S4 E69: Jordan Peterson, God, and Christianity with Word on Fire | The Jordan B. Peterson Podcast Transcripts

Welcome to the J Bp podcast season for episode, sixty nine, I Mikhail Petersen there's this new book, titled, Jordan, Petersen, God and Christianity, the search for a meaningful life. The authors are today's gas, Christopher Kasr and Matthew are Petra SEC and their book is the first systematic analysis of twelve rules for life and dad's biblical series. From a christian perspective,. this episode. You'll hear a lot about meaning and suffering truth in fiction time before consciousness, evolution, religion, acting ethically and how Doktor Kay there is a professor of philosophy at Loyola, Merrymen, university and like other gas, Doktor Petra Zack he's a fellow at the word. On fire Institute, Doktor Kayser has won a Templeton grant,

written many scholarly articles in Books- he's a Fulbright scholar who holds a phd from the University of Notre Dame Doktor Matthew, our Petra Zack Is an associate professor at Loyola, merriment University and I lay who holds a man just from Yale and a Phd from the University of Chicago, even though Doktor Petra Sex specializes in christian ethics and moral theology. He gives lectures on a range of interesting topics related to philosophy, theology and the catholic intellectual tradition. I hope you enjoy today's episode. Hello, everyone. I am pleased to have with me today, Doktor Christopher Kayser and Doktor Matthew, Petru sick.

They're, both working at Loyola, a Mount University and they recently co authored a book called Jordan it is, in God and Christianity, the search for a meaningful life, which is definitely a title that I would never have imagined existing. So I decided to talk to them today to see what sort of useful discussion we might have about that book, but about christian issues, more broadly, religious issues, more broadly cultural issues. Doktor Kasr is professor.

The loss of three and a fellow of the word on Fire Institute, which will discuss a little later. He graduated from the Honors Programme of Boston College and earned is Phd four years later from the university of not your damn. He was a Fulbright scholar who did posts, doctoral work as an elegant or von, humble German, chancellor, fellow at the University of Cologne. He was up did he was appointed a corresponding men. Member of the Pontifical Academy for life, a vatican city. And William S Simon, would visiting fellow in the James Madison program at Princeton University, the winner of a Templeton ground, Templeton funds, research into the intersection between religions. among other things, he's writ more than a hundred scholarly articles and book chapters and is also the author of sixteen books, including the one that I mentioned earlier. Doktor Patricia received his enemy in religious.

six from Yale and a Phd in the same field from the University of Chicago. He is currently associate professor of theological ethics. And serves as a word on fire institute. Fellow is well founded action to numerous articles. He is authored, CO, authored and co edited several books, he's bilingual English, spanish lectures, broadly on topics and ethics, the catholic intellectual tradition and the intersection between christian theology and philosophy. So welcome. Gentlemen. Thank you very much for agreeing to speak with me today and for your careful work as well. So I guess I'd like to start by asking you, as I mentioned in the interval, I never really envisioned being included in a book like

the one that you just wrote- and I have noted that a variety of religious thinkers have commented on my lectures and work, and I'm wondering why you felt compelled to put all time and effort into this. I mean it's a major undertaking to write a book and so why this book? What's the motivation and lie followed closely a lectures on Genesis and when I listed them ass really fascinated. Because, again and again, I saw I'm that I had read earlier in the church fathers people like Augustine, Kristen Origin and you were reading scripture according to who the more or reading of scripture, where you're looking at the story, if they can enable in your brain question isn't was there actually do brothers, so many someone name able you're not so much looking for these, facts. You might say terms of Kate, unable, rather you look

at that story in terms of universal lessons story has for us today and that moral reading of scripture is something that is very, very common in there christian tradition of biblical reading in so I thought that was you budgeting, and I also thought it was interesting how you are bringing to There are all kinds of other resources when looking he story, so you would bring in Evolutionary cycle gee you bring in Russia novels, you bring in all these things it would seem to be foreign to the biblical text, but in a way I too was something that was very traditional. In other words, if you look at people like a Gaston, he'll say that all truth is, from God, and so bringing in any truth from any field is perfectly legitimate in his view, in terms I do understand scripture because he thinks that God the ultimate author of two books, the book of Revelation scripture, but also the of creation. So

Everything in creation can up inform our understanding of scripture. Conscript broken up, inform understanding of creation, so these lectures, I really enjoyed them and it seems to me that what you are doing in a certain way was reinvent the wheel, representing again a new and fresh way, the ins, what's that were found in these older thinkers and that so many young people spoke and people who call themselves atheists or ignored x or religious and the fact that so many people, were fascinated by your lectures and drawing to them you know so. Many comments in on Youtube would say things like. I thought, was a kind of stupid, old collection of now stories totally meaningless for contemporary life, but after hearing your lecturers genesis, now I see how the stories have perennial and are extremely porn insightful. For now, getting life, and so you know. For me. What I wanted to do in the book is both bring out. These residences with ease earlier figures, but also

to try to show how these earlier vigour actually might you develop and in as some of your own insights and move them further down the road as it were, so I thought that it would useful to bring these reflections together? The book the I have the same intellectual reasons as well for, engaging your work. Basically, think we're trying to treat to audiences. At the same time, one is to your your massive audience to speak to them through your work there the ideas that you ve been engaging with such verve and such power in such clarity, Natalie resonate with biblical kindred context. But in fact this is where, from our point of view, they find their fullest expression. and so to that audience who want to see. Look a little bit deeper, look a little bit broader, we're

speaking to twenty two christian audiences as well. This look at the work that Jordan Petersen it's doing. Perhaps he doesn't see it this way, but he's a serious theologian he's opening pathways in opening modes of communication that can help us more clearly communicate, some of these difficulties as well. I also have a personal reason. For now I began watching you actually Chris introduced me to your work and I began watching your work online. Every You put out watch and what I found so fascinating is from from my point you you're. You took a lot of the christian virtue of of courage and were attracted to that. They were attracted to hearing truths, including very hard truths, and

I thought I wanted. I wanted to deeper to see what what this phenomenon what's been called the Jordan Pearson phenomena really is that this is a strange thing, for me is the the popularity of those biblical lectures of mean it came as a shock. No, I jumped with some people when I first rented the theatre in Toronto to put the lectures on. I thought I said if I had gone to a bank for alone and told them that my business plan was too few fish due to our lectures on on Genesis. Mostly to young man, and that I was going to charge them to come to a theater and sit through that. They would laugh me out of their because it's such a preposterous proposition, and yet it seem to work in the actors have been quite popular online and they ve they seem to have attracted attention from

religious and non religious people, but basically in the religious vain right, even the atheists you ve been watching, are pulled in by the bye bye. What is essentially the religious content? I guess part of question: is you know exactly? What is that religious content that something we could we could talk about in depth mean the fact that my thinking is influenced by these church fathers, the first church, fathers and other historical figures that you SK. I guess I get that second hand in some sense right and probably primarily through you, Karl you see, was unbelievably educated and ice created myself in his work, and he was of course incredibly influenced by the thinkers that you talk about in the book and so and you mentioned Doktor Kayser, that you know I was putting

old ideas into a new package, and you know that it's very important too, to to note that that's true is that, you know truly original highlight truly rigid ideas or very rare, and so much of what we think of as original is its built into this two of our culture in ways we dont understand and then manifests itself within us, and that certainly the case with these. These biblical stories- and I wanted to make another comment to about truth. No Doctor Kayser, you mentioned that I engage in a more Reading of scripture say rather than a literalist reading, and maybe We should have a talk about that because it isn't easy to read a book like the Bible, literally because it's full of of literal country

the actions and it whatever. It is especially the really archaic stories in in Genesis whatever it is. It's not it's not history, the way we think of history, and so that's hard for people at hard for people to see how that still be true. But if it's not literal, how can it be true- and this is a discussion that I tried to have with SAM Harris a lot because the eighth types- the rationalists types there's something they miss and what they, MRS, that fiction, isn't fair, Yes, it's not a lie right, it's not literal but it's not a lie and great fiction is true, but it never happened. So how can it be true an answer to that is something like well. There are patterns in things deep patterns, deep recur.

In patterns? You know, human nature, the fact that, where human that that the humanity Self is a recurring pattern. It has characteristic shape and great fiction describes the shape of that pattern and the greatest of fiction. The greater should becomes the more it is religious in nature and that's not even a claim about the nature of truth. It's more a claim about the nature of, except science. You know when we say something is profound: what we me, is that it's moving and that it has a broad influence, its capable of having a broad influence on the way we think and see it act. So if you re a profound book like one of those books, you could say of that book and people off today. that it changed my life when I read that book and a stir

worry that can change your life has a power that is best described as religious and so relate this is a kind of experience in some sense. Rather, in addition to a claim about what constitutes truth then those stories in Genesis Kane enable I think and and the story of Adam and Eve, because those stories are so deep that it's almost unfathomable they get at that at the most profound of patterns and so to say that there are literally true. Is that two massively underestimate how true they are, because you could tell me what you did this morning now would be literally true. But who cares. If you read the story of Adam and Eve it so true that it applies to everyone always and mere literal truth can't do that, and we don't have a good language as scientists. Let's say a cycle.

Just or even its citizens, we don't have a good language for that kind of truth and so well. I guess I'd like your thoughts about that idea Yesterday, the literal sense of scripture is sometimes misunderstood by people, and I think that the right way to think of it, the literal sense of scriptures, what the original acumen author intended to convey to the original human audience and so on. the agents, MRS. I think that we need to put this back and its kind of text. You re genesis as if it is a contemporary, Textbook on science, I think what you do: Thing is wrenching it out of its original context and therefore you are bound to misread it and that's not. Just Genesis is really to have any work there to understand that we need to understand its Jonah and we need international context. So. What is the regional context of degenerative story or the regional context it was written in terms of rights. If all stories of creation,

other stories that were circulating in the ancient world, and it was meant to be an answer to those and it uses, poetry uses major, and that was what all those stories did and the poetry me military. I would not say that against truth, If, on the one hand you have truth and the other had yet poetry, imagery and story, I think that one kind truth is scientific truth, empirically verifiable but I think it's too narrow to say, while the only kind of truth is the apparently verifiable, I think is actually is broader and in fact that claim that the only that the treaties currently verifiable. That's the only kind of truth that is itself a self defeating statement, There's no empirical evidence that the only way to get it truth is through the empirical method. So if we put genesis its context, what do we see? What we see it? A re telling us about income most of the other stories, the other stories and ancient world. Where store in which there are multiple gods. They

engaged in a warfare and violence? So you think if the greek mists were like this were right: Zeus overthrows, his father and his eldest violence, Genesis met to answer the. Other ancient met Senate, saying things like there's only one God does not more Secondly, that creation is not a matter of violence, but a decrease, can is reasonable speech and this was something you talked about in your lecture which really struck me, because I have as yet that story before, but I never really thought of that creation arrived, I got says, let there be light and there is light and what is reasonable speech tenable speech is orderly, rather differ between a random sounds, make unreasonable speeches that there is a kind of order to it. So if creation arises from recent speech, and increase itself is ordered its intelligible and make sense.

That gives rise centuries and centuries later. That believe that creation is orderly and makes sense gets right centuries later to science, but Red Genesis, as if its failed science makes it by as much as is Jerry Genesis as if it's in a for or against iphones, I mean emerges only reading genesis. No likewise, this should have been Iphone or not unreasonably Genesis to determine this will. Clearly, the original author Genesis wasn't addressing that in the original author, just this wasn't sing for or against devolution. So I think that that these readers, who want to make it for against evolution, artist, utterly misreading and taking in the store out of its original context and therefore, necessarily providing a really bad rating of Genesis there there's. Also really important theological point to make here is as well and in that way, can put it philosophically, what's the condition for the possibility of something be literal in the first place. What's the conditions

possibility both of it being recognised, spoken and then apprehended a certain court of orderliness, that's necessarily presupposed in the act of knowing and in the act of communicating that knowledge. itself, as Chris said, can't be empirically verified. So when we as Catholic, say that that recognise from you tell that Jesus is the truth that would clued in a literal, historical sense, but also the condition for the possibility of anything, be intelligible and and and litter. We understood and communicated at all. So I One of the frustrations I found a fine in contemporary debates on these questions is that second, some oftentimes isolates and identifies the literal. The empirical as if this is it's a free standing, epistemic platforms belongs to them, and everybody has to compete.

In order to to be on their territory, and I just don't think that's philosophically the case. It He supposes a lot of things that that they can give an account for year. I mean so whenever you please go ahead and justice just can add one thing. So imagine somebody was reading Shakespeare, Sonnet, eighteen right sure. Compare thee to assemblers day, Thou art, more lovely and more temperate rough wins do take the darling butts of May and summers lease hath all too short a date. So measures only reason. No, like ok, Shakespeare's a media, Rogers she's a whether man and I look up in the almanac- see if May had rough winds and interest, There's no reference in May o Shakespeare about it. You know telling us about the weather? Well, I think it's. obviously radically radical misunderstanding of Shakespeare. He's not trying to tell us whether and then failing to tell us whether- and so I think, This is not trying failing to give us its scientific truth, it doing something totally different, and that's bothering I appreciate

lectures is that you highlighted the reality the author Genesis is trying not to is tragic. It is very important truths, but not truce, that are in the scientific discourse, their true, but not scientific truth. The problem with the empirical approach, the problem with totalling it, is that the empirical approach tends to be mostly descriptions of things in the way they interact and the way they can be manipulated and that's fine, but doesn't tell you, doesn't provide any real insight into how to live, how to act. How to take your next step powder how to produce a hierarchy of values and how to determine what most important and what's least important, and all of that is also so difficult that we actually dont know how to do it completely

split, which is why we need poetry and drama in literature. We need that whole domain, so we could call that the literary domain, and then I think you could consider it. This might be an empirical proposition. Is that the religious domain is at the back. of the literary domain and, as literature gets deeper It becomes more and more like religious writing and so that, by definition in some sense and I've swiped, this in part- I would say from you- is almost by definition that the sense of profound engagement that the most profound literature produces is what constitutes the religious and that's a domain of experience. You know when you're captivated in a movie theater when you're captivated by story when you're take outside yourself, none of them

has anything to do with logical argumentation. It's a whole different issue in it to me, it's tied very, very deeply to our a bit thirty two imitated mimic and so were really good at that way better than any other animal we met like languages mimicry, We use the same words and so were mimicking each other, and but I can mimic. Every person separately? I have to extract out from each person some essence of being that's admirable, and I do that's personnel. Your person and I try to imitate that and then that core thing Admirable that I imitate that's as far as I'm concerned: that's psychologically equivalent to Christ. Whatever else Christ is, Christ is that's. Why he's sometimes described as the king of kings, so

if the king is the thing, that's at the top of the hierarchy and then you look at all hierarchies and you take the thing that at the top of all hierarchies value, then that figure when used see reflections of that figure anywhere Produces on respect, and that's because that pattern constitutes the appropriate wait act, just as when you see the opposite of that pattern, which might be in its most fundamental essence, satanic or demonic, something that's ultimately evil that, for Mrs revulsion and terror- and that's that's all instinct jewel, it's it's not, In the domain of rationality, precisely its way way deeper than that and the the and then there is another problem that the easiest have never come to terms with. I I believe in you guys tell me what you think of this is that if. If what is rendered it with what is pro

really rendered unto God. is rendered unto Caesar. Then Caesar becomes inflated to God and when that happens, all hell breaks loose, that's the genesis of totalitarianism, subservience to an idle. And so- and this is a case Think the church needs to make particularly the catholic church. The most strenuous of ways is that if we don't segregate off the religious instinct and give it its proper, attention and do which I suppose you do in part with ritual in church attendants and so forth, and every single thing we do starts to become inappropriately contaminated with religious longing that's why you see the rise of extremely powerful political ideologies and the division of people you know for tat, real reasons into moral camps. It's that religious instinct isn't hasn't, got grounding in it. It, sir,

king for something to attach itself to in it. It picks up second rate substitutes. You know the people like Dawkins. They seem to think that if we all just abandoned our religious superstitions, we'd all become. Rationalists like while, like like Isaac Newton, who is an alchemist and not a rationalist, by the way that great genius, and so one of the things. I think that the catholic church in particular, is doing a very good job of this morning, people how dangerous it is too late who's the proper theatre of X, russian for our religious instincts, go away, they just get perverted.

and they show up all sorts of places. They shouldn't not that's terrible, it's not good, so I'm always relieved to get back from, except without any issues, especially health issues which, as you might imagine, I can't help but worry about doing that. I have a toddler and long medical record of my own actually learned recently that almost a quarter of all international travellers get sick while travelling. I swear aeroplanes are a cesspool for germs. Anyway, imagine you get sick abroad. The stress the uncertainty that Kendall, language barrier. Let me tell you lining up in Serbia to go see a doctor wasn't ideal, which is why I wanted to tell you about air doktor air doctors a lot more use than worrying. It connects international travellers to local doctors. Their ab makes it extremely easy to find a clinic or get a consultation in more than seventy. countries and makes life a lot easier when a really counts, whether you in in person appointment or a video consultation. Air doktor connects you with first rate local doctors in a couple of clicks

this is something to write down for future travels. It's just a handy service dimension is Frida downloading use just visit air visit, doktor dot com, Slash Petersen, to get the app and travel with peace of mind. That's air dash d are dot com, Slash Petersen for free doktor APP, you Victor theme, is one that a ghost in talks about in the city of God. He talks to buy two loves any talks about the love of God, and It creates a certain the city is certain organization and if live guide. If God is not your ultimate love, well, you know have something, so it could be power, it could be pleasure. money could be status but Augustine that, if you love say power the most. What was that, to do is it's going to shape you and ultimately distort not only you, but also your relationships in your society, so

can view is that, ultimately, God is perfect. Truth love in beauty, and so not only is it the case that worshipping anything other than that is going to fail to give God, to do to God and that's where religion sensors about is a binding of oneself to guide giving to God what to do, but also it ends up making the person ultimately unhappy, so you can think about this. psychological perspective that like Martin, Seligman, would say things like of is at the core of human flourishing and and if we don't have if I love money or power were they love God and more, they left my friends and more than let my family. Well, that's going to deprive me the source of my my flourishing, I'm gonna end up harming myself in character shortly so harming others when it power, money or whatever, too much, and so

yeah forgets to at least this is a perennial temptation to replace God is something else that perhaps the Warning at the end of genesis with the story of Noah and also the story of the Tower of Babel in because the tower of Babel is people get together and they try to build an edifice that that's absolute in some sense right. It's it's it's a building! That's that's under the control of an edifice, that's of human manufacture and it becomes larger and larger larger in and then it devolves into a kind of chaos, and so with the flood story, with no flood, that's that's one form of danger that emerges as a consequence of deviation from the proper path. Let's say orientation towards whatever the highest good is the tower of Babel. Secondary one that has more to do with the danger of of egotistical

human construction- and it is something like the worship of these idle. So imagine we can think about this technically in cycle logically, in some sense is that, in order to act, you have presume that that to which you moving is more important than where you are right. So, a value judgment moving in direction is appropriate and then you have to move lotta directions over the course of your life and and maybe you search for fur friendship and you search for love and you search for money and you search for power and and so forth, and if there's nothing integrate All that thing, your pulled in all sorts of directions right. It's like devils pulling you apart, because you don't know what's more important than than then what that's very, very confusing and off putting and if the wrong thing takes control, then you get demanded and bent, and so what you see in Christianity is this struggle over

thousands of years to specify the thing that should be at the top of the hierarchy and one other thing. That really open my eyes to the depth of these works? Was this strange proclamation that the word that existed at the beginning of the type of time? that brought creation into being was the same as Christ, which is unbelievably bizarre proposition- and I am not speaking about prison- Firstly, religiously, I'm thinking about it more conceptually. It's like the people who had that revelation or intuition are making the priest. position that there's something about

the emergence of reality into conscious being like, because reality without consciousness doesn't really seem to exist right. So when we talk about reality, we always presuppose a conscious of you were and that the conscious viewer that makes order out of chaos is most appropriately. The perfect being that's manifested in the figure of Christ, and so that we participate in that process in some sense to the degree that were attempting who embody that motive being so, I know that's, no that's going out there some sense, but it struck me as such a brilliant idea that it was hard to account, for I don't know if I made myself clear with that,

I think it cuts in many different ways. At the same time, it also cuts directly to the previous question that you asked about the the right domain of religious expression and in a sense it solves that problem. Why well, if Jesus ice is the logos. On the one hand, there means that means that there is a logos. There is a truth. There is a way of existence that is real, which gives us standard to be able to identify false ways of being both individually, but also important politically. So, It establishes a ground work for there to be an inch Limiting principle, politically speaking and morally speaking to life, and that is there is a truth of the matter and if you're, not a living, into the truce you're you're deviating from it, so that a start, she's a kind of of ground and ceiling for the proper expression of of what Philip, morally individually and also political power as well. You only have right political power in so far as it conforms to the truth, but the logos, his

oh Christ, that means crisis also of the person that Thorkel person that, as as Catholics, we believe it is literally literally real it literally rays from the dead and that is that the political life is not the sum totality of life. The moral life isn't, even though some totality obliged to some so tallied life is love, relationship with God, who is made himself incarnate, On the one hand you have the foundation of truth to to structure and limit human life, and then ultimate transcendent tale purpose Kasr. You got some comments about That I did I circle back to. You said if I heard you correctly, that reality doesn't exist without consciousness, and I think that's true. If you ve got exists. But then, if God doesn't exist, and it's not true human beings, of course, haven't been on planet earth since the beginning of the universe

never says about thirteen point, eight billion years old, so say twelve billion years ago. There are no human beings at all and presuming consciousness at all. So there, reality, there were, of stars and things like that. But there was no conscious beings anywhere that that was able to understand that unless got this now you ve got exists and if it's true God is the logos. Well, then, you would say from all eternity there, consciousness. There was a mind there was a divine mind and so Matthew there actually would be in unity. You might say in terms of The divine essence in the divine mind, ultimately being one so consciousness. Distance have this The mental ground, in God, but if God doesn't exist, then I think we, that would not be true because again, twelve Billy, years ago, there's no human beings around recently

MR aliens, there's no one around to be conscious, and so there I've been reality, say twelve billion years ago, but her there would have been consciousness. Yes, oh I want to go out on a limb here too, because I have a problem with that. I can't shake this. The supposition that are scientific, Cosmo logical theories have an implicit conscious, observer nested in I'd of them, even when they claim not too so. For example, when you talk about thirteen billion years ago, there's theirs. I dont know how to say this properly this, the that the concept of thirteen billion years, seems to me to require a conscious observer to formulate to begin with, because I dont understand what derail and consists of in the absence of something experiencing duration like how,

something last thirteen billion years like inside since it all happens at once. If there's no conscious observer, like theirs well, it would depend on it the nature of time the view you're talking about was actually put forward by a guy named Barkley and he said to be is to be perceived So in other words, if you don't ever perceive her there wouldn't be any being at all, but I dont think that that is right. I mean, I think, you're right, that the idea or the concept, the human concept of time to seek that can exist. that human beings, but before there were any human beings. It seems that all available scientific evidence suggests there were things errors, carbon molecules and there were stars- and there is all kinds of things that existed before if there is any conscious human, perceiving them. So it is true, of course, that all of our evidence for the big bang and all of our scientific

instigations presuppose conscious servers that are in taking the measures lots of things I got, but I'm not sure from that logically, that, therefore we can't with reason hold that existed before there any human or for that matter, any kind of conscious observers unless we think he's right that to be is to be perceived. Well, but I think I do, but others there's something in Berkeley is objection, is that seems to me to be hard to skate around like when we imagine time before consciousness, and we imagined the existence of objects before consciousness we imagine them as if our conscious observer was there, even though there wasn't one. So we think we,

See a star from a particular level of resolution: right we can't see subatomic particles, we can't see atomic structures. We can't see molecular structures that that that exists before there is a procedure. Is all those levels similar, tiny asleep at once with a duration that doesn't with it with a temporal sequence, the dust involved, duration, and so, whatever was there before there was a procedure, is in some sense unimaginable without the projection of a procedure back into time, and I think that warps are perspective on what it was. That's their and perhaps our perspective on the role of consciousness in the genesis of being. so anyway, that's it. Those are here there is another way of thinking about it and your view would be so, let's say God forbid

either some sort of plague that strikes, humanity and all human beings die on I view their we'll be lots of things. It continue to exist like the sun. it still exists. The earth was still exists. There be all kinds of things it exists now, there'll be no human beings. In that herbal scenario that were there to perceive it, but they would still continue to exist or maybe have a different view. I just Imagine that consciousness was eradicated, say and not just human beings just to make it cleaner and some sense they. I can't understand how to conceptualize what it is that would be left. You know what is it? Is it nothing but quantum potential? Is it the sea of quantum Israel. Is it not turned into stars and solar systems and galaxies when there's an observer specifying a level of analysis, it isn't

obvious to me from looking at the physics what it is that there is a cause. You say whether still be a son. It's like well wait. A second, you think of the sun, you think of what you perceive and when you say it would still be there. You think that what you perceive would still be there, but you're, not there. So what you perceive would not be there. I dont know what it is. That would be there. You could say it's as if this, one is still there, but but that the law Full of analysis, problems and the fact of this strange constituent, reality of matter at the at the quantum level makes it very difficult for me to. Conceive of a universe- that's just the same as it is now, except there's no conscious observer at it, doesn't make sense to me. If I may briefly, it seems to me that there is perhaps some equivocal in the end, the use of the word existence here because

is of course tied up with duration, undressed from our own perception of it, but that necessarily mean that duration is the is either a necessary condition for existence or or the most important condition, so we think of existence in terms of of other. Essential qualities that it has unity following a kind of pattern and in that since it seems to me the more and more important question is what would existence be like if there were no observers, but would there be existence, and I think it's it's logically possible physically, perhaps even necessary, to say that their there would be existence, but that doesn't mean that we would be able to describe it so I think I disagree with you now. May I measure there would be if there was no. If there procedures at all including God, then I don't think so- the other existing thing, or I would seek mean human pretend tat so many of them, because if you can, if a coin, as is right there, there could

anything at all right run existence. If God it wasn't the ultimate for, cause of all these things, and so, if didn't exist at all. That would mean that their there could be anything else. If he's right about this argument Turkey is right so. So there is ultimately a and proceeding all created reality. The divine mind, but I dont know, needs to be human minds, or for that matter theory. You know if we talk to each other and I think it may be enjoyed minds for there to be existing things. Well, I guess I'm I'm stuck on this for four reasons that I think are somewhat scientific in in their nature, my inability to conceptualize what it is that would be if there is no point of reference because everything is all things at once in some sense, without a limited, without delimited observer

so I dont know what it is for there to be something when everything is everything at once with there's no, four situation as a consequence of a limited observers so but weak we can. We can leave that that part of the argument, I'm I'm pushing this. At least in some part, because. I I I have also seen I would say on the part of the more dedicated modern atheists. This necessity to devalue consciousness, because consciousness seems to be it's a mystery, let's put it that way and it it's an annex mystery and its given such pronounce status in the biblical writings. It's part of what gives human beings dignity is, fact that we share this logos consciousness. That's integrity, tied up with distrust

reality as such, and and where are the just leave it at that? That's enough enough exploration as far as I'm concerned, London is Londoners. Why the coolest places on the planet did you know they have wild foxes, downtown, pretty big from the reactions in Canada. I'm also someone who, like learning a lot as you might imagine- and it goes with it- saying, there's a lot of really interesting history in London. There almost too many angles to explore. I'm telling you this because are really cool. One dream course called no tour is London, which explores the dark side of London with its victorian intrigue and cobblestones and crime, because those quite a history of London crime till who could forget Jack the ripper or the singing Barber Sweeney Todd actually was swinging not even real, that's how deep London crime goes. We dont now, of course,

one dream formerly known as the great courses plus which have talked about before, isn't just devoted to London there's a really unique course called in the footsteps of Vincent Van Gogh. For example, there's one about the Beatles one for quilting, one for playing ukulele. You can check all these out on one dream: dot com or on the wandering em up, which download the audio and listen to it. Like a podcast with one dream, you pick the time and learn more about London, art or tiny musical instruments on the go, and I ve been amazing- offer to get. You started, of course, a free trial. With unlimited access sign up now, at one dream: dot: com, Slash Petersen, that's w O n D.

I? U am dot com, Slash Peter sent for a free, unlimited access trial. One of the other thing that we might talk about briefly is that there is also a tendency in the modern world as we move away from our religious heritage as fewer and fewer and fewer people go to church, let's say and are even familiar with the traditional church writings to swallow, this story that site in religion have been at odds with one another throughout the course of history and Doktor Petra sex made a case earlier in this discussion. I believe it was you that the Proposition that the world was ordered by something that was akin to a comprehensible intelligence or an intelligence, or

consciousness that we could have a relationship with was the deep felt sense that we understand things if we investigated them, and that means that the religious proposition of an orderly comprehends world amenable to the investigation of Consciousness- was actually a precondition for the dawn of science and that's what Nietzsche, claimed ass Nature claimed that Chris Deanna DE died at its own hands by emphasising the the ah. What would you say, the primary importance of truth, and so the exploration of truth, at least in part, developed into the empirical domain, and then the scientific world view produced representations of being that seem to contradict the traditional representations and because.

Our minds had been trained to value truth to such a great degree, at least in part as a consequence of our religious education, we were forced by logical consistency in some sense to experience this existential crisis that The apparent opposition between the empirical in the religious has put us into so that's a different route think of the relationship between science and religion demeans. It's up problem. We have to solve instead of a battle between two opponents. One of whom has to win and the other, whom has to lose you of that completely contradicts this, certainly the the catholic understanding. The relationship between science and religion there's a historic question here, which is how did so and emerge into its current form, and even

on those grounds, it's an accurate to say that that Christianity, and specifically Catholicism, has ever been opposed to science. The historical record, just just doesn't show that then there's a guy sexual and philosophical question of again, using that the philosophical language, what's the condition for possibility of there being a empirical and segregation in so far as its its cognitive Billy, in epistemic way possible and then the motivational question of why in the world, would you carry it out unless you you the believe, either explicitly or implicitly, that the world both is knowable that that knowledge is somehow real, that pre suppose is not even any generic metaphysics, but I would, I would say, a specifically christian metaphysic in particular, so it's it's a meme. I would say that science and religion are somehow opposed, but it's it's it's a false one. The idea science and religion are opposed.

rose really. In the nineteenth century, there was a guiding Draper wrote a book that it needs to put forward this thesis and and before that the thesis wasn't out and and there's no real good historical grounds for well in that. So, if you look at many of the prominence, Just in the history of science, many of them were faithful, believing people and we knew was it C4 protestant you have people like Descartes Catholic. You have Blaise Pascal, a great mathematician Gregoire when you have Georgian the matron century, who was one of the founders of people cosmology. So all the way from the beginning of science to today, you have prominent people a faith later that our scientists even right. Now, I think the head of the. What is it ahead of the National Institute for Health, and they give Francis, I forget his name but hey what he's approach a prominent believer, in the church as an institution also shows

port science, so the cathedrals were designed in the seventeenth century. Also as solar observatories Catholics, first is all around the world, have deeper science and promote scientific investigation, for their students. The Pope has happened, Difficult Academy for science invite scientists from all over the world. So I to save our different face to no faith to come to this, again for these scientific meetings, so gets really quite unfair to say that Turkey is opposed to science, faith and science are obviously not the same thing. There's people that a great at science- it don't have faith. There are people our great faith and don't know much about science. But there are people that our overlapping, and so I think is it really the myth to think that the churches opposed to science, I just have very very briefly: it's not a biographical peculiarity that that these these great people of science for cattle

they did that in practice there, their scientific craft, in addition to believe, in Gaza and in practising Catholicism. They do did it precisely as Catholic working from the framework of faith and These are there in the lead. That's always that's always been the case. So this, let's, let's delved into this faith, issue a bit too weak, because the faith is a very complicated term and we know it's often parodied, but by the rationalists. You don't have. Faith in God is parodied as a cup primitive and superstitious belief, but my psychological investigations convinced me that there's no action without face.

Because we are always stepping into the unknown. We have to take a leap of faith to exist, to do the simplest of things to literally to move, and that has to do with what I said earlier is that we're trying to move from a place Of less value to a place of more value, so we have to make some assumptions about what constitutes value, and then we have to leave that our actions are going to have the outcome that we desire and we do that without evidence. I mean that's part, Why to be human is to be riven with anxiety, its as there is no certainty, and so you can't act without faith, and so then the question might, if you accept that proposition, can't act without faith, and I actually believe I dont believe that that's a disputable proposition unless you view people as deterministic in the way the clocks are,

so that we're just stimulus response machines. It seems to me that instead we're moving into the unknown, and we do that dread in some sense dread and hope- and we do that because we have faith and we lose that faith are lives fall apart and we don't know which way is up or down, and so then the question is well. If we have to have faith, what is it that we We have faith in and then the answer seems to be something like what we should have. If we have to make a decision about that. Maybe we try to have faith in what in in the idea that the best should pursued and will prevail as an organ. is principle, and then the question is why what is the best announced is well, that's really hard question, and so we need cathedrals and we need box music and we need the story. Genesis and we need the world's great literature, We didn't all of that theater and Roma and art and aesthetics, to help.

I understand what the best isn T determine how it should prevail in idols. that technically, as any different from, I think it is the same thing psychologically as the worship of Christ? I think it's the same thing, because again, I'm trying to speak psychologically to think about what Christ represents. I'm not thinking about him as a historical figure at something we can get to later. That image, which is seen, for example,. Laid out on these massive cathedral domes Christ, as logos doses as generator of the world it it's the idea that the proper motive being is brought into existence by consciousness operating according to the highest possible principles and like why Wouldn'T- and that is the kind of thing-

It's maybe got some courage associated with it right. I'm don't act as if this is the case. We're all organ act as if this is the case. Now that begs the question: does that make it real? Well, that's hard question He has seen answer mood, thought about. God is glad, then, which nothing greater can be conceived, so we thought, of God it is the highest perfect good, iniquitous too, I've got a similar way as absolute perfection, and I do it hey that this kind of phase so can be reasonable. It's not in my view, least, opened up the wind a shot in the dark. you just wandering around and you just going to make things that I think these are good philosophical reasons to think that there does have to be a first cause. there does have to be a necessary being an acquaintance puts before these arguments, and the I myself have talked about this. things to my students and on an online theirs is

just a shot in the dark as it were so, but I think you're right that people do need that some sense is just live just to move forward, but I do think that say specifically, theistic faith is something there very reasonable. Me think of people like landline, Craig who has devoted a considerable amount of time to exploring the column, Cosmos, Logical argument, I'd enough you're familiar that argument, but it's quite simple. It just says that you know it says that whatever begins to exist has a cause. That's your premise and then the minor premises. The universe began to exist and there for the universe caused by universe with men in the argument is all time off in all matter ensue if the Euro, says a cause. That's prior to time. It must be said that is time less or you might, Eternal, its The universe is the cause of all matter. It must be.

I too matter must be immaterial if the the universe brought the whole union. central existence, The cause of the universe has to be immensely powerful ends you have seen the cosmos, argument the climb caused watch argument in art, a reason to believe that It exists You know we can talk about whether that argument works, but you also have other arguments like the fine tuning argument, and I read a line that you were looking at, the God hypothesis and, as you know, from reading a book. There is a lot of very solid evidence that, The universe is fine tuned and then, if you explain that fine tuning in terms of chance, the likelihood of is unbelievably unlikely. It be like if I won the lottery every single day of my whole life. It's more unlikely that this could have been brought about by chance in stone. enable to have life in it. So it think that that's

believe in God, is very much a reasonable fate. That's not just random arbitrary! You know wishful thinking, kind of kind of you yeah. I would add that that, I think, I'm hearing to different kinds of faith at the same time that, ultimately, I believe, can be Jackson. The teaching of gas ensures that they are united in that's, we call faith, one faith, one could be defined as as what must be in exist, since an true in order for there to be anything else in existence and true and as you putting ensured and how do we make any kind of decision based upon any kind of evidence whatsoever, whether its did in terms of empirical matters, whether its term immoral matters there? So many people the positions that we can't make arguments about. But that must be true in order for us to make arguments about anything the horizon, as it were, of faith- and we can't not have faith in that sense. But then, as you put it than that that it raises

question what we have faith in well that the cabin, answer to that in the christian answer to that in its broadest possible sense, as you have faith in Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ is the logos, is the total many of whom, God is that horizon of meaning the horizon of intelligibility and that can ultimately trusts? That's the second meeting of faith, which is not really an epistemic category presupposes epistemic category which has belief but its multiple about trust. Who do you most trust, and it's in there options. There are really quite limited, they're going to try something in the world you can trust yourself or you're going to trust God. Anything in the world and yourself what you'll be let down guarantee you'll, be let down disastrously, in fact, so the third option is just price, who deregulation, we see, loves you infinitely

in that sense of Christ once again solves the problem of faith both on its beginning edited at its case celeb. Let's don't delve into that again, so I mentioned earlier when we were talking that you could conceptualize Christ psychologically as the rap the representation of all things that strike us as admirable. So you can so here's an example. You know when I used to watch my kids play house.

Son would play the father, and my daughter would play the mother and she would act out being a mother, and you might say what she was imitating my wife, but she wasn't because she wasn't copying her exactly because you know my wife would walk across the kitchen in a particular way and and pick up on a plate and bring it to the table in a particular way like they were to copy. That is too duplicated exactly with your body rate, which I could do. If I was imitating something you'd find very annoying anyways. What the child is something quite different: they they watched the Father across time and they watch the mother across time and they Strapped out those elements of perception and action that can be imitated that constitute the spirit of the mother and the Spirit of the Father and then that's what they manifest in there.

way and so they're doing that at a very, very early age. It's not direct mimicry, it's maybe it's as if they ve their working out the story of what it's like to be a father, and they acting that out now they use their observance dozens of their actual father too,

failing that play space that imaginative space, but they also get information from movies and television and all the books they ve been read, and all of that is feeding their embodiment of the father. And so and this isn't something that's rational. Exactly so, let's say the child as a consequence of this felt sense of admiration. Focuses on a particular attribute in a book, watches the hero of the story and is compelled to incorporate that into their representation, and so they are trying to act out what's admirable and then faith in that sense is as it is,.

Is it willingness to act out the proposition that what we find admirable will in fact be the most appropriate guide to how we should act in the world, because you have the child acting out the father, but then there the set of all fathers, and then there would be what was extracted out of that. That would be the ultimately admirable ideal which is, like God, brought to earth. If God is that which no greater can be imagined and then that's embodied, which is the christian idea then, what's most admirable is embodied in the figure of Christ and that's the thing to imitate and the faith isn't belief that, real. I dont believe that the faith is willingness to act out of the world has a different thing, because we make this propositional too, much. I don't think it is because the enmity

it is the imitation with our coasts. Central Asia are only propositional also. sorry, everyone there's a bit of a lag, our connection. So that's why we're awkwardly interrupting one another. So Please going. I think I will that it it's it's not only propositional and in fact, final analysis, the propositional components of the faith, be the least important now say that their necessary, but certainly not sufficient, but describing you're conception of faith. The word that that really set out for me is that is that this will happen, but I acted into a belief or to an intuition that if I act a certain according to a certain kind of pattern that I will realise the the nature of the pattern itself, I think that, certainly

part of it from a christian perspective it absolutely as it has to be, because its metaphysically the case that God created all thing, good, and so this pattern is embedded absolutely everywhere in creation, including in the human mind, including in the human soul. However, theirs the problem of sin right. We live in a world that is radically fallen, starting with the broken natures of our own selves and with a will, there is not just that mission is. As do. I have any reason to believe that my acting according to this pattern will act. Will actually bring about the desired outcome that I hope for and that's where Jesus Christ moves from being the teacher who only gives the pattern, but instantiated pattern to the saviour. the reality is no, you will. I will not. I will fail and again fail, disastrously, so It is only because this archetype of more truth and goodness is actually

willing to reach into my life into our lives, that will actually can have any meaning and and and really and any kind of belief. That's why I believe is because it's not Stu Pattern that I'm seeking to conform to its a in whose reaching out to me he spoke. So if that's the case, then why is it necessary for us to strive to be good. What role does our moral striving play because It's the same reason, I would strive to be a good husband, and not only in a generic sense that I have a certain set of of criteria that this is what defines being a good Husband isn't so, therefore I am going to act to a sort of duty bound Duty is necessary, but not sufficient. I act out of love, so I seek to be good because I love that he who who loves me,

Then again at that point duty, is it ruins the story? It ruins the relationship, its? I am loved and I wish to love- and I recognise I will fail time and time again, but I love because I love he who loves me and him. And, conversely, that's also what leads to my ultimate happiness. So I think I think one thing that's the is: could could really complete a lot of the A lot of the theological reflections- and you were more broadly is- is a conception of grace. Lot of Christianity. I see in terms of its end its and ideas in your work is a Christianity. Without grace now grace we have to define very carefully, but at the end of it, Christianity without grace is not Christianity. what distinction that might help our conversation is the distinction between a live. Faith and dead face. So for a living thing. What that is as a faith. That is,

lightened by charity and it's a faith which gods zone love, sort of works through me, because I was in me and I express Gus love to others- Now we see well, why do we need to worry about the good? I mean if, if geez, is doing all the work. Then you know I can just do whatever I want, but part of the EU who would be that for he'd have a living faith. I have to maintain that connection with God, so it's possible to just as it is with the human relationship is boss. To damage our relationship in a kind of minor way, but it also Somebody damage a relationship and really deadly way so that our friend it just over in virtue of made punching him in the face of did terrible and the zooming would be true for God that we have. This relationship has gotta. We can, but it's possible us too so damage that relationship, that we no longer have living face. The best we could have is dead face. I believe the proposition that God Exists- and you know maybe

informs me in certain ways, but basically I dont have a living faith at all, and so do the things I do can't be an expression. ultimately it my union with God that spill over into living other people. It is of a catholic view Jesus is the ultimate you might say, but the altar pattern is becomes part of our lives through being united with him. So there's different metaphor: she's been scripture, like he's divine, and you are the branches, and he is the head and you were part of his body, but other beautiful wave came about it- and I just ran across this in a book called Christ live in me by this Jesuit braced, Father David Macaroni, and it was a great kind of analogy in it. He said, imagine if God is a sort of burning furnace and then you're like the hot iron, that's putting this furnace in kind of heated up with the heat in the light, Fire gets into the iron

they take it out of the fire and it still like lit up and it still super hard because the heat is kind of gotten inside and so the Chris in view we are, this relationship and we wonder as it were, let God inside and then may God remains, ass we Don T got out and Godwin leave of his own accord. But we can keep em out through serious series wrongdoing, but only that light that fire. Makes us more alive and makes us able to give Without light in that fire to other people who are in need of the people that need guides mercy and they, then you guys help so it's just a teacher student kind of relationship that I that Jesus is deliberate. Like Socrates, livestock I love Aristotle. They are actually terrific, but there Jesus is beyond just a good teacher. Beyond just a good example, but that the life of tea This would actually live in. He knew this is called by different names. Sometimes it's called theodosius deification

define. Crises are all kind of different terms for the same idea that debate idea at that the heat in the light of God becomes part of you and then hopefully you're able to make the world about place in the about her husband, be about her father, be a better friend you better, professor You can do the things you do in a new way, because you have this this light in this. Within. You are to quote two more questions. If you don't mind, let's, let's let about the evolution issue mean. It looks to me like the story of creation and genesis, and the story of Adam and Eve is in large part, a description of the role of consciousness in being the idea. That

the beginning itself is associated with the dawn of lights. It's like the experience of the day of the morning sun. It's that things sprang into being, and so some allusion to consciousness itself there, and then the fall of Adam and Eve seems to involve something like the development of self consciousness, and so that's one way of conceptualizing creation. And the human role in it and and maybe our fallen state to some degree, as well as the corrupting influence of self consciousness of the terror that it that it generates. It's it's difficult to square that it Out, in some sense, with theories of evolution and I'm curious about how you to manage that like you're you're both and make correct me if I'm wrong. But you both except the boy.

outlines of modern cosmology, evolutionary theory and so how do you see the christian narrative. How do you see it in the end in juxtaposition with that? We never certainly problem for Darwin. I mean it it just about drove out of his mind so. So in the catholic tradition, there is a long history of reading Genesis, way that sensitive to its context. So there are some readers like seen answer, I mean seen Ambrose, who did hold for instance, it there are seven days of creation where seven twenty four hour period, most catholic interpreters, Augustine Thomas Kent. This job, while the second France's Joad, interpret it in that sort of way. So I think Genesis teaching is very, very important truce, but it's not teaching us.

About contemporary science, so I would say it's not for or against evolution is just not trying to to do. Contemporary science What is it trying to do it? Well, it's trying to teach us important truths and you having your lectures, explored a number of those important trees by, but here's another Truth, at least, I think, is quite significant in terms of either this historic, if we take it, MRS story as a poetic, and image. Refilled kind of narrative what is the point, I think, is that all beings ultimately are part of one when family that is say one on planet earth, I should treat it. if they are distantly brother or sister of mine, and if you look at some other rival stories of creation. If you look, for instance, players imposing a me as a story there that is spoken by Aristophanes Energy companies in that story says well: human beings arose from three different sources summer from the sun Semira

from the moon, some arose from the earth, and so we all come from these different places and that, on that view, right, ultimately other human beings are literally could be from a different planet and sue. You know, there's ethical consequences for that. If we took seriously the idea that all human beings are part of one his family. That is The revolutionary idea, in centuries and centuries later, that idea was developed in this idea that we still have of human rights the area of human rights is that every single human being, regardless of race, religion, it doesn't matter all human beings deserve. Fundamental respect, in other words, What's a all human beings are part of one human family were all equal in dignity, we should be respected, I think Genesis teaching is incredibly important truths like that truth, that we should respect. All human beings is part of one human family, but I do Think it's amiss. Reading of Genesis too to look too Genesis, as if it asides textbook just like? We want

two genesis, you know to again I mentioned earlier we were lifted. This is to find answers about women. by an Iphone region. By an Android phone like that Genesis is trying to do that. It's not for or against iphones, it's just not about iphones and so Genesis just isn't for or against evolution is. It is just not talking about that kind of at all. I would just say I think I think the route question, the more important question both morally and metaphysically, with her? two evolution and God, existence is. Is it existence arbitrary or not? Is life act the dental or not, Is there any way in which we can identify that the symbols and patterns that we see in the world both directly scientifically and bring in some of your thought. Jordan. Morally are those. mentally our own,

creations, our own anxious creations in order to try and cope with existing. said, is neither here nor there I had and therefore just as arbitrary as anything else or are they real, and I and I know that the question of the real is at the one hand question to answer, but on the other it's. The most important question answered: that's the real question for me with regard to abolition theory to accept them I'd contours of it? Yes, it is Saint, John Paul, the second up a previous pope has it broke in support of it. The general idea that life can involve, but The question again is: does God exists? Ended God create the universe? How that happened. The mechanism by which that took place is an incredibly one question for sight of analysis, but it's a second very question to whether or not God exists and therefore.

Is meaning purpose order in structure and existence so lab maybe will I definitely want to ask this question so. It's become increasingly difficult for the Catholic Church, perhaps in particular in the west, to attract young people. I don't think that's a statement that anyone would disagree with, but people are. Watching my biblical lectures and lots of them are young and they came to the lectures. So Why is that exactly what's going on there I mean I don't know how to understand it precisely and I can't work it out in my own mind, you're looking at it in some way. From outside what. What's the story there either

part of its just a sociological cultural question where, in the minds of many young people, perhaps most p religion is an undifferentiated mass and what religion means is basically what the Tec eternal defeatism, that you believe something that you have no rational reason to believe and you Embrace it as a matter of kind of a personal monster, but otherwise it's completely irrational. I think most young people's minds, that's the case. So the general trend we see within Catholicism is more specific trend. We see within Catholicism more and more just a general trend of people leaving religion. Why why your work has been so important for those of us who who, who are our Catholics? Is that You are showing that that's not what religion is now we can have very important highly questions about why the catholic Church hasn't been doing study, as it were a we're part of the word on Fire institute in that's that's precisely what we are seeking to do. Anthracite

the mission of of the war on Fire Institute, but or work has re, establish that connection for millions of people who have a false idea, of religion generally but two of of Christianity and Catholicism in particular, you, I think, that's right. A part of your lecture lectures, I think, are showing a dialogue between faith reason, because, obviously other you have that scientific background. Pressure of psychology, and you know about the empirical science and all kinds of things by Eurostat. These questions are fate seriously, so for us, that is really bread and butter. Part of the catholic church. so there are definite are some forms of religion, even some forms of Christianity. What a pit? against reason, as if he's in reason are in an and may fight in there going out and let you know, shook you each other out and well on our feet. It's not true on our view, God is the ultimate source of both faith and reason. So Java was set

put it in a very beautiful way. He said that The second reason are two wings that the human person uses to fly up towards the truth. The idea is that there is a kind of harmony, their different right or left wing is not seen as a right wing. These are two different things, but the are not set at odds with each other there in harmony. So you see this sort of Many in figures like a deston who wants to combine a kind of platonic philosophy. a christian wisdom, and then you find a different kind of synthesis in someone like trouble. Aquinas who wants to combine in aristotelian philosophy with a christian wisdom, and then you find a similar sort of combining in many other figures the christian tradition, John Henry Newman jump on the second etc, and so I think in a way, why waiter interpret your work as another way of bringing together. her faith and reason in this in this information in this dialogue in its early part of the work. I try to do as it professor philosophy,

many people say: oh you're, professor philosophy, you're supposed to be. You know how Debbie Catholic and I think their quest and is nonsensical. If you understand the catholic view of faith and reason, the faith and reason are not our view, you know opposed their work, gathered there in harmony and part of the intellectual adventure, I think, is, is talking about these questions at bringing these two sources into fruitful conversation. you live in a very basic sense. Faith cannot oppose reason as if God is in God, is one. Then any truth, whatever form formulation that truth is taking, it cannot be applied Stu itself is a fundamental principle. In the end, the thought of Saint Thomas Aquinas and so, statement. That would be irrational. We as Catholics would reject, but faith is Supra rational

We talk about this early in the conversation right, it there's a sense in which there is a very there's, a invisible but real foundation. To reason itself of logic and empirical observation and then there's a destination for where its headed, so that, since fate is never against reason, but it's the can for the possibility in the purpose of reason, tat part of it, you think is, is this demonstration of the coexistence and maybe the necessary coexistence with the optimal coexistence of faith? reason, but there's maybe there's another aspect to couple other aspects, and maybe this might be a consequence of the empirical revolution in human thought- is that maybe the modern church has content

created too much on emphasising the propositional at the expense of the enacted in, and I could see that happening a little bit in our conversation, so I'm trying to find places to stand that are really solid and the idea that we have an instinct to admire, and then we can extract out the pattern of admirable and that we can then day five that and assume a relationship between now and the ultimate ideal. That seems very solid to be accurate. I don't feel any

internal disunity about those propositions, that's different or about those suppositions. Let's say that's different than the claim that you know there is a god who exists outside of time and space and who created the universe that that's more like a set of statements that you need to believe, whereas the first said is a set of answers to questions that it. Buddy House, you know- and maybe that's see I was trained as a behavioral psychologist, I was trained as a cognitive, behavioral psychologists, but I concentrated more on the behavioral element: the how to help people change the way they act and to make. central, and I try to do that in my lectures is like well. You know everybody needs to know how to act. No one disputes that the audience does

tat and then figuring out how to act as a great mystery, and we all seem to be guided by our conscience and we can't escape Our conscience, even though we might like to and we all seem to have- I'm that some things are good and others are evil, and so what's good that what we should pursue and how's that represented and those are all solid quest. and there are solid religious answers to them. But then there are these more abstract propositions that seem to make. people bounce off them in young people, bounce off them because their more like a set of.

They're, like an insistence about what you must believe proposition really, rather than answers to questions about how to walk through life. Given this two questions about life, mysteries that you all have in your head and it's the latter that I'm trying to explore in addressing the lectures on- and I think that's partly why people are find them acceptable. You know they don't just bounce off them and say: well, that's religious claptrap, I'm done with that. You know and reject them the same way. They do at least Some degree no church attendance and I'm always mute, I'm always exploring a mystery with the audience. In my lectures, you don't want

I'm not telling them what I believe I dont know even telling what I believe to be true, because I'm always questioning what I believe and the reason I keep insisting on this in this conversation is because it is really is something I'm trying to solve like What is the I do believe that we are in danger of making all sorts of things religious that should be in that that's going to do our culture great damage and that, unless we put God back and gods Place and Caesar Back and Caesar's place, things are going to be grim. and the church, the classical church. The catholic church has to play a role in that, but I don't see it. I dont see a tremendous amount of evidence that that's happening among you

people. So I'm not saying that with any sense of glee. Obviously it's it's a mystery that needs to be solved, and so yeah. I think you're right that your lectures focus more on the existential on the practical and out a live this out and that's really important and in the catholic church at least part of what we do is actually offer young people. She has to do that. Separates us at every Catholic University at every Catholic perish. There all kinds of outreach. Answers all kinds of ways: we're trying to live out description message, because at the end of their think, you're right that living it out is so essential and so important, on the other hand, think when you're living out something very at least implicitly, some sort of radical view that Europe, Now, that is to say, if I live out, life of greed right, implicitly, I am saying, as it were at least

actions that either that money is the most important thing and so in a way. The theory, I think actually right. Just a theory is what I would have called earlier dead face horse and that doesn't help at all. We need living face, but I do think that a living thing it's not gonna live very long unless there at least some intellectual to do it, and the reason for that is that she would be have minds and they asked questions, and so People are asking questions, and you know my students in philosophy class and ask questions all the time, and there's no answer at all. Then I think that leaves that the practice of faith being kind of unmoored in being kind of shallow. So I thank you hundred separate like if I could see from my kids would rather have them have all kind theories and all kinds of abstract ideas and be an expert in theology and philosophy, but in their real life. They don't worry God they don't serve. People need their horrible friend, etc

or the reverse? Of course, I'd rather have them living a life of Of charity and in the virtues and being a great person, even if intellectual understanding, this sort of thing, but I do think you know, given that people ask questions and people ask oral questions. I think there's no intellectual content. What can happen or illegally? Is it it just sort of evaporate? It's right, that is to say the you you give up going. But worship you service. You give up thinking that people that are differ from you deserve fundamental respect. You sort of the practices end up going away. I think, unless there's only some intellectual substance there and then parley. And your person person like you, you are so. I'm someone who really loves to read books. I love to talk about intellectual things. For me, that's a big part of my life and there are the people who are great people who. you know they don't read books, and I don't like talking about issues in Verona. Not have if not everyone's awake, but it

there are lots of young people. Intellectual questions right. There well. How do you fit Genesis with evolution and if you just don't go. I have no idea just just believe. do that but for us as graphics. We dont we're, not furious, we don't say just believe it. There's no explanation. Will you try? to provide reasonable explanations of things. But, but I do think I do great you at the end day. Living charity is the most important and it is something that Saint Paul talked about right. If you give your body Over to be burned, if you are free to move mountains, but you Have love rate is all was so love the end of the day is the most important. I think I think important distinction here is: is its necessary and its most important they're not is the same thing so what's necessary in order for Catholicism becomes also. We must have a set, must have dogma oils,

it's. It's not anything whatsoever, so in so far as the catholic Church has dogma, we have a set of propositions that we believed many sets propositions that we believe to be true in every way that something can be true. History quickly, metaphorically little airily. Morally, all these things we believe to be true, so that's necessary for that's necessary for any group is necessary for any individual in order to have any a unified personality, so that's it absolutely necessary is the most important no no, but but that again, the most important is that dogmas as Chris has been put, it become alive, become alive. Saint Paul also puts it without without law. of you are a like a gong that that makes no sound whatsoever, and so, if one of them, the critiques that has really hit home that you that you ve also maiden in previous videos, is that Catholicism not calling these people to be heroes that that that sticks with me, I think, I think that's right

and we have within our faith, was called the doctrine of the states which have very based since just believe means that we believe that there are people just like us through have in a way that the exhibits, what a truly means to be a follower of Jesus Christ, If you look at the different kinds of saint, what you will find is vastly different kind, the personalities vastly different kinds of interest, but two things will also be present one courage and fidelity to the truth. Diversity lost all other levels, but courage, already to the true, so I do think that this is a time for courage and One of the reasons that I was so attracted to you work because of the push back that it's really push most diplomatic. Where I could say

but in any remain consistent. I see that. That's that's courage and that's a model for us as well. So a couple of comments on that so well optimally. You want the optimal pattern of action to be part of your personality, and then you want the story of your life to be concordant with that pattern of action. And then you want the propositions abstracted from that story to be concordant with the story. So then you have the intellectual and let's call it the literary and the behavioral existing in harmony with one another, and I suppose a fully developed religious system would flesh out all three levels. And you see that end in Catholicism. You have the patterns of action, you have the stories and you have the the the propositions. So I but I agree with doktor case.

that the dogma is crucial and its partly to because the rational can undermine face. You know, and we always think as modern people we think well, it faith can be undermined by rationality. Then it should be, but as a practising mission. I see how devastating that is. So I had a client, for example, who is an extraordinarily creative person, brilliant person and fundamentally a good person, but he added a very very critic rational mind, and it was always digging at his roots as long as he was an architect of an artist and as long as he was engaged in creative activity here, live, but as soon as he started to think his thinking killed them. It was so it was so brutal era. Everything was up for ground.

Everything was questionable in one you should say. While you don't take anything on faith, you know it's like well try to live like that, see what happens if that doesn't get at the problem, that the untrammelled rational, mind can be unbelievably destructive in its ability to go down.

To the depths and undermine and and destroy, and so the that protective structure that a functioning religious system offers is some protection against the against that element of untrammelled rationality, and that's also something I think, the the rationalists atheist types they just maybe they haven't had enough experience with, say seriously depressed people who have been driven to the depths of despair by a mind that just won't stop uprooting and and destroying and- and you know, that's not only a personal thing in some sense, because it's easy for you me.

one to become possessed by these destructive ideas and their very powerful, and once they are part of us, we need an answer to them. You know, and we need an answer to our most- are nihilistic doubts and what Catholicism offers. I wouldn't say uniquely, but but definitely is the consequence of thousands of years of effort at keeping that terribly destructive destroyer of necessary faith at Bay and that's also a good way to communicate it. I think, to young people. It's like look you're gonna be plagued by these existential cat

straffic existential doubts, what the hell's the point of it anyways and that's particularly the case when things aren't going well in your suffering and suffering unjust. Please like what are you going to do then? We'll here's here is how people have solved that problem. You know it's possible that were akin to daddy, in some sense that there's something transcendental important about consciousness, that you play a crucial role in the structure of existence, no one can say that for certain you know, because what the hell do we know, but it's the best we ve been able to manage in terms of what was it Milton, wasn't didn't melt right, Paradise lost. To find a way of God, the ways of God to man to Hell. ambition in some sense. That's what this entire religious endeavour

as the literary devereuxs. Well, what's the point of all this? What's the meaning of this- and you know when you think about that into two propositions early and this I also saw this in my therapy practice it's like, while what's the meaning of life, and I could easily get off on a nihilistic argument with some of my more intelligent clients, they had a rejoinder for every proposition about Life was valuable, but then, if you said to them, don't be so sure that that part of you is your friend look what it's doing. It's so destructive and it has all of itself just two arguments and they might even be coherent, but look at the consequences and then contrast that, with your own experience, wind is that sense of nihilistic despair disappear. You know for some people it's when therewith people, they love there with friends or family. Some people find it in creative activity. Some people find

in charity, our various sources of meaning and that's not propositional. You see it in your own life right. You can literally in therapy, have people track that is like, while you're nihilistic, depressed. Let's, let's watch your life for a week and see how that ebbs and flows with what you're doing and then see if we can get You participating more in what makes it ebb then, what makes it flow and that's it, common sense right. I'm not asking you to believe something. I'm asking you to watch the structure of your own reality to see where meaning manifests itself, and then you could say in some sense the sum total of we're beating manifests itself. That's where God resides,

and that relationship with God that you described has as the what would you say as that that has to be maintained by our good behavior. I suppose that's that desire to live in that space of meaning. And then you can proposition lies that you can say well, that's associated with love and its associated with courage, its associated with these classical virtues, and it's not. These things that we ve learned to deem is evil, and that's that's where you is that. Is it reasonable to say that that's where you find God if you're searching That, too, is that an appropriate way of looking at it. I think so. I met a guy. What time who He told me he went to a lecture lectures on guys existence in the guy was lecturing and then after lecture, my friend came up to him and said you know. Can you say, is bunch malarkey, there's no guidance.

Your lectures just meaningless The guy said. Okay, what I want you to do is for the next week and wants you to treat everyone that you mean as if they were Jesus in disguise, during the guy left, the lecture any went home and you know it gets home and in mind. Are doing the dishes, any thought himself. Well, if this were Jesus in disguise during the dishes, I probably go up and like my mom, do the dishes and then DEC, from work and rather ignore said, hey dad. How is how is work as you can, and you know it really Jesus in disguise. I would do that and then there, dinner together with the family and there's one hamper or left any Turnscrews This is how we want have this and the guy told me his life was completely transformed by literally one week of acting in this sort of way and thoroughly surprising that Pope Benedict talked about this in one of his hands Because at one way to God to act in this

the way to act as if Cardenas right right to act as if other people our Jesus in disguise and need a mother Greece has talked about that too- that in for her the poor, leper and the destitute we're all Jesus, in disguise, and so she serve them as if they were Jesus, and so That is one way. It seems me to move towards guy, I don't think it's the only way, though in the region is, I know, laws for Alister Mcintyre, who mentioned to us and class one day that he was atheist until he carefully studied the arguments for gods existence, so there are at least some people released. One person, Alister Macintyre, who really did come got to that way, but I think that more common way is through lived practice. Looked action you brought up the cases of severe depression and It is the case, of course, that you can make a profoundly coherent, are

humans of four, why your life is meaningless and why meaning? There is just a vast nullity to all. Existence the question is: are they coherent? The question is: are they true? The question is: are the premises right because anything can be go here within all premises, that Is it the case that your life is worth nothing and the answer has to be? No that's a false statement. It's a fact sat Prevention of Rio. Look what happens if you act out, of course fully, and then you could say well nigh be doing some if within within that the groups of depression, you'd still be thing you then I am acting according to a good, given the premises that I have about the meaninglessness of my own life and end of all life. So I think that foundation which gives got back the same question. The foundation of truth must be there Then the next thing to say is not that you are wrong about your life, be meaningless as a false statement, but that also loved. You are loved and its adding that

the kind of thing at least my own experience that can take you out of it. Is that your life is not about you and your own thoughts zone, you in the systems that you are building ultimate when you are in response to something much greater than you and that's it. Its greater than you is looking at you and calling you out insane. I love you so it's not it's any either or it's not well. What's true propositional about the nature existence, and is there a soul, its it is and I'm calling you, which is a universal call for us as Catholics. This exercise that you described doctor. I believe that When we see other people, except under very extraordinary circumstances, we see

An illusion that we project upon them, mostly it's a simplifying illusion. We don't see the whole person party, I suppose, because we we couldn't tolerate the complete vision. It would be too much for us, you know so our door. Of perception or three quarters closed in exactly why that isn't obvious. But I do Leave that the more accurately you perceive a person, the more you perceive them in the manner that you described. You see this eternal recurring, conscious, hero striving against the darkness its and when you treat people like that course, there.

What compelled by that, it's a compelling way to be interacted with, although I don't know what it is that, maybe it's not obvious. How much of that you can tolerate, which is a very strange thing to know I'm thinking about this most of what we perceive as our memory and sometimes that stripped away, and we see what's there but seeing what's there is ass, awe inspiring it's it's gripping and ended instills terror and I think that's the same- is burning Bush and in some sense everything is a burning bush, but you, blinded to it the. You you see what's there

When you really love someone a child you really see that in a child, if you, if you're apparent right, you see, you don't see a generic baby. You see that actual person, so that memory that pushes generic baby into your field of vision, dissipates and you see what's actually there and that love drives that I imagine it does that it love seems to go. We sought when people fall in love with one another. They see the perfection that could conceivably exist. It's like the curtains of of illusion, pull apart momentarily and you see the paradise state that could be there hypothetically. If everything was done properly that drives the love and then maybe, if you work across time, you can achieve that to some degree you know cause other people think about themselves is deluded when they're in love and

That's a very cynical way of looking at. It certainly doesn't apply to the love between apparent and child. He, I think I think, you're right I mean I know in my life having children has been such an unbelievably enriching experience, and I think about especially when kids are little and they're asleep Go in there and there to sleeping and it's you their little chest, moving up and down, there's some painfully beautiful about that. I mean I just wish I could go on just indefinitely and. For me, that is something that I me to about about God's love, God really is God the Father, Well, then, you know we sort of how it looks at us and he sees the good. He sees the effort and you have, sure its imperfections too, but I do know it for me having

Children is a kind of it. I tried it so my students, most Don't have kids. What it's like and is hard to describe the best where I came up with, was remember when you were little child like six and is odd boys have who these girls are crazy idea of romance or kissing someone's just repulsive, and then you know You can imagine to explain to a six year old, look at some point can someone else and just fine, this person, unbelievably captivating and you're gonna, want use them, then you can see the words my little kids, like all, with no way that that's hard to describe and anything becoming apparent is similar to that in that yeah, seems to me it is so enriching that and is given so much at least to my life in including calling out something for me that would have never been elicited. Is there's gonna, be

suffice to say you do for a kid. They you'll never do for you know it all so that that's interesting ties in with this. This idea that you brought forward of treating everybody as if they were manifestation of Christ. You see that meaningful fragility in your children and it's beautiful, and maybe if here, if you ve, been warped and hurt you get resentful about it in and jealous of it, and that can lead to all sorts of terrible things, but to a degree that you can get your privilege to see that that calls you to be a better person, and you can think of that you know biologically. Well, you have these fragile creatures that you're responsible for, of course, that's good.

Call you to a higher motive action, because otherwise they are not going to live. You know so its third practical, but so then, but what you see there is, if that, if you view someone with love, then its incumbent upon you to treat them as if their valuable and then the more you treat other people as if their valuable debate a person you are tat, just comes along for the ride in some sense, so none that seems questionable to me that that seem solid, and so then maybe the more the more love you view. Other people with higher the moral demands placed on you, and then I would say to them. That's another reason why it is so important to be truthful in and in some sense to be good because it isn't obvious to me that you can withstand that moral load if you're compromised by

too much sin it's too much and that's another thing that we're not very good at teaching young people about? You know we shouldn't do that. You know it's like theirs sanctimonious authority that goes along with that? That's throng tone, it's more like. You know, I don't know how you laid out properly, but you tell people that you love. How do you avoid the road to hell? And you don't do that, because just making your finger at them or because you're moral authority. You do it because you don't want them to burn.

I think there is too much of the Moral Authority steel in the church and not enough of the you know the love that helps people avoid the fire I think that you just beautifully described is that the unity of the love commandment, that you love your with all your heart and all you're. So in all your mind- and you love your neighbour as yourself, along the love of God, identifies the pact. And then the interplay between the love of the neighbour and the love of the self there there in extraordinary their differentiated but inextricably intertwined you're. So to do, of the neighbour, is to see the neighbour as he or she actually is, and to respond to the actual. Had he not to your desires, not to what you want this person to be in a utilitarian instrumental sense, but to the reality of that each also right there in it through that, then you see who you are

A commentary on the ten commandments right, that's Christ, summation the ten commandments. So that's another another illustration of that abstraction, proper behaviour, the story on top of that, the proposition that would be the ten commandments, let's say so, then Christ is challenged on the ten something like rain quarter these, if you're so wise That is because you're going to say something heretical rice. Does this unbelievable sleight of mind and and extract out to super ordinance principles? And it's done in such a compelling way that the interlocutor, whose basically a prosecutor, your mind I got an inquisition is in some sense, is due to silence, that's that's a very powerful story. It's one of those stories. You read that you think it's not

obvious how someone could have made that up. There's lot of genius theirs, men's well of me, oral genius in that story and the idea that that some sort of casual false construct produce purposes of power cycle you try to write a story that short that that that is, that wise see how far you get with it. So. yeah knows those stories are all over the gospel swimming. Think about the story where the woman is cotton, adultery and they say Jesus. Well, you know the law says we should stoner to death in it. What do you say and they're trying to trap of worse because if he says well, don't stone to death and they say while you're against Moses, I you're a religious heretic and then, if you go ahead for the stones and he's going against his message of mercy but Jesus if says very famously let whoever

as the first sin, cast them first airway. Whoever has no sin, cast the first stone and Everyone has to drop their stones and go away him, and then he says to her, of course go say no more so than that story. You think you have to have quite an imagination you can have literary genius to come up with this and I think it's important in part, because Christ combines both right, that is to say, we have the command, and the commandment say not committed artery is therefore reason. I'm sure you know from your kind a practice that that can cause unbelievable problems for couples and families. but he also has the mercy so geez combines the high command Ask your sin with this, hi mercy and in a way with the churches seeking to do always imperfectly, because we're perfect, but but both need to be there. There needs to be the moral

the high oil calling, but also the great mercy, both cuz I one without the other is gonna be unbalanced, and the high moral calling again is for our own good. the law is a form of grace. This is how we flourish. This is how we become happy now, of course, we fail which springs and the mercy component, but that's another terrible misconstrued. Of religion broadly and specifically. Christianity, thoughtlessness is that so how these rules were we're premised on on control or power, as their motivating reason for existence at the exact opposite, it's to liberate.

to liberate us from ourselves. I guess it's. The other thing that that seems to have worked in my lectures is like a lot of this part of the work I've done was motivated by my attempts. I supposed to understand hell and then more than that's like. How is it you an active contributor to hail, and you might say well hell, isn't real. I would say that. Well, you haven't looked enough. Do you think that's true your fortune enough, so that you can believe? That's not true slick. You know nothing about history and you ve been unbelievably sheltered in your own life. If you don't leave that hell is real and you know, maybe only someone cruel would wish that that ignorance be stripped away from you. But if you study history as a perpetrator, well, then

If you study history, you believe and Helen, if you study history as a perpetrator, then you see how your own inequity contributes to that and then its on reasonable to say: well, if you love people, you would try to guide them away from that and when I did my maps of meaning lectures at the university and in public, that's always at the back of my mind, it's well look at what happened in Germany. Look what happened in the Soviet Union look what happened in China and how do you act so that that happens? Well, I I wouldn't make that happens like if you say that, then you would Because you don't know enough, gits cause, if you

you you'd say? Yes, I could contribute to that and I probably am- and I should be terrified enough to stop if I only knew how and then these guidelines to love and to tell the truth, they are in fact protection against exactly that kind of catastrophe. Yeah, I think it's true, not only in those very dramatic examples of how, like the gulag, is true in really everyday sense. I mean yes hell. Can start here on earth in a very everyday sort of way, so I think somebody now that I know my block in this person is incredibly anger. yet everyone, even people who try to help this person, she she's always angry at them and she's filled with hatred and bitterness and everything bad and, and so this person. I would say she is already living in Hell, the beginning of hell. least here on earth. I mean her life, as far as I can do, is just really really help

in every respect and men and people in contact with her. She makes their life hellish very often and versus true to their can be people here now who are already living in beginnings of Heaven? There filters let forgot their voters left for other people themselves, the there living this heavenly life, because at the end of the day, at least on the catholic view, what is Heaven what what happen is perfect, love of God, perfect love of other people, perfect love of yours and what is hell? What's the opposite of it's, a lack of all that right is lacking love of God lacking left rather people lacking lever yourself, it's been filled with hatred, so Heaven and hell. I would say, really begin right now and in the light to come, I think either intensified their deepened so in this is division of Dante right that that no, I haven't, or how is something that all of this planet its remit to show that the sin is its own, punishment in some respect right, all the punishment sets

The people in our experience are all natural outgrowth of their own baby, the Europe alone, and we see this in everyday life with, for instance, people that you know and up destroying their relationships, destroying their families. In the end up isolated alone and get living, this sort of existence but unfortunately, in those kids, they are as where their own worst enemy, yet I think they can expect today ear insights into the morality as well. In that way, it is marketable just in cultural sense that that your work with rules in the title. Twelve of them two books has garnered the audience there's. Obviously, A letter has obviously a profound hunger cross culturally cross, linguistically for what you are saying and what you are saying is about the necessity of rules

they want what we have here, as we now have a couple generations that have been liberated from rules and we get to see What that actually looks like in practice- and it's it's not just the possibility. of these external forms of hell. It actually is that, but the internal forms of Hellas as well. Pressure and anxiety, I can't think of any greater hell, then being in the grip of of of severe Russian and severe anxiety in the worst thing that you can tell somebody in that position is due whatever you want and invent anything according to your own, fancy is poison, so the fact that their there are rules and that these rules correspond with reality and therefore our good and for our happiness I think just speaks again. To tell the necessity of the rules, but the fact that we are

called something greater and when we stop that call hell begins to take over soul by soul can have their directions if you're lost in your turn to get somewhere in someone provides you with directions. You have to turn right at a certain point. It left a desert point and you dont say: well, to hell with these rules. You thank God for that, because you know how wander off the path and then where. Well, I end up at the least lost and so yeah. That's all right. So I want to close with one more question: if that's ok, let's you guys have something else you want to about what are you doing right at fire? What's Workin Edward on fire yeah? What what's working, I think the m on a lot of it. I would say in sort of follows the contours of conversation that we ve had

the rules. Are there, the dogmatic clarity? Is there the arguments? Are there the the price positions and the defence of those propositions is all there, so there's no apologetic foundation to it. So it's necessary, but again not the most important one of we're on fires, ways of describing the work that it does is. It is acting at that section of faith in culture and leading with beauty, so the again there's theological reasoning. If God exists, then is the unity of all that is good. All that is true in all that is beautiful, and these are mutually exclusive. You don't you know to choose one or the other. So the. The mission of of this apostle, it is too without any Integration of the importance of truth is to lead with beauty and end with that. To reopen the eyes of the culture to the possibility of being happy.

And in living a life that is genuinely Enchanted in a normal the real sense working. Are you seeing results. I think so I think so so you know where I saw on fire very closely in terms of their the materials they produce and benefit from them in and enjoy them a lot, and I think part of the six is the distinctive workers. Bishop robber. Baron may think that he is to be credited, his own way is only intellectual way of putting it and is winning hum way of. Persuading I think this is very. Very Our foreign is seen seen great result, so so I am very grateful to be connected with it we're on fire. As I say, not only do isn't as british content for them, but also benefit personally from listening to is

outcasts, Miss sermons, etc. So it's been a real benefit for me. I'm gonna be talking to him a couple of days, long with Jonathan Peggy Sue and job vacancy. So I am very much looking forward to that. An extension of this conversation, I suppose so it is there anything that we didn't talk about, that you think is vital. That we should talk about one thing I wanted to ask you in and encourage you really would be it if at some point you could carry out the and that you ve talked about before giving pictures, exodus and Irene Has given covert restrictions at things like that, maybe it's it's impossible right now to read out a huge place, etc, but I want if you could even just do it, the video right that you you know, or even to a very small group. I think that

elections are Genesis, we're such a huge benefit for literally millions of people, and I think that lecturing and exits which in some ways is an even more gripping story even its very dramatic. I think that to be ignored benefit many many people so anyway, just when I was wondering, if you are, meaning I doing that or if you'd be willing, may be given covert and restrictions. Maybe. do it in a different formats, slightly differently needed before I'm trying to figure out how to do it. I've had a lot of health trouble and it's got in the way in a big way. I'm trying to figure out how to do it and figured if I can do it. It's not obvious to me what I'm capable of doing and what I can do so, but it's definitely something I would love to do I mean I have their ideas. Were I do let them intellectual, obviously, but I would love to do it, so God willing and all that.

I will. I will just send with earlier statement. I suppose is I m sure you already know this, but there are many believers like ourselves, who who are who are praying for you, and who are so grateful for the work that you are doing, what whatever your personal beliefs are, and how are you worked out which so grateful for your voice on the international stage and the kinds of of arguments that you're making a big in the kinds of appeals to to becoming better individually and socially as communities you are a light in the darkness for for many people and again I am saying as a believer fourth in the christian community, looking out at someone who is not They mean to be a Christian I'm, but I just want you to

That, though we are praying for you in that we wish you all the best very much appreciate it very much appreciated. So I hope that I can- and I really hope that I can do these sex it this nexus. it would be something so I'm working out a way to do it, and we have a group of people, maybe they're not going to talk to exodus about. I might just record those discussions like this will walk through it with some people who can help comment. So I think I might be able to manage that we'll see.

Thank you very much, gentlemen, and for the attention that you showed me in the book and all of that and for the work you doing with we're, don't fire and hopefully will get a chance to talk again, we'll see what people think of this conversation see what they might hear more about or less about. So thank you, Jordan! Beg you Jane. You are right by by.