WEBVTT 00:00:00.540 --> 00:00:02.880 It is the 10th of July, 2026. 00:00:03.060 --> 00:00:04.160 I am Corey J. 00:00:04.160 --> 00:00:06.500 Moller, and this is At Any Cost. 00:00:06.500 --> 00:00:10.600 This is episode 35, a Q&A episode. 00:00:10.960 --> 00:00:19.920 I don't really have any housekeeping, so I'll just get straight into the questions, except I will briefly mention, for any eagle-eyed viewers, you notice I have a red line across my face. 00:00:20.520 --> 00:00:22.340 I was wearing a hat working in the garden. 00:00:22.340 --> 00:00:26.560 So, just to head off any potential questions about that. 00:00:27.500 --> 00:00:32.420 It's very warm here during the day right now, and I am mostly bald, so hats are a must. 00:00:34.460 --> 00:00:45.980 Let's see, question one is from the forum, and then I'll go to questions from the chat or wherever else, maybe get into some of the backlog. 00:00:47.620 --> 00:00:49.620 The angel of the Lord in numbers. 00:00:49.620 --> 00:00:56.100 Is the angel of the Lord who appears before Balaam to slay him with the sword on the way to Moab Jesus? 00:00:56.600 --> 00:01:05.320 And so, this has come up a number of times, this topic, but the angel of the Lord sometimes in the Old Testament is Christ. 00:01:05.500 --> 00:01:08.940 Sometimes it may not be Christ, it may just be an angel. 00:01:09.180 --> 00:01:24.600 And basically, how you can tell the difference is if a human being interacts with the angel of the Lord in a worshipful way by worshiping the angel of the Lord or the angel if he is God, those are the two ways you can pretty much tell it's Jesus. 00:01:25.080 --> 00:01:34.300 And I already know the answer to this one because I know the passage well, but I'll pull it up in numbers and read it just because it's good to actually read the text. 00:01:34.480 --> 00:01:36.280 So, let me pull up. 00:01:38.420 --> 00:01:41.440 And that, of course, number is 22. 00:01:43.000 --> 00:01:44.740 I think the nets will be fine for this. 00:01:51.342 --> 00:01:54.842 So, let us start with, let's see. 00:02:02.602 --> 00:02:04.062 We'll start with verse 22. 00:02:05.302 --> 00:02:10.062 And God was angry with wrath because he went, and the angel of the Lord rose up to oppose him. 00:02:10.242 --> 00:02:14.182 And he himself was sitting on his donkey, and his two servants were with him. 00:02:14.582 --> 00:02:24.002 And when the donkey saw the angel of God standing opposed in the road, and the sword drawn, then the donkey turned away from the road and kept going into the plain. 00:02:24.382 --> 00:02:27.562 And he struck the donkey with his rod to direct it in the road. 00:02:27.962 --> 00:02:32.862 And the angel of God stood in the furrows of the vineyards, a fence here and a fence there. 00:02:33.182 --> 00:02:41.862 And when the donkey saw the angel of God, it pressed itself against the wall and squeezed by the wall, and he added to whip it again. 00:02:42.302 --> 00:02:49.382 And the angel of God proceeded and went on and stood still in a narrow place, in which it was not possible to turn right or left. 00:02:49.742 --> 00:02:57.362 And when the donkey saw the angel of God, it settled down under Balaam, and Balaam was angered and kept beating the donkey with the rod. 00:02:57.782 --> 00:03:04.782 And God opened the mouth of the donkey and said to Balaam, What have I done to you that you have struck me this third time? 00:03:05.082 --> 00:03:11.942 And Balaam said to the donkey, Because you have mocked me, and if I had a dagger in my hand, I would already have stabbed you. 00:03:12.362 --> 00:03:18.582 And the donkey said to Balaam, Am I not your donkey, on which you would ride from your youth to this very day? 00:03:20.362 --> 00:03:21.682 What have I done to you? 00:03:22.342 --> 00:03:23.942 And he said, No. 00:03:26.142 --> 00:03:35.842 Now God uncovered the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of God standing opposed in the road and a dagger drawn in his hand, and he bowed down and did obeisance to his face. 00:03:36.222 --> 00:03:40.742 And the angel of God said to him, Why have you struck your donkey this time? 00:03:41.062 --> 00:03:46.242 And behold, I came out to oppose you, because your way was not pretty before me. 00:03:47.182 --> 00:03:49.342 And I'll stop there because that gives us our answer. 00:03:49.342 --> 00:03:56.362 And for those who are wondering, the word pretty there, I'll pull it up in the lexem, so we can just look at that. 00:03:57.882 --> 00:03:59.182 Let's see. 00:04:00.642 --> 00:04:13.382 Lexem translates it as appropriate, which the word there is indeed a styos, which can mean pretty or handsome in the Greek, but really in this case, it's more in the sense of good or right or appropriate. 00:04:14.142 --> 00:04:16.682 The nets just decides to translate it as pretty. 00:04:16.782 --> 00:04:21.382 But the Angel of the Lord says that they are not worthy of being called before Him. 00:04:22.042 --> 00:04:24.202 So, He's speaking as God. 00:04:24.202 --> 00:04:24.982 This is God. 00:04:24.982 --> 00:04:27.922 This is Christ here in this particular case. 00:04:27.922 --> 00:04:34.782 And that's how you can go through these instances in the Old Testament and figure out if it is Christ or just an angel. 00:04:35.262 --> 00:04:43.542 And the reason that you have Angel of the Lord is serving as the messenger here of God's message. 00:04:43.542 --> 00:04:46.782 He's God Himself, but He's also serving in the role as the messenger. 00:04:47.062 --> 00:04:51.362 And of course, the underlying word there for angel is just messenger in the Greek. 00:04:51.362 --> 00:05:00.302 So, they made a translation choice, and I would say it should be capitalized in the cases where it's very obviously Christ. 00:05:00.302 --> 00:05:01.142 Just didn't do that. 00:05:01.142 --> 00:05:03.462 The nets, like I said before, is kind of academic. 00:05:03.462 --> 00:05:05.482 They do some things that are a little weird here and there. 00:05:07.302 --> 00:05:10.202 But the brief answer to the question is yes, that's Christ. 00:05:12.342 --> 00:05:17.982 So much for the pacifist Christ that some modern Christians would prefer since he's here with a sword in his hand. 00:05:23.660 --> 00:05:27.180 Question two is on the resurrection. 00:05:28.400 --> 00:05:35.760 And I did not have time to go through these before I started streaming today, so I'm reading them for the first time along with all of you. 00:05:37.580 --> 00:05:41.300 Hello, Corey, I am 25 year old man from St. 00:05:41.300 --> 00:05:42.000 Louis, Missouri. 00:05:42.000 --> 00:05:44.620 I recently lost my dog and one of my guinea pigs. 00:05:44.620 --> 00:05:51.360 My mother was told in church long ago, when she was a child, that animals don't go to heaven, and that has affected her. 00:05:51.400 --> 00:05:55.140 She is Christian, but I believe others have been told this and are wounded spiritually. 00:05:55.640 --> 00:05:58.740 I want to know the church's teaching on heaven and the final resurrection. 00:05:58.740 --> 00:06:01.500 Will everything be restored to life? 00:06:01.980 --> 00:06:04.080 And human beings are judged. 00:06:04.080 --> 00:06:10.880 Does Christ's triumph over death mean that death is destroyed utterly in the second coming, and its consequences are undone? 00:06:11.160 --> 00:06:17.480 Does behold, I am making everything new, according to Revelation, apply to everything that has ever existed. 00:06:17.800 --> 00:06:21.260 I have read Paul's writings of the resurrection in 1544. 00:06:21.340 --> 00:06:22.740 It is sown a natural body. 00:06:22.740 --> 00:06:24.280 It is raised a spiritual body. 00:06:24.580 --> 00:06:27.180 If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 00:06:27.400 --> 00:06:30.900 And it would comfort me and millions of believers to know that we would see our animals again. 00:06:32.240 --> 00:06:36.320 So scripture does not explicitly state one way or the other. 00:06:36.320 --> 00:06:37.780 I'll go ahead and start there. 00:06:40.260 --> 00:06:47.000 But scripture does not explicitly state, and yet we can draw out what we should actually believe about them. 00:06:47.100 --> 00:06:51.100 I do believe that animals will be there in the resurrection. 00:06:51.120 --> 00:06:52.920 And I know there's a little bit of a light on my face. 00:06:52.920 --> 00:06:58.900 The sun came out from behind the clouds, and I haven't installed my new blackout curtain yet. 00:07:03.560 --> 00:07:07.620 That which is good cannot be destroyed because destroying it is evil. 00:07:07.640 --> 00:07:10.140 And so, God does not destroy that which is good. 00:07:10.140 --> 00:07:26.060 Incidentally, this is the reason that hell is eternal, because annihilation can't be true because to destroy the human essence in terms of what he actually is would be evil because that would be destroying something that is good. 00:07:26.060 --> 00:07:28.220 So, God cannot destroy something that is good. 00:07:28.500 --> 00:07:30.180 To speak in human terms, of course. 00:07:30.900 --> 00:07:32.940 I think the same thing holds for animals. 00:07:32.940 --> 00:07:34.820 God's creation is good. 00:07:35.020 --> 00:07:47.260 He will restore them to what they should have been, to what he intended that they won't have the problems they have here in time, they won't be mortal, all of the various things that plague us here and now. 00:07:47.260 --> 00:07:50.100 I had a dog that died of cancer, one of my golden retrievers. 00:07:50.500 --> 00:07:56.240 I believe that I'll see him again, and he won't get cancer again, and he won't die again, because all things will be made new. 00:07:56.740 --> 00:08:03.720 And we can also see this in how the Old Testament scripture speaks about the resurrection, the restoration of all things. 00:08:03.720 --> 00:08:10.840 First, it's the restoration of all things, which certainly includes animals, plants, everything else in God's creation. 00:08:11.380 --> 00:08:27.660 And you see in many places, in the Old Testament and elsewhere, creation itself is spoken of as groaning, desiring, or celebrating the restoration of all things, and God making all things new, making things good again. 00:08:28.480 --> 00:08:38.400 There are times where you'll see individuals in the Old Testament saying, this rock is going to testify against you because it has hurt everything you swore you would do for God and then you didn't. 00:08:38.600 --> 00:08:42.420 You can think of Joshua at the end of the Book of Joshua doing that. 00:08:43.240 --> 00:08:47.960 So, all of creation will be renewed, and I think that does include our animals. 00:08:47.960 --> 00:08:49.080 I firmly believe that. 00:08:49.080 --> 00:08:55.340 Like I said, it's not explicitly stated in scripture, but I believe that we can draw that out from what scripture actually does say. 00:08:55.840 --> 00:09:05.480 And I think that ultimately, those who are Gnostic in their beliefs, they don't really believe in paradise. 00:09:05.480 --> 00:09:14.400 They believe that we're going to spend eternity in heaven, some spiritual realm with God, and that's not what we're made to do, because we are not just a soul. 00:09:14.940 --> 00:09:17.760 We are body and soul and also mind. 00:09:17.900 --> 00:09:19.380 Not to get into that topic right now. 00:09:21.420 --> 00:09:35.920 Our final destination, our eternity is spent in the new creation, and that will be a renewed version of this creation, because this creation still is a shadow of what God wanted it to be. 00:09:36.220 --> 00:09:40.100 It's not something totally alien, something totally different. 00:09:40.240 --> 00:09:45.140 So, we will have a perfected creation in which we will spend eternity. 00:09:45.700 --> 00:09:51.420 And certainly that includes animals and plants and everything, since God made those, they're good, and He wants them to exist. 00:09:52.280 --> 00:09:59.100 So yes, I do believe that we'll get to see our dogs again, without all the problems that some of them have. 00:09:59.100 --> 00:10:06.540 I've had a lot of problems, so other than the one that got cancer and the fact that they're all mortal, they haven't really had or caused any problems. 00:10:09.000 --> 00:10:23.440 Other than Gizmo, of course, for anyone who follows me on various places and sees the Gizmo updates, he is the only other than I inherited one other non-golden I've ever acquired intentionally. 00:10:27.960 --> 00:10:30.660 Question 3 is about miscegenation. 00:10:36.438 --> 00:10:41.178 If someone is half African and half European, should they marry an African or a European? 00:10:41.198 --> 00:10:46.598 Does this decision depend upon if the person, the mixed person in this case, is male or female? 00:10:47.238 --> 00:10:55.178 My typical advice is that you follow the father's line as a general overall rule. 00:10:55.838 --> 00:11:01.358 However, in the case of half African, half European, you have to follow the father's line. 00:11:01.358 --> 00:11:06.078 And I see this is started making the rounds on X and some other places. 00:11:06.478 --> 00:11:15.538 The genetic distance, and there are various different ways you can measure genetic distance, and this is very commonly used in animal studies, for instance, and human beings are animals, right? 00:11:15.718 --> 00:11:17.658 Our physical body is mammalian. 00:11:17.878 --> 00:11:19.098 You can use the same tools. 00:11:20.738 --> 00:11:29.118 Genetic distance between Europeans and Africans is greater than that between like a wolf and a domestic dog. 00:11:29.858 --> 00:11:30.818 It's a big difference. 00:11:31.618 --> 00:11:38.058 So it's something that you'd even be tempted to call a difference in species under some circumstances. 00:11:38.398 --> 00:11:45.238 I don't prefer to use more of the classical definition of species, which essentially, I know that there are edge cases. 00:11:45.238 --> 00:11:48.618 So before someone comments on it in the chat, I'm aware of the edge cases. 00:11:49.058 --> 00:11:58.998 But the classical definition is if two individuals can reproduce and the offspring is itself fertile, then they are the same species. 00:12:00.238 --> 00:12:04.798 Definition, recognize that these definitions are human inventions. 00:12:05.198 --> 00:12:10.018 So kind of like verse numbers and chapter numbers in scripture, we've added these things. 00:12:10.838 --> 00:12:16.018 God created the types, and within those types, then you have subtypes and things like that. 00:12:16.018 --> 00:12:22.098 For our purposes, we've created terms and a hierarchy that for us to categorize and deal with things. 00:12:22.778 --> 00:12:29.558 But in the case, to get back to the question, in the case of someone who is half African and half European, I would say go with the African line. 00:12:30.218 --> 00:12:40.118 Because by and large, those differences are so significant, it is going to be difficult for that individual to fit into European society, into a European society. 00:12:40.598 --> 00:12:43.678 And the person is always going to feel like a bit of an outcast. 00:12:43.678 --> 00:12:46.118 It's going to be true in the African context as well. 00:12:46.438 --> 00:12:51.658 The difference being, in the African context, you're going to be the top of the pile, right? 00:12:52.098 --> 00:12:54.778 You are going to be in the upper echelons of society. 00:12:55.218 --> 00:13:05.398 You're going to be the one who gets to rule over the others, and be in easier position to deal with the consequences of your parents' decisions. 00:13:05.738 --> 00:13:09.418 Not saying the questioner in this case is necessarily the one, but ask in the hypothetical. 00:13:11.058 --> 00:13:18.598 Probably going to be an easier case to deal with that when you are at the top of the pile because of it, than at the bottom. 00:13:19.018 --> 00:13:29.098 So, for various reasons, some other ones as well, someone who is half African and half European should marry back into Ham's line and continue on with that. 00:13:35.013 --> 00:13:38.693 Question four, I guess, is kind of tangentially related. 00:13:38.733 --> 00:13:41.113 My stand on living fossils. 00:13:41.113 --> 00:13:48.953 Where do you stand on reports of dinosaurs living in Central Africa and Papua New Guinea, or any other so-called living fossils? 00:13:49.153 --> 00:13:53.613 So this is sort of a specific use of the term living fossils. 00:13:53.613 --> 00:14:05.653 The more common use of that specific term refers to animals that are very supposedly in the constructed timeline of Earth's past, and yet still exist. 00:14:06.033 --> 00:14:09.733 So that's what someone usually calls a living fossil, like crocodiles, or living fossil. 00:14:09.733 --> 00:14:11.473 You know, they haven't changed in a very long time. 00:14:12.233 --> 00:14:14.433 So part of that is Darwinian evolution. 00:14:14.433 --> 00:14:15.973 Part of it's wrong, part of it's right. 00:14:16.053 --> 00:14:17.333 I've gotten into that before. 00:14:19.133 --> 00:14:24.693 This is like cryptids, or the equivalent of, I guess, natural cryptids, as it were. 00:14:25.233 --> 00:14:30.533 Creatures that are sort of out of time, according to that timeline, but yet living. 00:14:31.133 --> 00:14:36.493 I don't think there really are many, if any, living in, say, the jungles and things like that. 00:14:36.493 --> 00:14:39.473 Most of those would have died in the flood, just as a practical matter. 00:14:40.273 --> 00:14:47.233 Thing that was out of the ordinary and survived that, humans would have hunted to extinction because it kept killing them in the night. 00:14:47.673 --> 00:14:49.393 That's why there are no lions in Europe now. 00:14:49.733 --> 00:14:50.873 There were lions in Europe. 00:14:51.233 --> 00:14:53.333 There aren't because they kept killing people in their beds. 00:14:53.773 --> 00:15:01.893 So, as far as this kind of, I guess, type of, maybe there's some in the ocean. 00:15:02.393 --> 00:15:06.373 We've explored vanishingly little of the ocean, and we have no idea what's down there. 00:15:06.593 --> 00:15:16.993 We just recently, relatively speaking, figured out that colossal squid are actually a thing, and that the sailors who were telling these tales of squid that destroyed ships weren't lying. 00:15:17.493 --> 00:15:19.713 In some cases, they were exaggerating a little, but not. 00:15:20.413 --> 00:15:29.793 So, there could be all sorts of weird stuff hanging out in the ocean, the deep parts, because we haven't mapped at all, and we certainly don't have live video feeds in the entirety of the ocean. 00:15:30.393 --> 00:15:33.833 But as far as land creatures go, I'm pretty sure most of those are just dead. 00:15:34.773 --> 00:15:38.353 I don't think there's anything too particularly interesting hanging out in the forest. 00:15:41.093 --> 00:15:51.893 And I've spoken before, anyone who does sort of tangentially related to your question, anyone who does a lot of camping, hiking, etc., you will eventually run into something weird in the forest. 00:15:52.853 --> 00:15:56.093 And sometimes it's an animal whose call you don't recognize. 00:15:56.753 --> 00:15:58.853 Sometimes it's something else. 00:16:01.613 --> 00:16:18.893 The best advice I can give you is, anytime you go on camping or hiking forums or anything like that and talk to people, you'll notice that there's a pretty significant number of individuals who have said, I felt weird and I turned around. 00:16:20.333 --> 00:16:23.293 I still haven't seen anyone say I felt weird and I kept going. 00:16:25.033 --> 00:16:26.753 I think the takeaway from that's pretty obvious. 00:16:26.753 --> 00:16:32.953 So, you know, God gave you some amount of common sense, just make sure to exercise it. 00:16:34.893 --> 00:16:39.513 There are big animals in the woods, even if there's no cryptid or anything like that, bears exist. 00:16:40.273 --> 00:16:45.473 Bears are dangerous, even the black bears that are less dangerous than certainly grizzlies. 00:16:45.473 --> 00:16:50.133 I don't prefer hiking in places that have grizzlies, even though they're beautiful. 00:16:51.293 --> 00:16:55.793 Although bear spray works, always carry bear spray. 00:16:56.433 --> 00:16:57.733 Bear spray works better than a gun. 00:16:58.333 --> 00:17:02.793 So tangential advice, but it works for this. 00:17:05.453 --> 00:17:09.093 Get into some of the questions from the chat here. 00:17:10.293 --> 00:17:18.753 Someone asked about some verses that the Aryans used historically to try to justify things, so I'll go ahead and copy that. 00:17:24.073 --> 00:17:26.133 It says, I am new to the faith. 00:17:26.133 --> 00:17:34.233 My question, in light of 1 Corinthians 8, 6, 1 Corinthians 11, 3, and John 1, 18, how are these not Aryanistic? 00:17:34.533 --> 00:17:37.073 Could you explain the exegesis and philosophy there? 00:17:37.433 --> 00:17:42.473 So, I know which verse is the best one to even pull them up, but I'll pull them up so we can all look at them. 00:17:43.493 --> 00:17:55.553 There are times in Scripture and in the early Church where you see many of the references being to God the Father, and Jesus the Son, and sometimes they leave off the Holy Spirit. 00:17:55.553 --> 00:17:57.533 They don't always speak of the Trinity in full. 00:17:57.933 --> 00:18:10.573 In some cases, they emphasize the position of God and Father, and so they'll use God instead of saying Father, and they'll speak of the Son, and they'll speak of the Son as Lord instead of God. 00:18:11.073 --> 00:18:17.153 They're not saying that Jesus isn't God, because there are plenty of places that explicitly say Jesus is God, right? 00:18:18.053 --> 00:18:19.473 Not only that, but Jesus is I. 00:18:21.233 --> 00:18:35.453 So, not all of these places are going to be sort of high level or rigorous doctrinal examinations, because some of this stuff is telling you about the faith. 00:18:35.473 --> 00:18:38.933 Speaking about the faith, but it's not a theology textbook in all cases. 00:18:40.593 --> 00:18:45.513 You have to know scripture in context, which is always the rule here. 00:18:45.513 --> 00:18:46.453 So, let me pull this up. 00:18:47.513 --> 00:18:50.773 The first one is 1 Corinthians 8, 6. 00:18:55.913 --> 00:19:01.773 So, 1 Corinthians 8, 6, and for some reason, has decided to shrink. 00:19:01.813 --> 00:19:03.353 So, let me fix that. 00:19:05.033 --> 00:19:07.133 Make it easier for all of you to read. 00:19:11.093 --> 00:19:21.833 Yet for us, there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and for whom we exist, and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we are, through whom we exist. 00:19:22.353 --> 00:19:28.233 So, it is still speaking of Christ here as God, because all things exist through him, right? 00:19:28.873 --> 00:19:37.993 It's not wrong to say that all things are from the Father, because the Son is begotten of the Father, and the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. 00:19:38.493 --> 00:19:41.013 So, it's correct. 00:19:41.013 --> 00:19:42.353 This is correct to say this. 00:19:42.373 --> 00:19:44.533 What's being emphasized here is something different, though. 00:19:44.533 --> 00:19:47.793 This is an emphasis, and you can see this earlier on, right? 00:19:48.113 --> 00:19:50.833 Because it's speaking of idols and false gods and other things. 00:19:51.193 --> 00:19:53.173 This is a condemnation of idolatry. 00:19:53.493 --> 00:19:59.573 So, it's recognizing the Father, God the Father, and actually, this time, it does say God the Father, specifically. 00:20:01.593 --> 00:20:05.873 It wouldn't have to specify if you didn't have different persons, right? 00:20:05.873 --> 00:20:06.833 It would just say God. 00:20:07.593 --> 00:20:12.893 And it does that in a few places, but not all places, like here, where it says God and specifies God the Father. 00:20:13.633 --> 00:20:18.853 And Lord is interchangeable with God in some places. 00:20:20.213 --> 00:20:20.793 That's what we call him. 00:20:20.793 --> 00:20:21.933 We call him the Lord God. 00:20:22.313 --> 00:20:23.093 That's what he is. 00:20:23.093 --> 00:20:24.053 That's who he is. 00:20:24.373 --> 00:20:27.173 And so, it is affirming the Godship of Christ here. 00:20:27.173 --> 00:20:37.393 It's also emphasizing that Lordship of Christ in terms of his intercession and his interaction with creation, and the fact that all things were made by and through Christ. 00:20:38.313 --> 00:20:41.773 Let me pull up the Corinthians 11.3. 00:20:48.168 --> 00:20:53.888 But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. 00:20:54.328 --> 00:21:06.128 Again, this is, this is actually, this one's more heavily theological because of God with respect to his, I mean, God the Son, of course, with respect to his humanity. 00:21:06.468 --> 00:21:10.668 And with respect to his humanity, he is lower than God the Father. 00:21:11.108 --> 00:21:16.928 And let me pull up one of the creeds here. 00:21:18.408 --> 00:21:22.768 Obviously, the fourth paragraph is what I want here. 00:21:22.768 --> 00:21:41.288 So, and just so you know, if you want to pull up one of the creeds, you can go to the bookofconchord.org, and then slash C1, 2, and 3 are the three creeds in the normal order they're given in Athanasian. 00:21:41.948 --> 00:21:51.268 So, the Athanasian creed and paragraph 4, equal to the father as touching his godhead, and inferior to the father as touching his manhood. 00:21:51.268 --> 00:21:53.068 That is just standard. 00:21:53.148 --> 00:21:58.708 Of course, I see that OBS is being weird and not showing the full page. 00:21:58.708 --> 00:21:59.628 Let me try that again. 00:22:01.228 --> 00:22:01.848 There we go. 00:22:02.348 --> 00:22:06.948 Again, equal to the father as touching his godhead, and inferior to the father as touching his manhood. 00:22:06.948 --> 00:22:11.928 This is the standard teaching of the Church, of Scripture, of Christianity all along. 00:22:13.188 --> 00:22:18.148 With respect to his humanity, Christ is lesser than God the Father. 00:22:18.828 --> 00:22:23.248 With respect, he is equal to God the Father, because they are of one essence. 00:22:25.368 --> 00:22:27.068 Let me pull up the next one here. 00:22:27.068 --> 00:22:28.468 We have John, what was it? 00:22:28.468 --> 00:22:28.968 118. 00:22:35.647 --> 00:22:38.167 Swap back over to Lagos. 00:22:43.810 --> 00:22:48.130 I might set up some keys here to make this a little easier to swap back and forth. 00:22:51.510 --> 00:22:56.490 No one has ever seen God, God the only Son, who is at the Father's side, he has made him known. 00:22:56.490 --> 00:23:01.190 So right here in the verse, it says, right? 00:23:01.550 --> 00:23:02.350 It's in the verse. 00:23:02.950 --> 00:23:07.310 And again, this is God is spirit. 00:23:07.590 --> 00:23:08.930 The Holy Spirit is also spirit. 00:23:08.930 --> 00:23:13.450 The Holy Spirit occasionally appears in scripture in, for instance, the form of a dove, right? 00:23:13.750 --> 00:23:15.410 But no one has seen God the Father. 00:23:15.910 --> 00:23:16.750 No one... 00:23:16.750 --> 00:23:18.870 that's how God operates. 00:23:20.310 --> 00:23:22.390 Because God the Son is incarnate. 00:23:22.390 --> 00:23:28.130 God the Son has taken the humanity into himself, and so we can see God the Son. 00:23:28.130 --> 00:23:30.250 We don't see God the Father. 00:23:31.110 --> 00:23:36.570 The Son can see the Father because the Son is also, as it says here, God, God the only Son. 00:23:36.990 --> 00:23:37.890 So this is also... 00:23:37.890 --> 00:23:43.530 this is actually one of the things that God teaches that the Son is indeed God, just explicitly states it. 00:23:43.910 --> 00:23:47.330 So the Arians would not be particularly wise to use that one. 00:23:48.850 --> 00:23:55.090 They tried to use a lot of arguments for that because the Trinity is something that is beyond human reason, right? 00:23:55.490 --> 00:24:02.710 The Trinity is something that, as human beings, we cannot fully comprehend this life or probably also the next, right? 00:24:03.250 --> 00:24:04.730 But we don't have to understand everything. 00:24:04.730 --> 00:24:15.390 In fact, we should be concerned if everything in our faith were completely understandable to human reason, because God is infinite and we are finite. 00:24:15.630 --> 00:24:26.010 And so, if we as a finite could understand everything that is taught about the infinite, that should make us question whether or not we're speaking of the actual infinite, because we are limited in ways that he is not. 00:24:26.370 --> 00:24:31.130 But those verses are very easily explained within the standard bounds of Christian theology. 00:24:36.499 --> 00:24:39.039 Let me pull another question here from the chat. 00:24:40.179 --> 00:24:49.999 Advice for how, question six, advice for how a white man should navigate advocating for his nation politically while also having non-white nephews and nieces. 00:24:51.699 --> 00:24:57.919 So this is going to depend in part, in terms of nuance, but not in terms of really the overall approach. 00:25:00.319 --> 00:25:01.199 Really two things. 00:25:01.779 --> 00:25:05.739 Are these nephews and nieces adopted aliens? 00:25:06.179 --> 00:25:07.199 Because that matters. 00:25:07.459 --> 00:25:09.299 Now, there's a distinction there that I would draw. 00:25:09.299 --> 00:25:12.699 There's a distinction between adopting your own people and adopting aliens. 00:25:13.159 --> 00:25:15.339 The former is good, the latter is bad. 00:25:15.779 --> 00:25:21.599 So if they're adopted, you have less of a concern to just be sent back to their homelands. 00:25:21.599 --> 00:25:26.039 That's the eventual goal, and it doesn't matter that they've been adopted. 00:25:26.059 --> 00:25:28.899 The legal piece of paper doesn't change the reality of who and what they are. 00:25:30.279 --> 00:25:39.559 If, however, one of your siblings miscegenated, and so they are genetically half related to you, that makes things more complicated. 00:25:40.099 --> 00:25:48.359 It goes back to the earlier question, right, about, are we dealing with an individual who's half Japanese, half Chinese, versus half African? 00:25:48.759 --> 00:25:50.639 There will be different ways to deal with that. 00:25:51.359 --> 00:25:54.519 I haven't drawn up, you know, Nuremberg Laws 2.0. 00:25:54.559 --> 00:25:56.439 No one has done that, as far as I'm aware. 00:25:57.099 --> 00:25:59.099 I don't really intend to do that in the near future. 00:26:00.859 --> 00:26:10.799 There will be some sort of line drawing that will be necessary at some point in the future, and it will take into account that certain peoples are, in fact, more compatible with us than others, right? 00:26:11.179 --> 00:26:23.219 Someone who is half Japanese and half white is going to have some trouble picking a side and integrating full of me, but much less so than someone who is half African. 00:26:23.819 --> 00:26:42.339 So I'm not saying that someone who is half Japanese has no problems in life, because as anyone who is mixed knows, your parents created problems for you, and they're very real problems, and the people who tell you you're perfect the way you are and nothing is wrong, I know those people are lying because you've lived it. 00:26:42.839 --> 00:26:51.919 And so I get people who DM me all the time about this stuff, but it's going to depend on sort of what the admixture is there. 00:26:52.239 --> 00:27:04.099 And the best thing that you can do is in some way they are family, but they're less likely that your sibling had married another white person, right? 00:27:05.479 --> 00:27:14.559 So if you have, say, white nieces and nephews, you should probably show them preference, because they are more your blood than those who are mixed. 00:27:15.159 --> 00:27:17.499 But that doesn't mean that you treat these individuals badly. 00:27:17.499 --> 00:27:23.479 The goal isn't to, you know, who's different as much as some people would like. 00:27:24.039 --> 00:27:25.019 It's easier, right? 00:27:25.119 --> 00:27:26.439 That's an easier path. 00:27:27.119 --> 00:27:28.399 But that's not the goal. 00:27:28.399 --> 00:27:41.339 The goal is we want our own lands, our own culture, our own people, who are protected from everyone else, and we don't want the problems that come with having other peoples in our lands. 00:27:41.339 --> 00:27:43.859 Not to say nothing of the fact that it's a curse from God, right? 00:27:44.699 --> 00:27:59.099 So, the ideal, and it's actually a tragedy that there are so many problems, but the ideal would be every group of people, every race, every nation, living in its own territory, worshipping God as best they can, and not fighting with one another. 00:28:00.199 --> 00:28:07.359 Reality, we live in this reality that's fallen, there are many problems, and we have to deal with things as they exist. 00:28:07.359 --> 00:28:10.679 It's realpolitik, right, instead of wishful thinking. 00:28:12.539 --> 00:28:19.299 But, to some degree, I can't give you exact advice, because it's a fact-specific analysis, right? 00:28:20.619 --> 00:28:25.799 It's a legal term of art, but in the law, there are really two kinds of questions. 00:28:26.099 --> 00:28:31.119 There are purely legal questions where it's, you know, is this a violation of the law? 00:28:31.639 --> 00:28:37.879 And it's one of those where you don't need to know the facts of the case, you just need to know the thing and the law. 00:28:38.319 --> 00:28:44.959 And there are things that are facts where the actual facts, specifically what happened to this instance, truly matters. 00:28:44.959 --> 00:28:48.099 And that's sort of the analysis that needs to be done here. 00:28:48.879 --> 00:29:07.359 So, like I said, you don't treat them poorly, but I think preferencing, if you have full-blooded relatives, I don't think it's wrong to preference them, because those are the circles of which we spoke in so many times, and those who are more genetically related are closer to you, and you have a greater duty. 00:29:08.739 --> 00:29:11.159 Obviously, yes, this creates problems, right? 00:29:11.699 --> 00:29:21.899 Because if you advocate for deporting everyone who is not actually racially American, you aren't going to have nieces and nephews, potentially. 00:29:22.339 --> 00:29:30.979 But you didn't create this problem, your sibling created this problem, and, yes, it's going to cause strife for you. 00:29:31.679 --> 00:29:33.259 That is just the reality. 00:29:34.299 --> 00:29:36.259 Sometimes that's unavoidable in this life. 00:29:36.259 --> 00:29:50.039 So it's a matter of wisdom, and you have to bring the squabbling and the fighting home, or at least not to the same degree that you would engage of it in public or social media or wherever else. 00:29:50.819 --> 00:29:53.959 But that, again, also partly depends on the reality, right? 00:29:54.719 --> 00:30:09.579 If you're dealing with a sibling who has miscegenated and is not going to be with this individual, the individual is African, that's probably going to cause much greater problems in your home life and in the tranquility and all those things. 00:30:09.779 --> 00:30:11.679 And everything that we know comes along with that. 00:30:11.919 --> 00:30:13.899 And so in that case, you should behave differently. 00:30:13.899 --> 00:30:19.559 Maybe you need to sort of push that person out of your life a little bit for the sake of the others entrusted to you. 00:30:20.699 --> 00:30:26.659 So, it's not an easy question to answer, and it's certainly not an easy situation in which to live. 00:30:26.659 --> 00:30:41.739 But you apply the wisdom that God has given you, you recognize those concentric circles of duty and the greater duty to those who are closer, and do the best you can with the situation to which you not of your own will. 00:30:48.395 --> 00:30:52.755 A second question from the same individual, but sort of in a slightly different vein. 00:30:52.755 --> 00:30:54.435 It's on Luke 16, 18. 00:30:54.635 --> 00:30:56.515 So I'll pull up Logos again here. 00:31:04.831 --> 00:31:10.551 Let's see, a couple notes for myself here before I continue. 00:31:15.783 --> 00:31:22.003 Okay, per Luke 16, 18, is it always sinful for a non-virgin woman? 00:31:23.263 --> 00:31:31.103 So, Luke 16, 18, everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery. 00:31:34.603 --> 00:31:35.823 The answer is yes and no. 00:31:39.423 --> 00:31:42.063 So, this pops up all over the place. 00:31:42.663 --> 00:31:49.983 There are times where sin leaves everyone in a position where there's no good solution, there's no perfect solution. 00:31:50.843 --> 00:32:01.783 So, this is going to depend on the sort of government under which you live, and then, again, a divorced woman. 00:32:02.003 --> 00:32:03.603 Why is she divorced? 00:32:03.863 --> 00:32:04.643 That matters. 00:32:05.323 --> 00:32:07.283 Did her husband abandon her? 00:32:07.283 --> 00:32:09.743 Did her husband have an affair? 00:32:11.563 --> 00:32:14.763 There's a difference between a man having an affair and a woman having an affair, right? 00:32:15.023 --> 00:32:16.263 Gone over that many times. 00:32:16.663 --> 00:32:20.443 Neither case is it good, but in one case, there's actually no good solution. 00:32:20.443 --> 00:32:23.963 In the other case, there really isn't, other than reconciliation. 00:32:23.963 --> 00:32:26.203 But if reconciliation doesn't happen, there's no solution. 00:32:27.563 --> 00:32:31.463 So, if the woman is divorced for a reason that is morally permissible, right? 00:32:32.003 --> 00:32:40.063 Again, adultery, abandonment, basically adultery and things that are tantamount to it, then marrying her, you're not sinning by doing adultery. 00:32:40.703 --> 00:32:44.903 She's divorced, but she's divorced for a reason that you're permitted to divorce. 00:32:45.143 --> 00:32:48.303 She's not the guilty party, the husband's the guilty party. 00:32:48.383 --> 00:32:50.063 The former husband is the guilty party. 00:32:50.543 --> 00:32:53.523 Now, let's say that she is the adulteress, right? 00:32:53.523 --> 00:32:57.703 That's sort of the hard case, as it were, or the easy case, depending on how you look at it. 00:32:58.483 --> 00:33:14.343 If she, and so her husband divorced her because she committed adultery, if you live under a society that actually enforces the moral law, adultery is a capital crime, and so the issue never arises. 00:33:15.343 --> 00:33:20.263 If you live under a society that doesn't punish adultery, that's where this becomes a reality. 00:33:20.263 --> 00:33:36.143 Now, you have a bunch of individuals wandering around who the state should have punished, and yet they've committed this grave sin, and now they are in a position where, what do they do, and what do other people do in response to them, right? 00:33:36.383 --> 00:33:37.443 Should they never marry? 00:33:37.823 --> 00:33:38.623 Probably. 00:33:39.163 --> 00:33:42.443 But is that going to lead to greater problems if they don't marry? 00:33:42.723 --> 00:33:43.783 Also, probably. 00:33:44.063 --> 00:33:53.963 So, we as a society have created this problem for ourselves by not addressing the underlying crime, by not punishing criminals. 00:33:54.903 --> 00:33:56.083 That's the harsh truth. 00:33:56.363 --> 00:34:02.203 The harsh truth is you should punish adultery so harshly that it doesn't matter whether or not you should marry an adulteress. 00:34:03.603 --> 00:34:12.323 Under the present circumstances where that has not been done, do I think it's always a sin to marry a woman who was divorced because of adultery? 00:34:12.743 --> 00:34:14.283 I think that it's not always so. 00:34:14.703 --> 00:34:15.583 Is it ideal? 00:34:15.703 --> 00:34:16.063 No. 00:34:16.923 --> 00:34:19.423 But let's say, for instance, she's the adulteress, right? 00:34:20.803 --> 00:34:23.403 She can't be reconciled to him now because he's remarried. 00:34:23.403 --> 00:34:26.623 There's also the polluted field thing and all of that. 00:34:27.283 --> 00:34:30.843 So, what is the best solution if the state doesn't punish her? 00:34:30.843 --> 00:34:34.503 Well, it's probably for her to get married and then not cheat again. 00:34:35.443 --> 00:34:36.903 Is this wise on your part? 00:34:36.903 --> 00:34:37.683 Probably not. 00:34:38.383 --> 00:34:43.143 Because a woman who was divorced once will probably do it next time as well. 00:34:43.823 --> 00:34:46.823 So, is it always sin? 00:34:46.963 --> 00:34:48.283 I don't think always. 00:34:48.283 --> 00:34:50.683 Is it almost always unwise? 00:34:50.683 --> 00:34:51.483 I think yes. 00:34:51.483 --> 00:34:56.943 So, I don't know if you're considering this, but I would say definitely be careful. 00:34:56.963 --> 00:35:00.323 Use the wisdom that God has give you to maybe reconvene. 00:35:01.103 --> 00:35:07.483 But if she is divorced because her husband committed adultery, then it's fine. 00:35:07.483 --> 00:35:08.663 It's not ideal, right? 00:35:08.663 --> 00:35:10.903 This is a situation that should never arise. 00:35:11.303 --> 00:35:15.063 He did something evil, but it's not her fault. 00:35:15.843 --> 00:35:18.743 The same thing as, you know, a woman who is a widow, right? 00:35:18.743 --> 00:35:21.503 She's not a virgin because she's a widow. 00:35:22.203 --> 00:35:23.063 That's not her fault. 00:35:23.063 --> 00:35:24.023 Her husband died. 00:35:24.143 --> 00:35:26.723 So, we live in an imperfect world. 00:35:26.723 --> 00:35:27.943 We live in a fallen world. 00:35:28.343 --> 00:35:32.943 Sometimes things, always, things are not going to be perfect or ideal. 00:35:32.943 --> 00:35:34.183 We do the best that we can. 00:35:34.983 --> 00:35:37.843 So, like I said, you run the basic analysis, right? 00:35:37.843 --> 00:35:41.963 Is she divorced because she divorced because he did something? 00:35:42.263 --> 00:35:44.283 Is it something that permitted divorce? 00:35:44.483 --> 00:35:47.123 And then, is what you are trying to do wise? 00:35:48.803 --> 00:36:01.263 And again, we should have a Christian prince who obviates these questions, so we don't have to talk about this stuff because he did his job, which might be difficult given that we have a leader in this country. 00:36:09.093 --> 00:36:18.613 Question eight, do you read the day of the Lord in the prophets as referring to the destruction of Jerusalem alone, the end of the world alone, or each of them depending on the context? 00:36:18.893 --> 00:36:22.073 Which is the answer to when Peter quotes him in Acts 2? 00:36:23.493 --> 00:36:30.873 So, the answer to this is both, because generally speaking, God likes typology. 00:36:30.913 --> 00:36:33.953 I've mentioned this many times, and I'll mention it many more times. 00:36:34.413 --> 00:36:36.253 God really likes typology. 00:36:36.253 --> 00:36:38.093 It's all over the place in scripture. 00:36:38.313 --> 00:36:41.413 And really, it's kind of all over the city as well, right? 00:36:42.553 --> 00:36:44.913 In a very real sense, for instance, each person, right? 00:36:44.913 --> 00:36:48.473 We're an icon, we're an image of God, that's a type of God in creation. 00:36:48.893 --> 00:37:05.353 But without getting too deeply into that, the Day of the Lord is prefigured by the destruction of Jerusalem, the wicked city, and then, obviously, then becomes the image of the wicked city that is ultimately destroyed on the Day of the Lord, and the harlot, and all of that. 00:37:06.093 --> 00:37:11.313 It's all symbolism, it's imagery depicting the wicked world passing away, being destroyed in fire. 00:37:11.873 --> 00:37:24.573 So, you have the minor fulfillment of the Day of the Lord, the typical fulfillment with regard to the destruction of Jerusalem, the burning of the temple. 00:37:25.233 --> 00:37:26.613 It happened multiple times as well. 00:37:26.613 --> 00:37:28.113 This has not happened once, right? 00:37:28.713 --> 00:37:33.073 The Babylonians did it, Rome did it, Rome is sort of the one that really did it. 00:37:33.633 --> 00:37:35.753 And then God will do it at the end of time. 00:37:36.633 --> 00:37:47.913 So, the ultimate fulfillment, the ultimate fulfillment, the one that is meant in the fullest sense when it is mentioned is, of course, Judgment Day, the actual return of Christ. 00:37:48.273 --> 00:37:51.573 But they are both in view because it's typology. 00:37:52.753 --> 00:37:57.053 But if you want to read it certainly today, you should be reading it. 00:37:57.073 --> 00:38:06.013