20:47):
Dubby is a clea energy drink that is made to
give focus with no crash, jitters, or angst like other
energy dreams. They also have no melted exprean fillers and
do not use artificial guys. WI contains vitamins, amino acids,
a new tropic, and one hundred and fifty milligrams of hate.

(21:11):
So whether you are a gamer getting ready for a
long session, you are a athlete getting ready for hard workouts.

Speaker 1 (21:21):
Or just lead that extra boost, W is where it's at.

Speaker 4 (21:27):
And with my code stink Fox ten, you can get
a ten discounts on your entire shopping basket. That is
stink Fox ten for W Energy. Thank you again so
much to W Energy for sponsoring the podcast.

Speaker 5 (21:47):
Yeah yeah, but that's that's not the that's the that's
just a detail. So the walls collapse, right, they collapse outward.
So the city of Jericho during this period and still
today where where its ruins are, what's basically built on
a hill created by a retaining wall. So there's a
retaining wall holding up the hill and then you've got
fortifications on top. The fortifications collapsed, the retaining wall didn't,

(22:13):
and as a result you had a ramp of the
wall rubble leading up into the city. So when the
Bible describes the Israelites attacking, it talks about them going
up into the city. This matches the archaeology. Now, by itself,
this wouldn't be a big piece of evidence, but then
the Bible also says this happened, This took place just
after harvest, and in the ruins of Jericho, on that

(22:36):
layer you find freshly harvested grain. Further, it says they
put the city to the torch, which is exactly what
you find. You find a layer of fire destruction. So
these are four specific ways to go. Did this passage
tell me the truth? Is what the Bible is saying? Here?

(22:57):
Can it be shown to be true? And obviously you
argue about whether or not God did it and how
many times they marched exactly. I think that's largely foolishness.
But when it comes to things you can check physical
evidence matches precisely what was said, which lends credence, which
makes it look more likely that the rest is also true.

(23:19):
I mean, that's that's one example, but I think a
pretty clear one.

Speaker 1 (23:23):
Yeah, I mean it's a very well known story. Of course,
you know, even you know, like used to to this day.
I mean there's literally, you know, a wrestler Chris Jericho
who you know, his finishing move is the Walls of Jericho, so,
which is more like a modified Boston crap. So I

(23:46):
don't know how much it actually has to do with
you know, the whole bablical perspective. Well still, you know,
it made its way into the pop culture. It's a
it's a very well known story. Indeed, you know, the
blowing of the ram horns, the marching around the city,
if they're is a story of the Bible that is
not the creation story or the crucifixion or whatever. It's
a very very well known one.

Speaker 5 (24:07):
And yeah, I think and again it's a thing that
you can you can show physically the parts that you'd
expect to be able to find are there as described.
And this is the case. And I would challenge your
audience to look into this if they get the chance,
check see if the Bible is accurate and it talks
about history, because if it is, then you need to
take seriously as spiritual claims. There are thirty five thirty

(24:32):
five thousand archaeological digs made directly related to the subject
matter of the Bible. Not one of them has proven
it false.

Speaker 1 (24:42):
And in fact, as there is evidence of a flood,
you know there is that was truly God who freaking
flooded the world and got rid of the nevoline that way,
or you know, however it happened. Now that may be
such subjective, but there is physical evidence around that time.
I believe, like the younger driest. So like let's say

(25:05):
like fourteen.

Speaker 5 (25:07):
It's even worse. It's even worse than what you're going
to say. I know where you're gonna go. You're going
to talk about a localized flood. I'm aware of that. However,
the evidence is actually stacked a bit higher. Now, if
you guys want to that would probably be a better
different video if you want to talk about because basically
every ancient culture, like we've spoken about a bit before,

(25:29):
Stein talked about dragons, talked about giants, yeah, and talked
about a global flood with very few survivors. Yes, genetics
agrees with this. Incidentally, modern genetics indicate that at some
point humanity was down to a single male ancestor generations

(25:49):
after we had had a single female ancestor, which is
to say, we were cut down to one family at
one point. Modern genetics agrees with this.

Speaker 1 (25:58):
Yeah, which is is funny because that's like, you know,
it's kind of Adam and Eve. It's kind of the
the Box saga.

Speaker 5 (26:04):
Even well, so Adam and Eve isn't shocking, Like, even
if you believed in evolutionary theory, I think you shouldn't.
I think there are real reasons not to. I think
there are actually quite a lot of reasons not to.
But but assuming you believed in evolutionary theory, you also
would believe in a first couple humans, right, you would

(26:25):
believe at some point that humanity evolved and that there were,
for there were would have been a pair to then
have more children.

Speaker 1 (26:32):
This, I mean, that's that's even the case. In Dramanic mythology,
we have Oscar Embla. You know, the first two people
cut out of ash tree in a different tree, I
don't know from the top of my head, and it
was Ordin vote on himself who you know, gave us
the gift of life. You know, he breathed error into well,

(26:53):
breathed life into ask an embla.

Speaker 5 (26:57):
Yeah, this this matches what it says in the Bible.
It relates to Adam and Eve.

Speaker 6 (27:02):
And even like for anything to happen, there must be
the one that gives the seed and the one that
received the sea to make it happen, to give birth.
Let's say that is true. Even if you go down
to the atomic le, you need a polarizing is the energies.

Speaker 7 (27:17):
Basically, you need a catalyst of exactly some sort and
the But the thing that shows that the flood right
genetically is likely to be true isn't isn't the Adam
and Eve idea?

Speaker 5 (27:28):
Isn't the first two humans. It's the bottleneck later. It's
the generations later after there were humans, Suddenly we're all
descended from one man then, not earlier. That's the thing
that modern genetics actually is showing, which and that lends
a great deal of credence to stories of humanity being

(27:51):
nearly wiped out and just a small number remaining.

Speaker 1 (27:54):
Yeah, there's even you know, like myself, you know, blue eyes.
That's a very recent genetic mutation coming from what is
most likely one single individual around the Caspian Sea, I believe,
or around that area at least. So everyone who has

(28:16):
you know, blue eyes is from that same genetic line, because.

Speaker 5 (28:24):
That is basically.

Speaker 1 (28:26):
Yeah, yeah, you know, there's there's one. There's was one guy,
you know around the I believe it wasn't around the
Caspian Sea. I can. I can be mistaken. You know,
he got around, as you know guys do, and you know,
created a whole freaking line of people with blue eyes.
But it's a genetic mutation. It's not evolution, like it

(28:48):
didn't happen just you know, over time, slowly but surely
brown turned into blue or you know, brown turret into
white or you know, whatever color you think you are.
You know, it's mutations and yeah, of course that you
know progresses and becomes you know, like mutates and mix it.

Speaker 6 (29:09):
Yeah. And then and then people can argue if that's
completely natural, as in someone like evolutionary argument would be
like everything is like completely natural, is just random mutations
or whatever, And someone can argue, no, it was completely crafted,
let's say, or even the middleway. It was crafted, and
then now it's mutated. So now I have both. You

(29:30):
have someone that first let's say, even on the name
of the first book, right Genesis, some way of reading
it is the gene of isis version. You see, there's
some genetics being taught there, even from the way from
the the histories that talk about the similar, the similar

(29:50):
thing going on as in the creation. You've seen all places.
I remember even I was hearing about person from my
from my workplace, which was talking about the I don't
know if they call it the religion, but basically what
they believe down in Madagascar, and they talk similarly about
their gods, which were giants or something that got from
the mud and did something. And so one it's well,

(30:13):
it's an island in middle of nowhere, and it kind
of got to the similar like kind of similar ideas.
And then you have this again, this idea of someone
let's approg me that someone someone changing it. So not
necessarily one hundred percent natural like random vocation, random atoms
just merged together, and now you have human and now

(30:35):
they think it's like, well that's a series, honestly. But
then you can go also the total the other way,
which is not it was completely totally crafted in and
so on.

Speaker 1 (30:46):
So, so a little correction on my part of the
origin of the blue eyes. It's not the Caspian Sea,
it's the Black Sea.

Speaker 5 (30:55):
Those are next to each other.

Speaker 1 (30:57):
Okay, sure, well the northwest region of the Black Sea.
I don't want to like I've had I've had a
video taken down for you know, misinformation already, so I oh,
I i'd.

Speaker 6 (31:09):
Like you just yeah, you and your yeah, and then
it's in.

Speaker 1 (31:16):
Minecraft you know. Yeah.

Speaker 5 (31:19):
But the but the the main, the main thing with
the flood, right like, like broadly speaking, the thing I
would want to talk with you about is the geological
evidence for it. Actually there's excellent evidence. And the short
version is the entire planet basically, and especially the tops
of mountains other than brand new ones volcanoes, is covered
in sedimentary rock, which is a problem because sediment flows down. Ill,

(31:45):
if there was never a global flood, how exactly are
the tops of mountains covered in sediment that turned to
rock under pressure?

Speaker 1 (31:54):
Must have flowed up, for.

Speaker 5 (31:57):
That's not how dirt flows, it says you're now. There
are arguments to try to explain it, but they do
have weakness, isn't It would take a while to get
into but that's the short version. The short version is
that that's a problem.

Speaker 1 (32:11):
Yeah, yeah, that's I'd say that's you know, definitely a
bit of a problem and would indicate that you know,
the tops of those mountains aren't even the tops of
those mountains because you know, then there wouldn't be sentiment there,
so you know, some part just cut off or e
wrote it off, which water does very well over.

Speaker 5 (32:32):
Deposited on them under pressure, creating a sedimentary rock.

Speaker 1 (32:37):
That could also happen, Yeah, and is.

Speaker 5 (32:40):
What you'll see with like localized floods. You'll see rapid
burial of stuff lowered down right. And then if so,
it wouldn't be a shock for this to happen, other
than just that it appears to have been global. Yeah,
that would be the surprise.

Speaker 1 (32:57):
But as far as we have global stories of a
you know, of a mud flood for example, you know,
a lot that's kind of going into the whole Tartaria thing.
I always managed to get everything back to Tartaria a
special sex like well, no, I mean those things like
that also happened worldwide. You know a lot of things
are buried quite deep, you know, like even in the Netherlands,

(33:20):
in the city of throninga at the market, the major square.
You know, they did some renovations there and they found like, well,
it's pretty much a city beneath the city. So sediments
over the you know, the thousands of years, hundreds of
years have been you know, has been deposited on top
of it. You know, so there must have been something,

(33:43):
you know.

Speaker 6 (33:44):
And not only that, you have plenty of stories of
like underwords. So let's say you have the idea of
earth heavens, let's say cities above us we can call
it that way, and you have about cities under us
literally like an underworld. Like people for example, go to
tribes in the Amazon, they'll they'll speak about certain like

(34:04):
even sometimes and people they'll call it or whatever that
they came from the underworld, and so on, like from
it to today. The subt right under the earth, or
caves from under.

Speaker 1 (34:15):
In the mountains, you know, we we call them in Europe,
we call them the dwarves for example.

Speaker 6 (34:22):
Yeah, you know, and so have plenty of And then
let's take corroborating.

Speaker 1 (34:27):
If you take that a little a little further into
more conspira conspiratorial territory, you get the hollow Worth theory.

Speaker 5 (34:35):
The don't go that far that one at least is
provably wrong.

Speaker 1 (34:39):
I'm just saying there's there are a whole lot of
different theories that you can speculate on, and a whole
lot of physical evidence as well, or you know, at
least remnants that prove that stuff happened.

Speaker 5 (34:51):
What one of the other like interesting problems or challenges
that I think it's pretty easy to picture about the
notion as as we're on the side for a moment
of evolutionary theory, right, is so it takes, if evolution
were true, millions or billions of years, right, or hundreds
of millions of years to develop certain mutations to adapt
to like new environments and stuff. It's not usually like

(35:13):
the Morrow. It's not next gen brand. Everything is working
a slow development process. So one of the challenges is
there are creatures that are uniquely adapted to live based
on the world's tides, the ocean tides, right. The problem
is the Moon. The Moon has only about three or

(35:37):
four inches of dust on it, and it is evenly
coating the surface, which is to say, with the exception
of like a recent impact crater, it's equally distributed. Okay,
front on all sides. So the reason this is a
problem is that space is not actually empty. Space is

(35:57):
mostly empty, and any large gravitational body without an atmosphere
will slowly accumulate dust. This is a known phenomenon and
has a predictable rate at least in our solar system.
We obviously can't know outside of it because we haven't
been there, But within our solar system there's a predictable
rate at which you will accumulate dust that we've been
measuring since like the nineteen sixties. So the problem is this.

(36:22):
The Moon's dust is under ten thousand years worth of dust,
which means one of two things. Either the moon is
fairly new, in which case you can't explain all the
tidal creatures, or something knocked the dust off the moon.
Or lastly, evolution isn't correct. I'd argue evolution isn't correct.

(36:44):
Modern evolutionists will argue something knocked the dust off the moon.
The problem is or that is that the Moon is
a sphere, and most of their arguments ignore that which
is magical.

Speaker 1 (36:57):
Something not dust off the moon like evenly Like.

Speaker 6 (37:01):
Yeah, that's a problem about the first argument, though, there
are a lot of esoterics or is the Turk stories
which will go that route, as in the moon is
actually crafted, it's not it's not a natural thing. Let's say, yeah,
it's a crafted body.

Speaker 1 (37:16):
The moon is you know, placed in our our orbits.
You know that rings hollow like about you know those those.

Speaker 6 (37:24):
Kinds of things different. Yeah, yeah, some will say no,
it was like people that were here and went there,
or some that went from outside of the thing. But
then it's like at that point again that that's to
me where it can be cool to read the story
as a story kind of as you would read let's say,
even a comic book or whatever, right like like a
literal story, or you can you you can try to

(37:46):
understand what's what can actually be said about such a
thing and to see if it brings value to you
or not. When we were talking about, for example, the
underworld where you have many cultures, again talking about this
notion that there is a place heavier, let's say than Earth,
or a place much under and deeper and harder to
to access. You should look into your body or your psychology.

(38:07):
You have what people can call the unconscious that could
be your cave where you go where like secrets are hidden,
where things are and so on, Like you go back
to the conscious part that would be happens and you
can get these sort of like I think I haven't
understanding is about your body, which.

Speaker 1 (38:24):
Will bring more son and hell our main I can.

Speaker 6 (38:29):
Say that that's one thing, but I'm saying more about
how your body operates as then you have the conscious part,
where like right now we're conscious, right, or at least
we think we are. We are away, we're doing something,
but there are things that run Like first of all,
I'm not controlling my heartbeat. That's unconscious behavior, right, it's
just happened and swan so you.

Speaker 5 (38:48):
Can be right, I apparently need to get my door.

Speaker 6 (38:52):
Okay, yea.

Speaker 1 (38:54):
So basically we'll continue this the moment.

Speaker 6 (39:00):
But basically what I'm saying is like you can make
correlations between histories and symbols and your body and in
your surroundings. Really you can understand how things may appear
on the conscious part, as in I can see what
you're doing right now, Stein, but there are things running
behind you that I cannot and those are let's say hidden.
Those are again the caves that the underworld that I
can't see. Your private life for example, Sure, yeah, it's

(39:24):
it's always this playoffs. You can take information for the
entertainment of the information, as in no I like it, Okay,
it's cool, or for the also for the valuable. How
can just help me some out and you play this
game basically.

Speaker 1 (39:38):
That's why I kind of you know, like when I
mentioned all those theories, that's why I kind of laugh
about it, because you know, they're they're interesting, well notions
to to think about. It's it's fun too to speculate on,
you know, like, oh, what is it really? Oh we
don't know, like have we actually been to the moon? Oh,
you know, instead of being rigid.

Speaker 5 (40:00):
So, but I think it's important right to differentiate speculation
or fantasy from reality.

Speaker 6 (40:06):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (40:07):
Absolutely.

Speaker 5 (40:07):
And and the way this specific issue right with the
moon I think is good evidence for it having been
created by God is described in the Bible. I do,
because it does have the right amount of dust for
that actually that the timing works just fine, exactly.

Speaker 6 (40:28):
And then and then that's the thing. People some people
who argue, yeah, it was that God, the same God
in the boldy created some others will say, no, it
was actually these other guys which had much higher technology.
Therefore they were the gods at the time, whatever, whatever.
So that's the thing. I completely, I completely aliens exactly
exactly aliens or whatever, right, you can whatever Rocke want.

Speaker 1 (40:49):
From the bear row, preferably.

Speaker 6 (40:51):
Yeah, exactly whatever. That's the thing the stories really to me,
it's like, it's cool, it's fun. But when you go,
when you go deeper into like you asked, reality, right,
what is it really? Because we as humans, we have
one point of view, but then other beings even have
different points of view, and for them, their reality will
be totally different. Like imagine being an end. It's it's

(41:15):
gonna be a different thing, you know. Or imagine being
like a wave. Yeah, it's gonna be a completely different thing.
So we can do as much as we can with
our understanding of reality to understand more, and then we
find the tools. Like some people will go into science
and I think that's it, that's all it. Some other
people go to their religious practices. Some other people will
not think about nothing like that.

Speaker 1 (41:39):
There are plenty of people, you know, just inside their
hat's just you know, the monkey with the two symbols,
she's yeah, exactly.

Speaker 6 (41:48):
So it is very interesting to try and go different
routes to find that I think that, and then we
can agree to disagree on how it is, because again,
at the end of the day, I have my point
of view I thought would have his time, will have his.
The people listening right now will have theirs, and we
can agree a lot of the times, right, we can
find like similar Oh, yeah, you've thought of this. I've
thought of that as well, and so on one. But

(42:09):
at the end of the day, it's your It's like,
it's your point of view, right. I think if you
live true to that point of view, you can have
a much better experience than just you know, and any
accept everything that people say to me, because who knows,
maybe the other guide point of view won't work for you,
and then you're just accepting it.

Speaker 8 (42:26):
Yeah.

Speaker 5 (42:27):
Now, let me see if I can do the share screen.

Speaker 1 (42:32):
You should be able to There you.

Speaker 5 (42:34):
Go, if you can show that that's the book I
was hoping to talk with you guys about.

Speaker 1 (42:39):
I say, oh, okay.

Speaker 5 (42:44):
You can tell it's a real old book because it's
got two titles.

Speaker 1 (42:47):
Yeah, how you know it's legit?

Speaker 5 (42:52):
Yeah, published in eighteen oh one, written a little bit
before that though, and obviously this particular paper back in
twenty eighteen that's not the actual publication date of.

Speaker 6 (43:03):
The of the original it's not dam okay, cool, Yeah,
I can give it definitely, I can give it a read.

Speaker 5 (43:13):
Cool.

Speaker 1 (43:13):
Yeah, yeah I will, I will. I'll get a copy.
I'm in chipping here. Would probably take a little longer,
but i'll.

Speaker 2 (43:24):
Oh.

Speaker 1 (43:25):
I don't want to, I don't want to summary. I
just I want to buy the actual book. And I
don't like I like collecting books.

Speaker 5 (43:30):
I completely agree this one, this one, I do have
a copy of behind me, different different printing, though I
have a hardcover. But nice.

Speaker 6 (43:41):
Yeah, I'm not so sure about that. I think on
my computer a PDF will appear magically. That has that book?
Not true?

Speaker 5 (43:49):
Oh yes it is. You can read it for free
from the Canadian Royal Library. Like the book itself isn't
under copyright. The guy's quite dead, or its edition might
be Internet archive copyright.

Speaker 1 (44:01):
But yeah, the archive. If it's bound to have a
it's bound to have a copy. But I'm gonna, I wanna.
I want to buy the the actual actual book. I
like that much better than just a a PDF copy.

Speaker 5 (44:22):
I agree, but I think, I think again, this is
showing the generational difference stime.

Speaker 1 (44:30):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, unfortunately, so.

Speaker 5 (44:33):
The the young guy here doesn't need this book. It's
just us.

Speaker 1 (44:38):
It's us old folk.

Speaker 6 (44:40):
I mean, I'm not home here, so you cannot see
my my books. But like I have a couple of
it's just I don't I wouldn't buy all of them
because it's find But that being said, I would love
to talk to you guys about that on another another occasion.

Speaker 5 (44:58):
I think that would be good. I hope I've done
a decent job of kind of explaining and engaging with
your original claims. I think on the whole the Hebrew thing,
you agree that you were probably not accurately representing it,
but we're really more pushing for interaction exactly.

Speaker 6 (45:18):
Yeah, that was the Yeah, you can, but I think
it's you can stop history.

Speaker 5 (45:23):
Sorry, go ahead, you can stop.

Speaker 1 (45:24):
The screen chair, by the way, I can. I can
do that for you.

Speaker 5 (45:28):
That's that's that's yes. So the but I think when
you talk about history as much as possible, it's important
to tell the truth. And a lot of times the
truth will get people to interact with you just fine,
especially if you if you point out things that are
not popular or not being taught, like my talk with
Raven about the Black Death. He didn't know that there

(45:52):
were three major sections about breaks. He didn't know about
the people like screaming through the streets the first time
around that and the how you can tell how it
was being spread like that just isn't taught in school
and you can so you can really get I think
quite a lot of people going if you if you

(46:13):
just if you present, if you present things that are
that get lost or or left out of their education.

Speaker 6 (46:18):
Yeah, definitely, definitely that. I mean on my Twitter, I
mainly talk about usually the symbolic points of view. It's
just that sometimes it's I mean, that's the algorithms, right,
you need some kind of controversy to stir things up.
But it is interesting. I remember once I think I
went to the guy's post at that time, like he
said something and I went to his post, and the
end of the interaction we were actually in good terms

(46:40):
because that, to be honest, I don't hold grudges in Twitter.
I know most people. It's what I'm It's not like
I'm personally taking things there, but I do agree with there. Again,
the truth will be based on your point of view.
At the end of the day, I think we can
agree that there is some there's some let's say, shared truth,
from understanding that this shared truth will only come from

(47:02):
the sum all points of view, like I cannot, I
cannot say to here, here's everything. And then that's my
point of you. I guess that's my pet of you. Yeah, yeah,
you're gonna say that's.

Speaker 5 (47:13):
I don't I don't think you really. I don't think
you really believe that. And and the and the way
I would demonstrate that is two ways. One's pretty simple,
which is math, basic math. I don't think that you
probably are really making the argument that like two plus
two equals whatever number we happen to all feel like

(47:35):
the words can change, of course language, it will depend
on it. It does twenty aside from your feelings.

Speaker 1 (47:44):
Well, but it does in twenty twenty five. Feelings are facts.

Speaker 6 (47:47):
Okay, yeah, but the second sorry but but yeah, but
that's the Again, that depends on the how you're using
the numbers actually, because if you're talking okay, arithmetics, sure,
if you're using base arithmetics, sure, then one plus one.

Speaker 5 (48:02):
Will always be the same, is true in base twelve.

Speaker 6 (48:06):
One plus one is always gonna be true right in
base ten. But then if you go to base two.
Then one plus one is not too anymore because there's
no two. It's gonna be ten or or like one
in zero.

Speaker 5 (48:18):
That's a way of right, that's a way of notation
that is not correct.

Speaker 6 (48:21):
Yeah, but but then again and then you can understand
it again symbolically, that's the thing you can't. You have
rational things, sure, but you also have symbolical symbological things
like symbols. And then and that's the all the all
the numbers and language and everything we're doing. It's at
the end of the day, it's symbolic. Like for example,
if I have sky and a woman, they'll make a child.

(48:41):
So one plus one in this case made a third
thing there, made it a second thing.

Speaker 1 (48:46):
Well, one plus one still in that case equals one.

Speaker 6 (48:51):
Other than that equally a third thing. That's what I'm
saying Again, you two pay around the symbols. It might difference, you.

Speaker 1 (48:59):
Know, one plus one and then like one plus one
again equals you know, one plus one.

Speaker 6 (49:03):
Is because because with the even with the story, just
to to finish the points right, even with the story,
for example, you're gonna be getting the point of view
from one specific group, right, from from certain people, not
getting the point of view from everyone. If I if
I tell you, let's say this debate, it's over, and
then I go to the kitchen and then I sit
to every Yeah, like I ended everything in the debate,

(49:25):
and it's that that's gonna be.

Speaker 1 (49:27):
Okay. But then you can always you can't always separate
the esoteric from the exotery. You can't always there are
the son That's what I'm saying. Yeah, exactly, And just
because it is a certain amount of people writing about it,
it doesn't make it less true. And just because it's
you know, it's historical people who have written about it

(49:49):
and we translated it into modern day English, modern day Dutch,
modern day you know, German, French.

Speaker 9 (49:55):
Like them, will be the truth, not just one point
of view, some of the point of views, Like you're
not getting just the Bible, for example, from the people
that wrote it, but you're also going to other cultures
to see, Okay, we're all your coatures talking about similar things,
and it's so okay, it makes more sense than if
it was just one person talking.

Speaker 5 (50:14):
About So that's so you're you're kind of skipping around. Actually,
what we what I was talking about, is that mathematics
is true whether or not you like it, or whether
or not I like it, And the same is true
of morality, and the way I would show it to
you in person is illegal. But I suspect you would

(50:34):
suddenly find a great deal of morality objective morality. Right
if I took your wallet and left with it, I
suspect you would be upset with me and would expect
me to know better than to take your wallet. That
I also agree that you would expect me to agree
that theft is not good or that murder is not good.
For example, I do agree.

Speaker 6 (50:56):
I do agree that it may not have view the
best feeling, but on grand scheme of things, you never
know how things may work out. I personally, for example,
was was assounded a good point in Brazil one time,
and I think that was one of the best things
that happened to me because it made me to it
made me take decisions afterwards that didn't happen. It wouldn't

(51:17):
it wouldn't help me.

Speaker 1 (51:20):
That's why you take it from the objective to the personal.
That's that's you know, like objectively technically no, but objectively
speaking being threatened under you know, on or at gunpoints.
Orry English, Yeah, you know, is a bad thing, just

(51:40):
that that's not the overall thing itself on itself, you know,
aside from everything else that you know happened after it.
The thing itself is a bad thing.

Speaker 6 (51:58):
But again that's more of a judgment.

Speaker 1 (52:00):
On assault of it. You know turned out differently, It
turned into lessons. It made you who you are today.
But that doesn't mean that. You know, if I were
to be held at gunpoint, you know, it would make that.
It makes it a good thing because young became a

(52:21):
better person for it.

Speaker 6 (52:23):
I'm not arguing it's good, it's neither. It's neither good
or bad. We are the ones putting the morality under it.
And when a when a lion goes in and kills that,
you're is it like a good lion a bad lion.
It's just doing doing something.

Speaker 1 (52:36):
It's a lion. We can say it's a lion doing
lying things.

Speaker 6 (52:40):
Exactly, And we can say, but.

Speaker 1 (52:42):
Who are we to judge about whatever the someone else
does or you know, whatever a lion does, a lion
does lying things. It's it's animal kingdom human kingdoms.

Speaker 6 (52:50):
That's again to me, I don't see I don't see
the difference. That's the thing I don't see the morality.
I understand that we can argue something. Otherwise it's totally
KOs right if I don't argue that. If I don't,
we don't agree that. Okay, let's not still be chopper.
Maybe it makes not no sense that society cannot happen.
I understand that. But again that's just or our ways
of say things.

Speaker 1 (53:11):
Yeah, okay, but then like you're you're an example, which
is horrific.

Speaker 6 (53:16):
It's cool or bad. It's neither to me, to my
point of view, it's neither. That's the thing.

Speaker 1 (53:20):
It's not that's your personal point of view.

Speaker 6 (53:25):
That was Todd was trying to say that I wasn't
like I actually wasn't. Let's say I didn't have.

Speaker 1 (53:31):
This point of view or like objectively speaking, it's a
bad thing just for you, which is you know, another
layer objective other layer below. It's when we go from
the grand to you know, the.

Speaker 6 (53:43):
But that's the thing. It's objectively from your guy's point
of view. Again, no, there's.

Speaker 5 (53:47):
No we could both be dead and it would still
be objectively wrong.

Speaker 6 (53:52):
Again, not necessary, not necessarily.

Speaker 1 (53:54):
That's like the outcome may be you know, different for
everyone else, for you, it you know, it turns you
into who you are. Unfortunately, no, just so. But so
that's that's that's that doesn't make the thing a good
thing just because it works.

Speaker 6 (54:11):
And didn't claim that. I didn't claim that it's good.
It's near. I claim it did a good thing. But
it is the action itself, it's neither. That's that's the point.
We we define what is good what is bad. For example,
even in some cultures that their gods are going to
be the demons of others and vice person because obviously
their gods isn't helping them. Yeah, okay, but as the others,

(54:34):
so for the others the demons. But we have some
in that case will be well.

Speaker 1 (54:38):
Well, we have some ground rules. We can't we can
texts whatever aside. We have some ground rules as humans.
And one of the ground rules is that, well, let's
say unnecessary violence, and whenever it's necessary that is you know, subjective.
Let's say self defense, then it's necessary. If you know,

(54:59):
if you were out gunpoint you shot the monifarker first,
you know, good, Yeah that's a good thing because you
got threatened. You know, you were done a bad thing,
so you whatever. As the ground rule basically is don't
be evil to each other. You know, I agree, be
a good person. So then how is you know, doing
such a aneous thing? How is it something in the middle.

Speaker 6 (55:23):
Again, because what is evil and good depends on the culture.
Like like let's say, let's say it completely depends. It
completely depends some cultures. Some cultures believe, and I'm not
gonna name names here, but some cultures believe that certain
specific people should die that evil or not.

Speaker 1 (55:41):
That's that's a very dangerous that's a very dangerous over generalization.

Speaker 5 (55:46):
By the way, there is one. Let's let's pick an
example from history. So there was a certain German culture
in World War two, and they had a particular several
groups of people that they didn't think should be around
anymore exactly.

Speaker 1 (56:02):
But that was the entire idy of Germany. That wasn't
all the German people.

Speaker 5 (56:06):
Hold on, Just just wait a sec guys. What you
appear to be claiming, just to clarify that, is that
that was fine for them because it was their culture.
And further, what Stein and I would be claiming is
that that was objectively wrong despite what their culture may

(56:27):
have thought.

Speaker 6 (56:29):
No, my point is not that again someone is right
or wrong. That's or conception, but you cannot know.

Speaker 1 (56:38):
No, that's the point.

Speaker 6 (56:39):
First of all, if lightning strikes right here, right now,
is it good or bad? It's neither. Lightning strike like that.
That's what I'm saying.

Speaker 1 (56:49):
That depends on.

Speaker 6 (56:52):
I'm expelling the topic to the idea that from your
point of view, you are going to have moral ideas.
But that's again your point of view. There's no objective.
We can say. We can agree and people okay, it
was it was maybe not so good, but then some
other people who say, no, no, it was actually great because
from my point of view, I wanted that to happen.
And then how can you argue with that? Then you

(57:13):
have two different point of view. Then again it came
into duality. What I'm saying is when you come back, there's.

Speaker 1 (57:18):
That's going back to the ground rules, which basically says,
be good, don't that, don't get shipped to each other.

Speaker 6 (57:28):
But again that's that's one that's one way of saying, Okay,
I can come to you and say what is good.
Then for some people, good is going to be something
from people who is going to be another thing.

Speaker 1 (57:37):
Fine, Let's say I I am some sort of you know,
computer fucking genius, not that I am, but and I
managed to, you know, like plunder your entire bank account
because I need the money. You know, it's good for me,
but bad for you? Does that does that for you?

Speaker 6 (57:50):
It feels gonna be good?

Speaker 8 (57:51):
Yeah?

Speaker 6 (57:52):
From from my Yeah bad, but not necessarily.

Speaker 1 (57:54):
I still did a bad thing. I fucking store from you.

Speaker 6 (57:57):
Again again from from a lot of people morals. And
I'm not disagree. I'm not saying it's not bad, but
that yeah, bad and good.

Speaker 1 (58:05):
But then you are that is exactly what you're saying.
That is exactly what you're saying. You're saying because it's
a good thing for me, it makes it.

Speaker 5 (58:14):
It makes a good thing.

Speaker 6 (58:16):
Basically, let's let's use a similar to that when we
come here. Now we have good right hand and bad
left hand. That's kind it this way one way I
have described it. But at the end you have neither
like a discern of everything. There's no there's no bad
and good, there's no there is. It's all there is
from or perspective. It's not a personal perspective.

Speaker 5 (58:37):
May I again, may I attempt to explain and and
Stein because I suspect you and I were raised with
by somewhat similar parents in some respects, may I attempt
to explain our point of view now other than obviously
Stein won't agree with me on the source. So my
my belief, of course on the source is that morality

(58:59):
is something established by God that humans by and large
actually already know to some extent. But ignoring that for
a moment, the difference or a way to tell if
something is good or evil is whether or not it
can exist on its own. Namely, you can have good
sex between say a man and his wife to produce children. Right,

(59:21):
it can stand on its own. It can exist in
a world without rape, But the reverse is not true.
The same is true of theft. You can have property
ownership without theft, but you cannot have theft without theft
is dependent on property ownership. That evil, by nature, in
almost all cases you will find, is derivative and dependent

(59:45):
on something that is alone capable of existing and is good.
Sure does that?

Speaker 6 (59:52):
Guess?

Speaker 5 (59:52):
Just hold on? Does that sound right to you? Stein? Yeah?

Speaker 6 (59:58):
Okay, okay, and I guess I understand. But that's your
point of view because because depending on the culture, and
not even the culture, depending on who is doing the action,
Like we just said, Okay, if if it's a lion killing,
then it's not good or bad. Yeah. Sure, but it's
the same for humans. It will depend on your culture. Sure,

(01:00:19):
And I'm happy that most people nowadays agree that, Okay,
let's not kill that's not a Robinsons on.

Speaker 1 (01:00:25):
I'm very happy about it. No one. But that's but
that's only because of what has no thing No, that
has nothing to do with culture. That has to do
with being a human being, that is ingrained in our
very being.

Speaker 5 (01:00:39):
In our nature.

Speaker 6 (01:00:40):
Well yeah, well I could, I could argue, I could
argue that most of you are arguing.

Speaker 3 (01:00:46):
I want to say a big thank you to the
sponsor of today's episode, Bear Knuckles, the best leather gloves
ever made. Experience ultimate comfort and durability with the Bare
Knuckles patented design, crafted for the natural curve of your fingers,

(01:01:09):
perfect fits and superior protection. These gloves are engineered for
superior comfort, reducing hand fatigue, and increasing productivity. Made from
premium leather, they offer exceptional durability and protection ideal for
demanding work environments. So whether you are tackling heavy duty tasks,

(01:01:31):
working in cold weather, or handling delicates welding jobs. Their
gloves provide the perfect balance of flexibility and strength. They
are most definitely not like the other gloves, who are
nothing more than just two layers sod on top of

(01:01:52):
each other with a beard thumb.

Speaker 10 (01:01:55):
I never liked those kind of gloves. They don't feel light,
they heard after working with them for a while. So
that's why I switched to Bare knuckles. And you can
go to buy bare Knuckles dot com use my code
Grayhorn for a exclusive fifty percent of any product that

(01:02:20):
you get.

Speaker 3 (01:02:21):
I can highly recommend them.

Speaker 1 (01:02:24):
They are the best gloves on the market, So go
to buy Barre Knuckles dot com use code gray Horn
at checkout for a fifty percent discount of your entire purchase.
Thank you to Bare Knuckles for sponsoring this episode.

Speaker 6 (01:02:46):
Let's okay, I'm arguing. I'm arguing that most people, or
a lot of people should be inclined towards maintaining order.
Let's let's call it this way, maintaining order, maintaining things
the way they are, instead of creating capes, instead of
killing each other and rubbing in so and so on
and so forth. Yeah, okay, that's that's the But that's
the thing if even no they we have people doing

(01:03:07):
things that are not necessarily moral, do you think they well,
they in their heads, in their hands, they know, has
such an evil guy. I'm good at do even things
this life.

Speaker 1 (01:03:16):
Yes, yeah, absolutely absolutely. The otherwise you want to be
doing is it's a choice monssly, It's a choice that
they may it is. It literally goes against human nature.
So it is a very deliberate action.

Speaker 5 (01:03:30):
And you can tell. And the way you can tell
is that when you confront someone and I did this regularly,
I think you guys know this. I did security for
about seventeen years, so I regularly confronted people who were
doing something illegal, often in moral also those though though
those aren't necessarily aligned. No, exactly. And the response almost

(01:03:53):
invariably other than sometimes running was an excuse. It wasn't
a disagreement about what they were doing was wrong. The
person didn't go, well, to hell with your standards? No, no, no,
they go they would go, well, it was okay this
time because there was no one at the front desk. Yeah,
so therefore I could just take the Bible I.

Speaker 1 (01:04:11):
Work security to this is very much. It's like not
arguing against like your argument, it's like arguing of why
it is the right thing to do, therefore making it
the wrong thing to do, because if it was the
right thing to do, there was no argument, and so
you wouldn't have stopped them, you know, or prevented them

(01:04:33):
from doing that same thing. And that is not a
subjective thing. That is not a a personal thing. It's
not you know, because you think it's bad. Like I
think a lot of things are bad, but you know,
you two might think that some of those things are good.

Speaker 6 (01:04:47):
Doesn't make it again and again we come back to
that idea. You just proved my point. You out think
some things are bad, You're going to think some other
things are bad, and so on and so forth. We
can we can say that there are some some general
things which short a lot of the where that are bad,
but some people are not necessarily agreeing because they'll just
are doing it.

Speaker 1 (01:05:05):
But those are the out wires. And if you have
to make an excuse, if you like, if you have
to try and explain the thing that you are doing,
then you know, why are you doing it?

Speaker 8 (01:05:18):
If you if you're you know, for example, I have
worked in nightclubs, you know, and yeah, like Dutch techno parties,
Dutch em parties, ecstasy will be used.

Speaker 1 (01:05:29):
We know it is. It's just a matter of don't
let us see you use it. Okay, we know you
have it, just don't let us see it. But you know,
they're they're whether it be to you know, to me
or local authorities or whoever, they're going to try and
explain and you know, make it right, why they are
using it, why they have you know, too much on them.

(01:05:52):
If it's one pill, sure, if it's two pills, you
know it's a bit too much. But if you have
like six, seven pills or whatever on you don't have
to call local authorities because we are going to have
to assume that you're selling them, and they're gonna have
to try and explain because it is object you know,
it is a bad thing that they are doing. A

(01:06:14):
lot of us can agree, can agree on that they're
gonna have to try and explain why it isn't a
bad thing that they are doing.

Speaker 5 (01:06:22):
Maybe a simpler example would be a thief stealing some
food who argues that it was okay this time because
he was hungry. That's a pretty simple example. But as
soon as he says that what he actually said, what
he's actually saying is I agree there is a standard,
which is that theft is wrong. I'm arguing that it's
just okay this time because of these excuses. Yeah, they

(01:06:44):
show by giving an excuse that they agree with the
standard and expect you too as well. Otherwise the thing
they said would be nonsense. They would just be speaking gibberish.
It is only useful things. An excuse is only useful
in that there is a standard. So and you will
you will say see this in daily life. You probably
do it in daily life. I'm certain that that virtually

(01:07:05):
every human does that. When you do something that you yourself
actually acknowledge is not the right thing to do at
a given moment, that you will make an excuse for you.

Speaker 1 (01:07:15):
Yeah, and that has nothing to do with religion, spirituality, power.

Speaker 6 (01:07:23):
It is it comes back to the idea of again
the point of view. That's where we begin, right, I
was saying this, It was actually the beginning.

Speaker 1 (01:07:31):
It is that nature. It is ingrained in our nature,
It is ingrained in our very being. That has nothing
to do with point of view. It's not a personal thing.

Speaker 6 (01:07:44):
Let's come back to the to the beginning of the argument,
which was I was saying, from my point of view,
the truth is going to be the sum of point
of views, and then Todd will say, no, I actually argue,
you don't believe that, And then we started talking about
the math as in like one plus one, and so
that's what's the insue of the Okay, cool. So what
I'm saying, what I'm saying about the what I'm saying
about the good and bad is again dependent on the

(01:08:06):
point of view of whoever's acting something. Thing can be
good or bad depending on that. Okay, So saying I'm
not saying I'm not saying I'm not saying let's break
just finished argment. I'm not saying let's let's strip everything
and the murder is actually good and rumm is actually
it's actually good. I'm not saying that. I'm saying, Okay,
we assurements in a culture agreed that those are the terms. Sure,

(01:08:31):
I completely agree with that, but not necessarily all points
of view who agree with that, just like, yeah, you
have to.

Speaker 1 (01:08:37):
Then let's kind of go go back to the point
that Milton, life is dread, life is a dream, death
is an awakening. Was was trying to make you know that, uh,
like just because and there have been several world leaders
who said this, including you know, Funny Mustache Man, that

(01:08:58):
if you tell a lie long enough, then people will
start believing it doesn't make it less of a lie.
And if you say that, you know, you'll you'll believe
things for a fact if multiple sources back it up. Cool.
I can get a group of friends right now, we
can make up a story and we can you know,

(01:09:18):
tell each other that we're going to tell this story
for the risk of our fucking lives, and we believe
that it happens, Like we genuinely believe that it happens.
You can put on on, put us on any kind
of fucking lie detector. It will not go off. But
it never happens. But we all say it happened, we
all believe it happened, but it never actually happened. There's

(01:09:40):
no physical proof, there's no record of it. We just
made it up, but we're all saying it. So in
your arguments with your like, your definition then would be
that's the truth because multiple, multiple sources are backing it up.

Speaker 6 (01:09:57):
Multiple sources.

Speaker 1 (01:09:58):
People are saying same thing for you know, several years,
several generations. If we're really trying, even though it never happened,
but because so many people tell it, it must be
the truth.

Speaker 6 (01:10:11):
If people start taking actions and starting and start to
shake their lives upon that, it does become a truth,
does become something that even though there was no basis,
but it never has happened. Okay, and that's the thing
you made. You made it into existence. Then there are
true stories which.

Speaker 1 (01:10:28):
But then their truth is still a lie because it
never happened. It may be their truth, sure, but it's
still a lie. It is based upon a lie. It
is their truth based upon a lie provably because there
is no proof because it never happened. We made that
ship up.

Speaker 6 (01:10:48):
Let's let's get an easier, an easier example you're talking about, like,
let's see, let's get some people with let's craft a
stress one. You don't need to do that. You as
a person, you have memories of the of the past.
I assume you have them of childhood and once. Yeah,
sure you have memories of things from your point of view,
and you believe that to be true. But then other
people leaving around that same time will have another point

(01:11:09):
of view of the same thing that happened. Does your
point of view is not the truth with only theirs?
Or is only yours point of your true and so on,
because for example, you can you can have an experience,
let's say with a parent or a brother in whatever,
and you can see from your point of view, oh,
she was being mean to me and he was, you know,
doing bad things and one whereas from his point of
view he's going to say, no, no, I was trying to

(01:11:31):
do my best. Set I do I make claim that
way and swan. So now you see that there's a
polarizing thing. There's a polarizing there's two.

Speaker 1 (01:11:38):
Points of view, two different point of view the truth one.

Speaker 5 (01:11:42):
No, No, you're wrong, and you're talking with the wrong
audience here, because we both work security. What happened, What
was on the camera, that's what happened. Yeah, it doesn't
matter what the witnesses said. We can check what happened
and review it with everyone. There is objective truth that
is not in fact your feelings or his feelings. It
is true, whether or not you like it.

Speaker 6 (01:12:03):
Sure, that's part again, that's part of the truth. Part
of your observation is also the truth because if you're
gonna take actions upon that, then it changes your reality.
If you say an action and you think and you
think for example, that somebody is being mean to you.
You're going to take actions based on that. And if
you thought otherwise, if you thought, no, they were actually
being good to me, you're gonna take action.

Speaker 5 (01:12:23):
Right.

Speaker 6 (01:12:23):
So, even though I agree with you, there's there's objective truth.
Someone may have sent you a bad meassage or whatever
they they slurred or whatever, Okay, that happened, that's objective truth.
And I agree with you. Guys, objective through exists, right,
I can punch my face. It exists. But there's more
to that. And that's what I'm saying. The sum of
all the points of view plus the objective truth will

(01:12:44):
be the total truth because the even even some things,
we cannot get the objective truth off anymore because we
just have like people that That was my first argment,
like some sort of well as thought.

Speaker 1 (01:12:58):
Sadly, you know, you're talking to to security guards. You're
talking to people who for their for their living proof
like actual tangible physical proof. Yes, so I have worked
I've worked more security before. It's it's a lazy fucking job.
Just do your around every now and then you'll be good.

(01:13:18):
Don't bother too much. If I see someone on the
security cam stealing. You know, one of my first fucking days,
actually somebody stole a bottle of perfume. You know, in
that situation, we never managed to manage to catch that person.
But say, you know I caught them, and you know
it is on the security footage. I can see on

(01:13:40):
the security footage from that store, because most of them
have their own security footage, their own CCTV, I can
see that that person stole a perfume bottle. I am
allowed to search him at that point I find the
perfume bottle. The theft is immoral, illegal, doesn't fucking matter.

(01:14:02):
But if that person said to me, you know, like
their truth is, but I didn't have any money, and
you know, like fucking Valentine's Day is coming up and
I wanted to get something nice from my girlfriends. Does
that make it right? You know, he's coming with a
good arguments. You know, I feel that I'm you know,
I'm broke as fuck too. You know, I wish, I

(01:14:24):
wish I could.

Speaker 6 (01:14:25):
Depends on what you do. What do you do with
that information. It's not right or wrong, It depends on
when you do it.

Speaker 1 (01:14:30):
He did to the police because he fucking stole something.

Speaker 6 (01:14:34):
That's that's one way affecting. And I'm not saying don't
do it. For sure, if you want to do it,
go do it. I'm not saying don't.

Speaker 1 (01:14:40):
It makes it's jully a bad thing.

Speaker 6 (01:14:45):
And yeah, it's an objective bad thing from your point
of view, that it is.

Speaker 5 (01:14:51):
So there's a confusion. There's a confusion of terms. So, Matt,
you're mostly arguing from a personal morality rather than objective
morality point of view. Mostly you're mostly also arguing from
a personal reality point of view. To an extent, now
you agree, objective reality also exists. That Yeah, so that's

(01:15:12):
that's what you're saying. And and Stein and I appear
to be arguing from a objective truth and objective morality
point of view, which is to say, morality is true
whether or not I agree with it even at a
given moment, even if I feel like stealing a thing.
That doesn't make it right, that that that I'm being
judged from above, or that that that's not my I

(01:15:33):
don't have the right to decide morality. It's not. I'm
not the source. And so the problem is or the
way that you betray that you kind of do agree
with us actually is by making the claim that your
your personal view of subjective truth is correct. You are
making an objective claim. You are claiming, yeah.

Speaker 6 (01:15:57):
Both again, both are true. That's what I'm saying you
on which you said it doesn't you're knowing us that that.

Speaker 5 (01:16:05):
Your perspective is is true, and that we should believe
you if there's objective true, No, you can.

Speaker 6 (01:16:11):
You can believe. You can believe whatever you want.

Speaker 5 (01:16:13):
You can.

Speaker 6 (01:16:14):
And again it and and then most of the points
I'm not even disagree with you. I do agree with you.
Don't rob, don't que latters, and so on and so on.
My main point is that again there's an what it
can call objective part of life, but there is the subjective.
And and again your your mind is meriable, your your
your memories and everything. It's not objective. You cannot get

(01:16:37):
reminded of something in objective terms. It's all marrible. Every
time you remember something, you you were basically changing that memory,
even your your snaps is are changing a little bit.
You're like imprinting your current emotional state on that memory.
So there's at some point there is the most let's
say mairable things life and the most physical, let's call

(01:16:58):
it the most like hard, hard to change.

Speaker 1 (01:17:00):
How did this turn into into a biology class?

Speaker 6 (01:17:04):
Just I'm just giving an example. There are things which
are not You cannot point, You cannot like grap right,
even even in physics, at some point you go deep
enough you cannot really understand what's going on there. You
cannot say where the quard is, where the the quantum
stuff are is to have a differability. I'm just giving
you other exceptions to understand.

Speaker 5 (01:17:24):
The idea you're talking about a perfect knowledge. There is
a different thing.

Speaker 6 (01:17:29):
There is the there're awful, Okay, we cannot agree that
there's a And that was my my main point, right,
that we sum up all the personal point of views,
not only from humans but from from everything really in
reality will come out to me.

Speaker 5 (01:17:45):
Well you can.

Speaker 6 (01:17:46):
First of all, you can ask them, right, just like
you guys are saying to me your points of view
and I'm understanding.

Speaker 5 (01:17:50):
That, or you cannot.

Speaker 6 (01:17:53):
You can try to meditate on them, you can try
to understand how how they be. It's gonna be a
very interesting, very interesting experience. Just strategy, that's sorry. If
if there is literal if there is.

Speaker 1 (01:18:06):
Literal evidence for things, whether they be you know, physical
as in the Walls of Jericho example, not bro interrupt
me one more time. Okay, there is For some things
there is physical proof, such as you know, the Walls

(01:18:29):
of Jericho example, that you know he gave yes. Some
of the stories recountings may not be entirely true or
may have entirely happened as you know they said happened,
but it doesn't make them true or false. And you know,

(01:18:49):
like kind of going back to what I what I
said earlier. I can get a group of friends and
make ship up as I go. For other people, that
may become their truth, but it's still based upon a lie.
So if the overarching thing is you know, it's good
or it's bad, which is human nature again, you know,
do security guards as we say, you know, if you

(01:19:11):
catch someone, they're going to make an excuse why it
is right that they are doing this, you know, proves
that they know it's wrong. It made me right for them. Yeah,
that may be their truth, but that doesn't make it
actually right. Or you know, the funny mustache guy, he
did a whole lot of bad fucking things he thought

(01:19:32):
it was the right thing to do. Does that actually
make it the right thing to do? Because several people
agreed with him, several you know, big brain people and
that agreed with him that it was the right thing
to do. No, but his like his personal view was
this is right, so therefore it is right. That's what
you're arguing for him.

Speaker 6 (01:19:54):
Again, you're making a confusion him from there that there
is a string thing that everybody should follow and it's
called human nature. Again, again, we can we can agree
to disagree in this, and we're gonna go circular, right
because without saying that the sum of all the points
of view will make that supreme point of view. That's

(01:20:17):
that's the point. Like it's if again, most people believe
let's not murder each other, great, that's that's good, right
because it makes the game. Imagine if everybody woke up
in there that there's there's no life, there's no society,
there's no So then if.

Speaker 1 (01:20:33):
Other people are like, you know what, fuck those rules,
I'm gonna start killing because I feel because I feel
that's right for me. Because yeah, okay, but that doesn't
make it right. Just because it happens, it doesn't make
it right.

Speaker 6 (01:20:47):
And I'm not saying it it does. But for them, yes,
you do, they think they think it's right from their
point of view. Otherwise do yeah, Exactly, you're arguing because
from their point of view, they're doing the right thing.
They're doing the right thing because that's their point of view.
You're making I guess as as thoughts that.

Speaker 1 (01:21:03):
You're literally making excuses for those people. No proving our point,
proving the subjective morality Otherwise, otherwise this wouldn't be an argument.
Otherwise you wouldn't have to like go to the outliers.
Oh you know, but this happened. Oh but you know
those people did that. Yeah.

Speaker 6 (01:21:23):
Absolutely, Again, we are going to keep circular flat. Some
things might help, but to to to say a final
word and then Tom, you can go. But I don't
think we.

Speaker 1 (01:21:35):
We We've went asking for for three plus hours and
this is turning into a whole different kind of discussion exactly.

Speaker 6 (01:21:41):
But but but just to just make it very clear
what I'm saying. Okay, again, the idea is that things
happen existence. Okay, we're here. If everybody looks at his shirt,
will they see red? No, some people different color exactly

(01:22:02):
animals and some animals see more like light, like frequencies
and all. But but those are so there, are there
are parts of life which are not objectives. Can we
agree to that first?

Speaker 1 (01:22:14):
Yeah, okay, but just because they don't see it as
red doesn't mean your shirt isn't red.

Speaker 6 (01:22:19):
Let me let me get to it. Do we agree
that that reality sometimes is not the same for everyone?

Speaker 5 (01:22:24):
Again, No, we agree that the perception of reality.

Speaker 6 (01:22:28):
Exactly the perception of reality. Okay, perception of the reality.

Speaker 1 (01:22:32):
No.

Speaker 6 (01:22:33):
My point is that you're like the s of the
perception of everybody's reality is reality. There's no outside of that.
There's no reality. That's what I'm saying. That the some
of all those perceptions, it is going to be the reality. Now,
if most people agree that this are this is red, great,
great to them. If most people agree that murdering is

(01:22:53):
badance one perfect, it's very good. Actually, I also agree that's.

Speaker 1 (01:22:58):
Some things can be proven, some things can be physically
objectively proven.

Speaker 5 (01:23:05):
So one thing that might help, Matt And it may
be that you've read a great deal about this, But
I suspect, because of how you're talking about it, that
you perhaps you have not one thing that might help
to give us a common language to discuss this in
the future. If you are ever interested in some of
the terms including the law of human nature, which was
what Stein was alluding to, are explained. There is the

(01:23:25):
first quarter of the book, Mere Christianity. The first quarter
is exploring the idea of right and wrong and what
can we know about reality and the nature of right
and wrong aside from or outside of our society and history.
What can we kind of know about divine nature and

(01:23:46):
truth and right and wrong. The first quarter really addresses
the conversation we're having, helps explain the terminology right and
helps clarify that. And so even if you don't read
the rest of the book, which has to do with
what are the Christian claims relating to what we can know,
that first quarter, I think will help if you ever

(01:24:06):
want to talk with this, talk about this in the
future with I think either of us help clarify what
you mean, what we mean, and what's being discussed, because
it'll give us kind of a common language to you.
And I heard Stein using some of the language, so
I suspect it will work well for him also. But
the thing is, on the whole, what you are basically

(01:24:30):
rejecting is truth outside of collective beliefs. If I understand correctly,
The thing is there are things that are true even
if you are unaware of them. For example, I don't
think you really believe that radiation began existing when it
was discovered. I suspect you actually think it probably existed before.

(01:24:53):
So the fact that no one believed it existed before
didn't mean it didn't exist. It got discovered later. This
same idea would be if you have an uninhabited island,
it's not like the island suddenly came into being. That
that was there, whether or not people were there believing
it even though it was uncharted and previously undiscovered. Like
and if you don't think that, I think you will.

(01:25:16):
I don't think you could live. I don't think in
practice you could live in the world.

Speaker 6 (01:25:20):
No, I do. I do agree, I do agree. I
do agree with that. The point is every bit of
reality is let's say it's causing it to be. Every
bit of reality is a point of view. Again, every air, molecule,
every everything literally is a point of view. That's what
I'm saying. It's just different, different types of points of view.

(01:25:41):
Just like an animal is going to be different than
immense and insect, and it's going to be different than
a human. It's going to be different than many of
those things. And it could be different if you do
believe in gods and angels. That's why it would be different,
probably from their points of views. And you have again
different points of different types of points of views, and
those are not are different realities.

Speaker 1 (01:26:06):
Those are different perceptions of reality. They're not different realities.

Speaker 6 (01:26:12):
Exactly exactly. But for a person having the perception is
going to be different if we compare it again. Yeah, absolutely,
But perception does not equal proof. Just because I, you know,
see something is there, just because I believe something is
what it is doesn't make it that way. Just because
I think a bad idea is a good idea doesn't

(01:26:34):
make it a good idea.

Speaker 1 (01:26:35):
It's still a bad idea.

Speaker 5 (01:26:37):
Just because you misremember, say your bank account ballance does
not change the balance.

Speaker 1 (01:26:43):
Oh then I miss, I misremembered I have like a
couple of mill It just my bad, you know.

Speaker 5 (01:26:52):
But I think that's a good thing to conclude on.
And if you guys want to discuss the especially that chapter,
but in general, that Age of Revelation book, I'd love
to talk about that, in particular the claims relating to
symbols that his suggestions symbols of the Triune God throughout
all these ancient religions. And then also if you want

(01:27:13):
to talk more about this though you you I think
probably Matt, you should probably read that beginning of Mere
Christianity because it will give you a quick view. There
are much longer books you could read, right that will
also kind of explain the terminology. But if you want
something that's like sixty pages or less, that's that's probably
a good spot because like it feels like we're talking

(01:27:36):
past each other a little bit or more that you're
talking past there's a.

Speaker 6 (01:27:43):
Yeah, there's there's a lack of vocabulary to explain to
so it can get to common ground. But yeah, but yeah,
like at the end of the day, that's the thing.
At the end of the day, I do agree with
a lot of what you're saying from from the point
of view that what you're saying, I'm just trying to
show you that that there's more to it.

Speaker 1 (01:27:59):
That's my point.

Speaker 6 (01:28:00):
There's there's more to what we probably agree on even
but we can again if we keep on that, we're
going to be infinitely But yeah, that's so.

Speaker 5 (01:28:12):
Yeah, But if if it sounds good, if you guys
do have a moment afterwards. I'd like to talk with
you briefly when we're done, but did maybe maybe we
should conclude we are, as you mentioned, a few hours
in three.

Speaker 1 (01:28:23):
Hours, Yeah, this is all before editing. So I think
by the time I have, you know, done all the sponsorship,
plugging and ship and you've done your ship, I think
like even with editing, is like close to three hours fifteen.

Speaker 6 (01:28:38):
Yeah, so yeah, we can can probably end up.

Speaker 1 (01:28:40):
So yeah, let's let's end it on on this. We
have several topics that we can do several more shows
on pre recorded or live. I am down for either.
I have a good back blog, so I can I
can do a few few live shows. And it's interesting
because you know, we have some people in the chat
as well, among which Mormon Rischi, who Matt very much

(01:29:02):
agrees with you. So I'll talk to you later, mister mormond. Uh.
You know, I'll do things that in my from my perspective,
are the right things. They may not be the right
things for you, but you know, from my point of view,
they're the right things. So you know, bite the pillow,
set no. But gentlemen, thank you very much for this.

Speaker 6 (01:29:26):
For this very very long, very deep going interesting.

Speaker 1 (01:29:31):
Conversation interesting as well. That's that's definitely one way to
describe what all just happens.

Speaker 5 (01:29:37):
Well, thank thanks for having us. I really appreciate the
chance to talk with both of you. And uh and
for the for the viewers who skip to the end.
I don't know about you, guys, but I sometimes do
that with YouTube videos. Where is this going? We spent
like half an hour talking about Hebrew translation. We then
talked about a couple of specific claims that Matt made
and the history and kind of physical evidence or written

(01:30:00):
evidence relating to that, and then we jumped into philosophy
in theology a bit as you do.

Speaker 1 (01:30:08):
Yeah, yeah, this is uh yeah, it's been all over
the place. I enjoyed it very much, so, I mean, guys,
any any last words, you know, like, look some of
your some of your.

Speaker 6 (01:30:26):
Go ahead first Yeah sure, I mean not so much.
You can find me on next at Metmoor nineteen. I
pretty much will post about similar and even crazier things
suit you you're interestent, I can really let myself go there.
And also in my bio you find like my YouTube,
my other stuff. I'm pret sure yeah you'll find something

(01:30:46):
interesting there to you should like the conversation cool.

Speaker 5 (01:30:50):
And I guess once again, my name's Todd. You can
find me on Twitter at dm underscore Blackwall, and I
also make and sell RPG games. There are two up
on our website, are working on a few more, me
and my me and my co author, so you can
check that out at blackwallgames dot com. And I guess,
I guess. The other thing I would say is what
you are? What what you If you watch this whole video,

(01:31:13):
what you have just witnessed is a Pagan who believes
in absolute right and wrong, in in in in in
morality aside from his preference in a moment, a Kabbala
practitioner who believes in and I'm going to try and
summarize this correctly, in objective truth mostly there is there
is some subjective us or subjective truth mostly and some

(01:31:37):
objective truth like that we're talking now, say, which was
which was very interesting. H And then a Christian who
obviously believes in objective morality because you'd be familiar with
like the Ten Commandments and such which are which are
from God. Right. So yeah, so that was a very

(01:32:00):
very interesting conversation and is not where I expected us
to go at the end.

Speaker 1 (01:32:04):
So yeah, they did not see that coming, but you know,
glad it happened. It definitely gives us some some fuel
for the for the net next fire, next fucking three
plus hours.

Speaker 6 (01:32:16):
Yeah, yeah, absolutely, you are most welcome.

Speaker 1 (01:32:22):
This is uh, this has been a lot. I very
much enjoyed this, this live show of the Greyhorned Pagans podcast.
For everyone watching, for everyone listening, if you have stuck
with us to the ends. First of all, props, I mean,
holy shit, you know, do remember to like the video,
leave something in the comments, you know, leave like your

(01:32:43):
objective or subjective or personal reality in the comments, because
why not, you know, let's let's have a discussion in
the comments as well, you know what. If we're at it,
remember to subscribe to the channel ring the notification bills
so you do get notified whenever a new episode either
drops or when we go live again with you know,

(01:33:05):
other interesting guests, or you know on the weekends mostly
Saturdays with zero Lath Eternal. It is now not Sarah
La Immortal anymore. He has gone from immortal to eternal
for room readings and high minded discussions, for everything else
that we do, and you know, everything else, Greyhart Pagans Relates.
Go to the website ww Dog Grayharntpagans dot com where

(01:33:27):
you can find our merge, our Patreon, you know all
the groups and tribes that we associate ourselves with, our
mission statement however you want to call it. And last,
what not least, a big thank you to the sponsors
of the channel. First of all, Shop Reclaim Repurpose and
they're awesome, amazing Nevataffle set Viking Chess as our ancestors

(01:33:51):
used to play it, of which there is physical proof, so.

Speaker 6 (01:33:55):
You know, just a little with that there you're buying
and get yet yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:34:00):
Yeah, um all handcrafted, hands made. It is amazing, amazing stuff.
It is a one man webshop. He does it all himself,
so go show him some love and use code Stein
Fox Toughle that is TAFL to get ten percent off

(01:34:20):
your own set. I can highly recommend it Shop Reclaim
Repurpose dot sc dot com, code Stein Fox Toughle, and
a big thank you of course, also to w Energy.
I wish I had some at the moment I ordered new.
It hasn't come in yet, but boy, I can use
a pick me up at the moment. W is a

(01:34:43):
clean energy drink with you know, not giving you any jitter.
Is no caffeine crash crash, no sugar crash nothing. But
you know, with amino acid, it's a healthy amount of caffeine.
No fillers or artificial buyes because you know that shit
is objectively bad for you. Use code stein Fox for

(01:35:05):
ten percent of your entire purchase, or simply go to
w dot gg for slash stein Fox ten. Yeah, this
is everything that I need to do as a good podcaster, influencer,
content creator. However, I feel like describing myself at the moment.

Speaker 5 (01:35:22):
And did you mention following you on Twitter or X.

Speaker 1 (01:35:27):
Yeah, I mean you can do that too if you like,
follow us, which you can also find on our website www.
Pagans dot com of course, but yes, follow us on
Twitter or X. I still refuse to call it X,
so you know at Greyhorn Podcast, follow us on Instagram
at Greyhorn Pagans. Everything can be of course found on
the website, So if you feel like following us on

(01:35:48):
the social platforms as well, go there, go find it,
and you know, follow Matt as well, follow Todd as well.
If you liked what you saw, if you liked what
you heard, and if you didn't, I don't care.

Speaker 6 (01:36:00):
Still do it yet?

Speaker 1 (01:36:02):
There is there, There will be gems here and there,
and a lot of a lot of shit talking. So yeah,
thank you all. Have a good night, have a good evening,
have a good morning, good afternoon, whatever the time may
be for you, I know for well for Matt and
I it's getting pretty late. So yes, thank you all.

(01:36:23):
The next time, Bye bye everyone.

Speaker 11 (01:36:35):
This was yet another amazing episode of the Gray Horned
Pagans podcast. We thank you all for watching. We thank
you all for listening. Remember to like, share, subscribe, and
hit that notification bell so you will be notified whenever
we upload something new. Support us on Patreon for early

(01:36:56):
access and for everything else that we do with the
like for everything else that we do with the podcast,
find us on www. Nbadians dot com.

Speaker 1 (01:37:07):
For now, we thank you.

Speaker 3 (01:37:09):
Until next time, m HM.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce

Dateline NBC

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

.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;}Biblical Texts and Mistranslations with DM Blackwall and Mat Moura (PART 2)

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;}New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce

Dateline NBC

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

All Episodes

Biblical Texts and Mistranslations with DM Blackwall and Mat Moura (PART 2)

New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce