WEBVTT 00:00:01.500 --> 00:00:04.040 Welcome to the At Any Cost Podcast. 00:00:04.040 --> 00:00:04.960 I am Corey J. 00:00:04.960 --> 00:00:08.680 Mahler, and this is the 27th of November, 2025. 00:00:09.720 --> 00:00:14.280 It is Thanksgiving Day for those of us who are in America, at least, for our friends around the world. 00:00:14.280 --> 00:00:20.600 I know that you celebrate that on other days, but for us here, it's Thanksgiving Day. 00:00:20.600 --> 00:00:26.680 This is the fifth Q&A episode of 2025, and I have a handful of questions here. 00:00:26.680 --> 00:00:28.900 I have some other questions I see in the chat as well. 00:00:29.100 --> 00:00:33.100 So, again, let me know if there are any audio or other issues. 00:00:33.100 --> 00:00:38.560 I did sign up for ReStream, so hopefully that will have solved all of those issues going forward. 00:00:38.560 --> 00:00:40.540 I know that... 00:00:40.540 --> 00:00:41.040 Excuse me. 00:00:41.040 --> 00:00:42.520 I know that KIK is not working. 00:00:42.520 --> 00:00:43.920 I am not certain why. 00:00:43.920 --> 00:00:48.500 I think maybe I'm sending it too high of a bitrate, and it is objecting to that fact. 00:00:55.388 --> 00:00:58.628 So starting off, we have a question. 00:00:58.628 --> 00:01:00.988 Someone says he cannot hear. 00:01:03.828 --> 00:01:06.848 Sounds great on X, can't hear on YouTube. 00:01:06.848 --> 00:01:09.448 Okay. 00:01:09.448 --> 00:01:11.368 Let me check that. 00:01:15.548 --> 00:01:24.208 It's not reporting any issues for me in Restream, but that doesn't mean that they don't have any. 00:01:26.508 --> 00:01:29.988 Can someone on YouTube tell me if you can hear me or not? 00:01:32.828 --> 00:01:35.008 Loud and clear on X, that's good. 00:01:38.388 --> 00:01:40.168 Works fine, the sound, okay, good. 00:01:41.348 --> 00:01:49.448 I guess maybe you're having a problem on your end there, not on my end with regard to the sound. 00:01:49.448 --> 00:01:51.908 So check your settings. 00:01:51.908 --> 00:01:55.688 At any rate, it seems to be working, so I will move into the questions then. 00:01:55.688 --> 00:01:57.428 I will try not to sniffle into the mic. 00:01:57.428 --> 00:02:03.968 I do have a little bit of a cold, so I will try not to share that with those of you out there. 00:02:03.968 --> 00:02:08.948 Thankfully, I can't actually share the cold with you, but I'll try not to share the sniffling. 00:02:08.948 --> 00:02:15.628 The first question is about Roman Catholic Mariology, and I will read through the question first here. 00:02:20.448 --> 00:02:33.288 I've been discussing various topics with some Catholic friends, and as the only Lutheran I am usually going for against one, it puts a burden on me to know their doctrine well in order to be able to know why it is wrong. 00:02:33.288 --> 00:02:34.788 Mary is coming up soon. 00:02:34.788 --> 00:03:01.588 This was briefly covered here and there in Passing in Stone Choir, true, but I am curious as to the specifics of Roman Catholic Mariology, particularly modern, as most of these accretions became binding after the Reformation, which is true, I'll go into that, the Immaculate Conception, the Assumption to Heaven, etc., though others like Perpetual Virginity were believed in Luther's time, though still accretions, also true. 00:03:01.588 --> 00:03:04.968 Exactly how wrong are the Roman Catholics? 00:03:04.968 --> 00:03:08.348 What is the best steel man of their views? 00:03:08.348 --> 00:03:17.528 Which arguments would be most convincing against them, though I fear anyone with a presupposition of Magisterial Invalidity will not be able to budge on an issue? 00:03:17.528 --> 00:03:19.128 That's generally true. 00:03:19.128 --> 00:03:31.588 So the question here with regard to Merriology, really there are essentially four doctrines here that are going to be relevant. 00:03:31.588 --> 00:03:44.308 One on which all Christians have to agree, and then the others are going to be various stages of you don't have to agree, or you should not agree, or you cannot agree. 00:03:44.308 --> 00:03:48.468 And the first one then is Theotokos. 00:03:48.468 --> 00:03:55.368 And that is defined in 431, although it's been the holding of Christians, the belief of Christians from the very beginning. 00:03:55.368 --> 00:03:57.748 It simply means that Mary is the God-bearer. 00:03:57.748 --> 00:03:59.888 That's what Theotokos means. 00:03:59.888 --> 00:04:22.728 And the reason this came up and was officially defined as a dogma, as a doctrine at a council was, this was the Council of Ephesus, incidentally, was because there were those who were arguing that she was only the bearer of Christ in terms of his humanity, and only Christ as a created creature. 00:04:22.728 --> 00:04:24.868 So in other words, it's Arianism. 00:04:24.868 --> 00:04:27.988 And so obviously as Christians, we have to reject that because that is false. 00:04:27.988 --> 00:04:29.708 That's not what we hold. 00:04:29.708 --> 00:04:31.208 Christ is God. 00:04:31.208 --> 00:04:33.868 He's fully God and fully man. 00:04:33.868 --> 00:04:41.148 And so Theotokos, you cannot object to that as a Christian, because that is simply right teaching with regard to Mary's role. 00:04:41.148 --> 00:04:46.068 She is indeed the God bearer, because she bore Christ and Christ is God. 00:04:46.068 --> 00:04:53.648 The second one would be perpetual virginity, or semper virgo, if you want to use the Latin, called by various names. 00:04:53.648 --> 00:04:58.528 That is defined in 641 by Pope Martin I. 00:04:58.528 --> 00:05:08.868 And there have been those who have held to that down through Christian history, but that is when it became an official dogma of the Roman Catholic Church. 00:05:08.868 --> 00:05:20.328 And so, the problem with semper virgo, and we have gone through that, just so you know, it's the Lateran synod, and it's canon 3 of that synod, if you want to go and look at that document. 00:05:20.328 --> 00:05:24.288 But the big problem is, how do you define marriage? 00:05:24.288 --> 00:05:31.628 If you don't understand what marriage is, then you are going to be okay with semper virgo. 00:05:31.628 --> 00:05:35.828 If you understand what marriage is, you are not, you have to reject it. 00:05:35.828 --> 00:05:40.748 And the reason for that is that, what does scripture say? 00:05:40.748 --> 00:05:42.768 Always look at scripture for these issues. 00:05:44.048 --> 00:05:48.708 Scripture says, Joseph is a righteous man. 00:05:48.708 --> 00:05:53.948 And scripture says, do not fear to take Mary as your wife. 00:05:53.948 --> 00:05:56.448 Well, that's a command from God. 00:05:56.448 --> 00:05:59.128 A righteous man obeys a command from God. 00:06:00.028 --> 00:06:05.148 Scripture calls Joseph righteous, commands him to take Mary as his wife. 00:06:05.148 --> 00:06:07.248 There's only one way you can take a wife. 00:06:07.248 --> 00:06:13.048 We were very clear on that in a number of episodes, not least of all the one on marriage for Stone Choir. 00:06:13.048 --> 00:06:16.948 And so, Semper Virgo is at odds with that. 00:06:16.948 --> 00:06:23.888 If you understand the nature of marriage, you cannot believe that Mary was a virgin for her entire life. 00:06:23.888 --> 00:06:28.888 And also, just reading scripture plainly says that Christ had brothers and sisters. 00:06:30.208 --> 00:06:34.308 Now, the Roman Catholics will argue that those were cousins. 00:06:35.388 --> 00:06:38.628 The problem is, the scripture doesn't say that. 00:06:38.628 --> 00:06:40.308 Greek has a word for cousins. 00:06:40.308 --> 00:06:44.988 It's not always used, and this is where perhaps we can steel man their argument. 00:06:44.988 --> 00:06:48.008 There are times where a cousin is called a brother. 00:06:48.008 --> 00:06:55.428 We even do that today, perhaps less so than the Greeks would have done, and probably less so than the Old Testament Israelites would have done. 00:06:56.688 --> 00:07:01.248 However, the word for cousin exists, it's not used. 00:07:01.248 --> 00:07:04.728 It simply says, brothers and sisters. 00:07:04.728 --> 00:07:15.028 That is what they were known as, and not only that, but they're called that later on as well, because you have them in important positions in the church, and they're called the brother of Jesus and things like that. 00:07:15.028 --> 00:07:22.928 So, if you just read scripture and take the language plainly, it's very clear that Mary had other children. 00:07:23.188 --> 00:07:28.228 And also, that makes perfect sense, because children are a blessing from the Lord. 00:07:28.228 --> 00:07:32.048 Why would God not bless his own earthly mother? 00:07:32.048 --> 00:07:36.248 Now, that's not to say that you cannot be a Christian and believe this. 00:07:36.248 --> 00:07:46.548 You're going to be in error, because you have misunderstood what marriage is, and you have misunderstood some parts of scripture, but you can still be a Christian and believe in Semper Virgo. 00:07:46.548 --> 00:07:51.168 There are plenty of Christians down through history who have believed that, and there are Christians today who believe that. 00:07:52.368 --> 00:07:53.328 I reject it, obviously. 00:07:53.328 --> 00:07:54.668 I don't believe in it. 00:07:54.668 --> 00:08:01.928 And I think that it raises other problems, because again, the central problem is it misunderstands marriage. 00:08:01.928 --> 00:08:11.108 So if you get marriage wrong, you're going to be able to defend Semper Virgo, but if you get marriage right, you'll find that you have to reject SV. 00:08:12.448 --> 00:08:19.108 The next dogma is jumping a bit here from 649 to 1854. 00:08:19.108 --> 00:08:20.588 This is the Immaculate Conception. 00:08:22.008 --> 00:08:28.908 Now, if you are dealing with some Roman Catholics, they may try to argue that it is from 1476. 00:08:30.008 --> 00:08:36.628 Now, that particular document, the problem with it, is that it doesn't actually define it as a dogma. 00:08:36.628 --> 00:08:38.208 This is important for the Roman Catholics. 00:08:38.208 --> 00:08:47.888 For those who are not in Roman Catholic land, perhaps some of this is irrelevant, because we don't have ex cathedra pronouncements as Protestants. 00:08:47.888 --> 00:08:48.148 They do. 00:08:48.928 --> 00:09:04.848 And so, the 1476 document does not define it as a dogma, and one of the ways that you can look at this is that in 1849, the Pope asked the bishops for a definition of the Immaculate Conception. 00:09:04.848 --> 00:09:12.428 Well, if he's asking for a definition of it, it can't be a dogma, because that one have already been defined. 00:09:12.428 --> 00:09:22.748 And so, it's actually in 1854, with the document is called Ineffabilis Deus, that is when it is established. 00:09:22.748 --> 00:09:35.208 And then, one of the other ways that we can know this is that in 1904, 50 years later, it is celebrated as the 50th celebration of the establishment of the dogma. 00:09:35.208 --> 00:09:37.948 And that is by Pope Pius X. 00:09:37.948 --> 00:09:43.348 And so, very clearly, you can see, this was not established until much later. 00:09:43.448 --> 00:09:45.248 This is not from the early church. 00:09:45.248 --> 00:09:47.328 This is not ancient. 00:09:47.328 --> 00:09:50.568 This is the 1800s, the mid 1800s. 00:09:50.568 --> 00:10:00.968 And so, if they want to argue for that, they're going to have to argue that this was something that was revealed or just missed in scripture. 00:10:00.968 --> 00:10:09.768 And the problem, of course, is that it is fundamentally at odds with scripture, because scripture says that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. 00:10:09.768 --> 00:10:11.168 That includes Mary. 00:10:11.168 --> 00:10:11.768 Mary was a sinner. 00:10:12.528 --> 00:10:20.968 Mary did not believe in Jesus in the way that she should have, initially, because think of what happens in the pages of scripture. 00:10:20.968 --> 00:10:28.468 She and Jesus' brothers, incidentally, come to take him away from what he's doing because they believe he's lost his mind. 00:10:29.668 --> 00:10:33.268 That is not fully believing in him as your God and Savior. 00:10:33.268 --> 00:10:41.868 Now, it's not to say that Mary didn't have some idea, because you have things where it says that she cherished these things in her heart, and clearly she had some idea, but she did not fully understand. 00:10:41.868 --> 00:10:45.068 It seems very clear from the pages of Scripture. 00:10:45.068 --> 00:10:47.268 And so, Mary was a sinner. 00:10:47.268 --> 00:10:48.968 She needed a Savior. 00:10:48.968 --> 00:10:57.928 And in fact, I think it's an insult to Mary to call her sinless, to say that she was without sin, because that's to minimize the work of Christ. 00:10:57.928 --> 00:11:05.448 And I don't think Mary would want that, because Mary did eventually recognize the nature of Christ and his role and what he did. 00:11:05.448 --> 00:11:08.428 And part of it is that he was her Savior as well. 00:11:09.368 --> 00:11:24.568 And so, the problem with the immaculate conception is that it's just a false teaching, it's just wrong, because all those who are naturally conceived, which means a man and a woman, are born with original sin. 00:11:24.568 --> 00:11:30.908 Original sin is transmitted that way, because that's just how God designed the universe, how things are designed. 00:11:30.908 --> 00:11:33.808 You received original sin in your conception. 00:11:33.808 --> 00:11:37.428 In sin did my mother conceive me, as it says in the Psalter. 00:11:38.368 --> 00:11:40.228 That includes Mary. 00:11:40.228 --> 00:11:44.588 Nowhere does it say in the pages of Scripture that Mary was born without sin. 00:11:44.588 --> 00:11:52.168 Nowhere does it say that she was saved from original sin, which is basically what the Roman Catholics hold. 00:11:52.168 --> 00:11:58.848 This is a doctrine that is necessary for them, because it builds up to other things. 00:11:58.848 --> 00:12:06.888 And it's going to build up to worse things in the future, because I'll get into it now, but this is sort of not the main four. 00:12:07.048 --> 00:12:09.188 This is something, a minor doctrine. 00:12:10.308 --> 00:12:13.808 Doctrine, not doctrine, it depends on which Roman Catholic you ask. 00:12:13.808 --> 00:12:20.048 There are those who will call her the Mediatrix, or the Co-Redemptrix, which is just blatant heresy. 00:12:20.048 --> 00:12:26.148 You cannot possibly believe in that, because there is only one mediator between God and man, and that is Christ. 00:12:26.148 --> 00:12:33.668 And so, in order to build up to that doctrine, which is where they're going, they will eventually make that a dogma. 00:12:33.668 --> 00:12:41.748 In order to build up that, they need to say that Mary was without sin, because otherwise she can't be co-redemptrix. 00:12:41.748 --> 00:12:48.288 And so, this doctrine is a necessary part of that foundation for something much worse in the future. 00:12:48.288 --> 00:12:58.048 This is one that you have to reject as a Christian, because it just goes plainly against the words of scripture, and it is going to produce poisonous fruit. 00:12:58.048 --> 00:13:06.768 And then the final one is the assumption of Mary, which sort of flows naturally from the other things they believed, and that is 1946, actually. 00:13:06.768 --> 00:13:08.768 That one is very recent. 00:13:08.768 --> 00:13:16.208 And it's in a document entitled, I'll just give the English name instead of the Latin, Virgin Mary, Mother of God. 00:13:16.208 --> 00:13:23.588 And so, that is actually, that's the one that asked for the definition, it's 1950, it's four years later. 00:13:23.588 --> 00:13:29.028 It's actually defined as a dogma in 1950, so four years after 1946. 00:13:29.028 --> 00:13:30.208 I misspoke on that first date. 00:13:31.428 --> 00:13:34.468 So, this is obviously quite recent. 00:13:34.468 --> 00:13:42.288 And the problem here is that it's just nowhere in scripture, and we don't have the ancient church testifying to it either. 00:13:42.288 --> 00:13:50.788 I think it's pretty clear that the ancient church would have said, oh, by the way, Mary just disappeared into heaven one day. 00:13:50.788 --> 00:13:52.648 Because that was something that happened in the Old Testament. 00:13:52.648 --> 00:13:55.148 This is not something that never happened. 00:13:55.148 --> 00:14:02.068 And so, if she had been assumed instead of dying, it would have been noted. 00:14:02.068 --> 00:14:08.768 It's kind of noteworthy if the mother of God disappears into heaven one day, if she doesn't die. 00:14:08.768 --> 00:14:10.668 We don't have that testimony from the ancient church. 00:14:10.668 --> 00:14:13.668 And so, this is something that is necessary. 00:14:13.668 --> 00:14:25.788 It flows necessarily from the other things they believe with regard to Mary, but it is very modern, and it's simply not supportable by either scripture or history. 00:14:25.788 --> 00:14:43.588 Then, of course, you have the queen of heaven bit, which that should make you uncomfortable, because the queen of heaven is the name of a demon, and heaven doesn't have a queen, because Mary is not the wife of God, which is what they sometimes try to argue. 00:14:43.588 --> 00:14:45.208 That's nowhere in scripture. 00:14:45.208 --> 00:14:48.568 That's just whole cloth, made out of whole cloth. 00:14:48.568 --> 00:14:49.448 Complete nonsense. 00:14:49.448 --> 00:14:51.868 Incidentally, the east holds to that one as well. 00:14:51.868 --> 00:15:02.268 Slightly different formulation for the east, but you don't have to argue with that one as much when you're dealing with Roman Catholics, because it's not officially a dogma yet. 00:15:02.268 --> 00:15:04.608 And so, it's really just those core four. 00:15:04.608 --> 00:15:14.768 And so, in summary, theotokos, you have to accept it, because that's the teaching of the creeds, it's the teaching of the scriptures, it's the teaching of Christianity. 00:15:14.768 --> 00:15:19.708 Semper Virgo, you should reject, because it's false with regard to marriage. 00:15:19.708 --> 00:15:25.788 Immaculate Conception, you must reject, because it is explicitly contrary to the clear teaching of scripture. 00:15:25.788 --> 00:15:41.028 And then the Assumption of Mary, honestly, that one's really neither here nor there, it's just, it's part of this cloth they're building, this tapestry that's going to lead to worse things, but there's no proof of it, and there's no real proof against it. 00:15:41.028 --> 00:15:47.268 We don't have like the grave of Mary, we can say, well, no, Mary didn't get assumed into heaven, because there she is. 00:15:47.268 --> 00:15:51.508 And we also don't have the testimony of the ancient church, and we're all saying, she was assumed into heaven. 00:15:51.508 --> 00:15:55.448 So that one is just a weird myth they've made up. 00:15:57.848 --> 00:16:02.828 So that sort of covers the answer to that particular question. 00:16:02.828 --> 00:16:05.228 So I'll move on to the second question. 00:16:05.228 --> 00:16:08.348 This one is about Christianity in the Third Reich. 00:16:08.348 --> 00:16:12.368 Let me pull up the actual wording of the question here. 00:16:14.528 --> 00:16:18.828 I was hoping you could speak on the state of Christianity in the Third Reich. 00:16:18.828 --> 00:16:27.188 Growing up, I was fed the line that the confessing church was full of good guys, everyone's fed that line, who stood against German Christians. 00:16:27.188 --> 00:16:33.388 Over the past several years, it has become obvious to me the confessing church was full of men who were less than orthodox. 00:16:33.388 --> 00:16:38.788 I am aware of the issues of men like Bonhoeffer, but I was surprised to find that Sassa was weak. 00:16:38.788 --> 00:16:43.168 He very much was on the issues of the young earth and some other things as well. 00:16:43.168 --> 00:16:50.068 I have started reading the book on positive Christianity, put out by Sacra Press, but I have not gotten very far yet. 00:16:50.068 --> 00:16:55.928 Ultimately, my question is, were there any orthodox teachers in Germany during the 1930s and 1940s? 00:16:56.968 --> 00:16:59.668 And so, of course, I would recommend finishing that book. 00:16:59.668 --> 00:17:02.988 You can also just read the 20 Theses of the German Christians. 00:17:02.988 --> 00:17:05.268 I am the one who translated that. 00:17:05.268 --> 00:17:06.568 It's available on my website as well. 00:17:06.568 --> 00:17:10.348 I'll put a link in the show notes for that one. 00:17:10.348 --> 00:17:15.628 The question of were there orthodox teachers in Germany is yes, there were. 00:17:15.628 --> 00:17:24.168 In fact, there were much better teachers in Germany than basically anywhere else at the time, with regard particularly to Lutheranism, but Christianity generally. 00:17:24.168 --> 00:17:30.688 And some of those names, there are people who would definitely immediately know those names. 00:17:30.688 --> 00:17:37.608 The one that would be most known by, including many American pastors, would be Kittel, K-I-T-T-E-L. 00:17:38.948 --> 00:17:58.548 And the reason that that would be known is because they probably have his books on their shelves, because he produced a multi-volume series basically on church history and theology that everyone still uses, despite the fact that he was very pro-national socialist. 00:17:58.548 --> 00:18:03.788 So he's still used, he's still read, and he was a sound theologian confessional. 00:18:03.788 --> 00:18:11.348 There is, of course, a caveat that I'm going to give with regard to any of this, because I'm never going to give just a blanket. 00:18:11.388 --> 00:18:16.268 That everything this man said was perfect, and he is the perfect theologian, because no one is. 00:18:16.268 --> 00:18:23.848 Everyone's going to have something he believes was a little off, or something he could have worded better, something like that. 00:18:23.848 --> 00:18:26.988 That's obviously true with many. 00:18:26.988 --> 00:18:28.708 And that's true with these men as well. 00:18:28.708 --> 00:18:35.168 So you also have Eilert and Althaus would be two other men I could name for orthodox Lutheran teachers in this period. 00:18:35.168 --> 00:18:42.568 They're small things with which I would quibble, but by and large, these are orthodox teachers of the Christian faith. 00:18:42.568 --> 00:19:01.688 But the real answer to the question, that's sort of the preliminary answer, the real answer is that there were thousands, because there were many faithful parish pastors who day in and day out taught the faith truthfully under the Third Reich. 00:19:01.688 --> 00:19:11.028 Because Christianity was not persecuted, Christianity was not attacked, they were building churches, they supported the churches, it was a Christian movement. 00:19:11.028 --> 00:19:19.808 And so you had many thousands of men who were orthodox, small o, orthodox, teachers of the Christian faith in the Third Reich. 00:19:19.808 --> 00:19:25.908 And you're not going to know those men's names because they just did their duty day in and day out. 00:19:25.908 --> 00:19:37.948 Because a parish pastor is not supposed to be known really outside his parish, because that's his duty, he has a flock God has given him to take care of, to look after them, and that is what he's supposed to do. 00:19:37.948 --> 00:19:49.248 And so you have many faithful men in Germany and other parts of Europe at this point in time, and you'll never know their names until you get to paradise, and then you'll get to meet them. 00:19:49.248 --> 00:19:58.208 So yes, the answer is there were many faithful men, including some well-known theologians, including some your pastor probably has on his shelves. 00:19:58.208 --> 00:20:01.908 Particularly Kittel would be the best example of that. 00:20:06.288 --> 00:20:07.108 I guess I'll answer next. 00:20:07.108 --> 00:20:17.488 I saw a quick question in the chat just before we started here asking if I saw that Doug Wilson had responded to my debate with James White, and the answer is no. 00:20:17.488 --> 00:20:21.228 And I may not read it because I honestly don't care. 00:20:21.228 --> 00:20:26.268 But the larger question there sort of is, are those men even relevant anymore? 00:20:26.268 --> 00:20:26.948 And the answer is no. 00:20:28.068 --> 00:20:44.228 Doug Wilson is sort of vaguely relevant in his tiny little bubble at this point, and that influence is shrieking, and also just the fact that how much longer he will be alive is an open question, because he's getting older and he's not in the best of health. 00:20:44.228 --> 00:20:48.488 To be quite frank, he should lose weight. 00:20:48.488 --> 00:20:56.108 It's Christian to tell him that, because if you have a supposedly Christian brother, which I hope that he will repent and come back to the fold, I don't think that he will. 00:20:56.268 --> 00:20:58.928 But I wish that he would. 00:20:58.928 --> 00:21:07.828 It is one of your Christian duties to tell him, you need to lose some weight, because it's bad for you and it's not fitting for someone in the office of pastor. 00:21:07.828 --> 00:21:14.748 But both of those men have chosen to sort of set fire to their legacy and become irrelevant. 00:21:14.748 --> 00:21:18.808 And so they can do whatever they're doing off in their corner. 00:21:18.808 --> 00:21:20.848 They're not part of what we're doing going forward. 00:21:24.188 --> 00:21:32.148 The next question is about the Nephilim, which this one comes up occasionally, so I may as well answer it here. 00:21:32.148 --> 00:21:37.468 Do you hold to the Sethite, Kingly, or Angelic explanation for the Nephilim and their tribes? 00:21:37.508 --> 00:21:45.968 Do you think a better understanding of the Angelic explanation is that the angels or watchers use genetic manipulation instead of genetic contribution to their offspring? 00:21:47.748 --> 00:21:51.768 This is one of those questions where we do not fully know the answer. 00:21:51.768 --> 00:21:59.928 I don't think we can fully know the answer until we get to Paradise, and even then, it will be irrelevant because by then, who cares? 00:21:59.928 --> 00:22:07.808 But insofar as speculation goes, I can certainly say, angels are spirit beings. 00:22:07.808 --> 00:22:16.728 They are permitted to have a body, a physical body, only when God permits it, and it seems like only for very specific tasks. 00:22:16.728 --> 00:22:20.548 So, you can think of the angels who visited Sodom and Gomorrah. 00:22:20.548 --> 00:22:25.368 They were physical, but God gave them something specific to do. 00:22:25.368 --> 00:22:28.288 That's why they had bodies at that time. 00:22:28.288 --> 00:22:31.428 Did they have bodies in the sense where they could have produced children? 00:22:32.668 --> 00:22:33.828 I don't think so. 00:22:33.828 --> 00:22:35.608 I don't think that they did. 00:22:35.608 --> 00:22:42.608 I don't think, I certainly don't think, that God would permit demons, fallen angels, to produce children. 00:22:42.608 --> 00:22:45.068 They are a different thing from what we are. 00:22:45.068 --> 00:22:48.768 And so, I don't think there's biological compatibility there. 00:22:48.768 --> 00:22:53.508 I don't think that the Nephilim are children of angels and human women. 00:22:53.508 --> 00:22:58.828 I think that it's speaking of the wicked versus the elect, the righteous versus the evil. 00:22:59.748 --> 00:23:05.028 And could there be manipulation with regard to fallen angels? 00:23:05.028 --> 00:23:13.568 I think that's probably true, because we know that demons can influence the physical world in certain ways. 00:23:13.568 --> 00:23:16.068 The question is, where is the line? 00:23:16.068 --> 00:23:17.808 I don't know where God drew that line. 00:23:17.808 --> 00:23:21.468 God did not give us the rules of engagement for demons. 00:23:21.468 --> 00:23:23.408 It might be nice to have those. 00:23:23.408 --> 00:23:27.448 It would certainly help figuring out what's demonic and what's not. 00:23:27.448 --> 00:23:28.608 But we don't have those rules. 00:23:28.888 --> 00:23:31.708 And so, we don't really know. 00:23:31.708 --> 00:23:35.288 Scripture is not particularly thorough on this point. 00:23:35.288 --> 00:23:37.488 And it's not to say that scripture should be thorough. 00:23:37.488 --> 00:23:40.428 It's to say that we don't need to know. 00:23:40.428 --> 00:23:43.248 If we needed to know, God would have told us. 00:23:43.248 --> 00:23:55.008 And so, I know that men get very interested in the Nephilim and things like that, and all these parts of scripture where it's left open and vague, and it draws people in. 00:23:55.008 --> 00:23:56.868 I think it's best to just leave these things alone. 00:23:58.228 --> 00:24:00.988 There's no reason to get invested in this stuff. 00:24:00.988 --> 00:24:03.728 It's not important to your faith. 00:24:03.728 --> 00:24:07.808 It's not going to change anything with regard to your faith. 00:24:07.808 --> 00:24:14.088 And in large part, this stuff is so far in the past that it is essentially irrelevant at this point. 00:24:14.088 --> 00:24:15.348 Is it interesting? 00:24:15.348 --> 00:24:21.148 Perhaps, but there's no knowable answer in this life. 00:24:21.148 --> 00:24:32.168 And so, there's no amount of investigation where you're going to arrive at a definitive answer and so it is a distraction where you could spend that time on better things. 00:24:32.168 --> 00:24:36.728 So I think the short answer is that can demons influence the physical world? 00:24:36.728 --> 00:24:38.108 Sure, we know that. 00:24:38.108 --> 00:24:40.048 Demonic possession is a thing. 00:24:40.048 --> 00:24:43.948 And so, could they influence genetics as part of that? 00:24:43.948 --> 00:24:44.988 Maybe. 00:24:44.988 --> 00:24:46.468 We don't know. 00:24:46.468 --> 00:24:57.928 I don't think that you have hybrids though, because again, angels are spirit beings, not human beings that have a human body and then like a super soul or something. 00:24:57.928 --> 00:24:58.628 So it doesn't work. 00:24:58.628 --> 00:25:04.088 The biology doesn't work there for the half-breed thing, which is basically fan fiction. 00:25:04.088 --> 00:25:05.528 You have the Book of Enoch and things like that. 00:25:05.528 --> 00:25:07.848 You're talking about Jewish fan fiction. 00:25:07.848 --> 00:25:10.828 And so, I'm not going to put much stock in that. 00:25:13.568 --> 00:25:19.308 The next question is about evolution and some related things. 00:25:19.308 --> 00:25:32.128 In the Stone Quire episode where you discussed evolution being debunked by natural selection, being deleterious, it's more specifically that the mutations are deleterious. 00:25:32.128 --> 00:25:38.408 Does this point to the first men being visibly similar to Europeans or Americans? 00:25:38.408 --> 00:25:43.148 We have the largest set of possible physical characteristics when compared to non-Japathitic races. 00:25:43.148 --> 00:25:44.788 That's true. 00:25:44.788 --> 00:25:49.468 Eye color, hair color, things like that, particularly regarding coloration. 00:25:49.468 --> 00:25:50.168 Yeah, exactly. 00:25:52.188 --> 00:25:57.508 So, I think we can probably fairly conclude that Adam was fair-skinned. 00:25:57.508 --> 00:26:00.328 Can we say what shade of fair-skinned he was? 00:26:00.328 --> 00:26:01.388 I don't think so. 00:26:01.388 --> 00:26:03.368 Scripture doesn't tell us. 00:26:03.368 --> 00:26:15.888 But if you look at dark skin, that is an adaptation with regard to exposure, particularly to high levels of ultraviolet radiation, because it protects you from that. 00:26:15.888 --> 00:26:17.168 We all know that. 00:26:17.168 --> 00:26:21.568 Blacks can sunburn despite the fact that many of them don't even know that. 00:26:21.568 --> 00:26:30.748 They can sunburn, but it takes them longer, which makes perfect sense, because they're supposed to live in an equatorial region, not areas that get snow. 00:26:30.748 --> 00:26:40.648 And so, for those of us who are native to areas that do, in fact, get snow, we need lighter skin because we need more of those wavelengths for vitamin D and various other health reasons. 00:26:40.648 --> 00:26:51.968 And so, the adaptations don't make any sense for atom in the state of perfection, because ultraviolet radiation wasn't a problem. 00:26:51.968 --> 00:26:57.548 God didn't set it up so that in the world pre-fall, you could have had skin cancer. 00:26:57.548 --> 00:27:01.108 And so, protection from ultraviolet would not have been a thing. 00:27:01.108 --> 00:27:14.328 So, it does seem to follow that darker skin tones that are part of evolution post-fall would not have been part of atom, except insofar as they were possible in his genome. 00:27:15.288 --> 00:27:19.868 And so, again, you get the evolution due to the loss of information over time. 00:27:19.868 --> 00:27:34.708 And this also follows because we have descriptions of some of the sons of the sons of the sons of sons of Noah, depending on where exactly it is in the timeline, and they're described as being fair skinned. 00:27:34.708 --> 00:27:40.848 They're described as being able to blush and things like that, which only those of us who have fair skin can blush. 00:27:40.848 --> 00:27:47.648 Yes, you can have the physiological response, in those with much darker skin, but you don't see it. 00:27:47.648 --> 00:27:51.168 And so you would not comment on it, because it's not something that's visible. 00:27:51.168 --> 00:27:59.368 And so when we're dealing with the men in scripture, we're basically dealing with almost all men who are in fact fair skinned. 00:27:59.368 --> 00:28:08.308 We would recognize them as having a European style phenotype or an ancient Mediterranean phenotype. 00:28:08.308 --> 00:28:19.128 Because all of the areas around the Mediterranean and ancient times, those men were fair skinned, with the exception of those who came from other parts deeper into Africa for trading and purposes like that. 00:28:19.128 --> 00:28:23.728 So, for instance, we do have Ethiopians in the Old Testament. 00:28:23.728 --> 00:28:29.888 We have some of them who traded with, and actually it's one of the reasons they had Christianity very early on. 00:28:29.888 --> 00:28:34.608 They were in trading relationships with Old Testament Israel. 00:28:34.608 --> 00:28:40.048 So they had access to the scriptures and things like that, which basically no one else did at the time. 00:28:40.048 --> 00:28:41.328 They would have been dark skinned. 00:28:41.608 --> 00:28:45.828 The Ethiopians were dark, they're called Ethiopians because it means burnt face in Greek. 00:28:45.828 --> 00:28:47.348 They were dark skinned. 00:28:47.348 --> 00:28:51.868 But by and large, the men in scripture are fair skinned. 00:28:51.868 --> 00:28:53.688 Christ was fair skinned. 00:28:53.688 --> 00:29:02.208 He probably had light brown hair, he probably wasn't blonde with blue eyes, but he had fair skin and light brown hair. 00:29:02.208 --> 00:29:09.208 That's the most likely thing given the period and the artwork that we have from those shortly after that period depicting him. 00:29:10.708 --> 00:29:18.428 So with regard to Adam, yes, he was fair skinned, but I'm not going to guess he was pale, copper, whatever it happens to be. 00:29:18.428 --> 00:29:22.668 He wasn't black, is sort of one of the short answers there. 00:29:24.848 --> 00:29:29.508 The next question is about the descent into hell. 00:29:29.508 --> 00:29:32.628 Let me see where that one went. 00:29:41.367 --> 00:29:43.467 I think the question has disappeared. 00:29:47.987 --> 00:29:58.487 Well, I know what the question is about, so I can just answer the question and then link to it when I figure out where the question is actually gone. 00:29:58.487 --> 00:30:05.187 But the question is basically, what was the descent into hell? 00:30:05.187 --> 00:30:12.687 Because obviously the creed speaks about he descended into hell, the third day he rose again from the dead, et cetera, et cetera. 00:30:12.687 --> 00:30:20.127 And this is one of those questions on which there is disagreement among Christians. 00:30:20.127 --> 00:30:31.987 There is not disagreement among Lutherans, incidentally, because we all hold to the solid declaration on this one, and the solid declaration of the formula of Concord is very clear on this point. 00:30:33.867 --> 00:30:37.127 Let me just go ahead and pull that up so we can look at it. 00:30:38.127 --> 00:30:39.747 I will read part of it. 00:30:42.247 --> 00:30:45.767 So, Christ descent into hell, this is Article 9. 00:30:45.767 --> 00:30:49.687 I will just read the second and third paragraph. 00:30:49.687 --> 00:31:00.827 And we simply believe that the entire person, God and man, after the burial, descended into hell, conquered the devil, destroyed the power of hell, and took from the devil all his might. 00:31:00.827 --> 00:31:05.527 We should not, however, trouble ourselves with high and acute thoughts as to how this occurred. 00:31:06.147 --> 00:31:16.847 For with our reason and our five senses, this article can be comprehended as little as the preceding one, how Christ is placed at the right hand of the Almighty Power and Majesty of God. 00:31:16.847 --> 00:31:21.447 But we are simply to believe it and adhere to the Word in such mysteries of faith. 00:31:21.447 --> 00:31:30.647 Thus we retain the substance, the sound doctrine, and true consolation that neither hell nor the devil can take captive or injure us, and all who believe in Christ. 00:31:31.567 --> 00:31:50.967 And so, the teaching here, and the important distinction, so between Lutherans and some other Christians, and I think this is obvious from Scripture and obvious from the Creed, the descent into hell is not part of Christ's state of humiliation. 00:31:50.967 --> 00:32:07.207 And if you're not familiar with the theological terms of these, the state of humiliation is basically, depends on which sense you're using, but it's either his entire time on earth, or it is the trials and tribulations of the last few days of his life. 00:32:07.207 --> 00:32:16.607 But at any rate, it is his suffering, it is his being cursed in the place of sin on our behalf. 00:32:16.607 --> 00:32:21.047 And so you have the state of humiliation, and then you have the state of exaltation. 00:32:21.047 --> 00:32:24.627 The descent into hell is part of the state of exaltation. 00:32:25.447 --> 00:32:29.567 It is him going to hell and declaring his victory. 00:32:29.567 --> 00:32:32.647 He's preaching, which is one of the things that Luther says about it. 00:32:32.647 --> 00:32:40.747 I don't have the quote here, but he is proclaiming his victory to the devil and his fallen angels, and perhaps also to those in hell. 00:32:40.747 --> 00:32:49.487 Lutherans don't hold to the release of those in limbo because we don't hold to limbo being a thing. 00:32:49.487 --> 00:32:51.067 The Roman Catholics are going to hold to that. 00:32:51.067 --> 00:32:52.227 That's going to be part of their argument. 00:32:52.347 --> 00:33:00.547 But the big division is whether you hold it to be part of the state of humiliation or part of the state of exaltation. 00:33:00.547 --> 00:33:10.347 And I think that from both the creeds again and scripture, you clearly have to argue, you have to believe that it is part of the exaltation. 00:33:10.347 --> 00:33:15.727 And the clearest warrant for that is what does Christ say on the cross? 00:33:15.727 --> 00:33:16.627 It is finished. 00:33:17.607 --> 00:33:30.747 Well, if the descent into hell is part of the state of humiliation, then it is part of his work, and then it's not finished, which would contradict what he said on the cross. 00:33:30.747 --> 00:33:34.987 So I think you have to conclude, it is part of his state of exaltation. 00:33:34.987 --> 00:33:38.347 It's proclaiming victory, not part of his suffering. 00:33:38.347 --> 00:33:40.067 He didn't go to hell to suffer. 00:33:40.067 --> 00:33:42.507 He went to hell to proclaim that he had won. 00:33:47.187 --> 00:33:52.587 Those are the questions that I have for today written down, but I saw a few in the chat. 00:33:52.587 --> 00:33:55.147 I'll scroll back and see if I can find those. 00:33:57.867 --> 00:33:59.067 Oh, yes, that's... 00:33:59.067 --> 00:34:02.347 I found the descent into hell question is in fact in the chat. 00:34:02.347 --> 00:34:06.407 So I will copy and quote that in the show notes. 00:34:12.588 --> 00:34:19.468 Will you address the contradictions between James and Paul around salvation through faith versus works? 00:34:19.468 --> 00:34:22.548 No matter how many times I read it, I cannot reconcile the two. 00:34:22.548 --> 00:34:33.848 I commented on that last week, actually, and I can go over that just briefly again, because it's always a point that comes up, and it's worth addressing. 00:34:35.568 --> 00:34:46.228 The issue between seemingly the contradiction between faith and works is sort of an order of operations. 00:34:46.228 --> 00:34:48.308 You are saved by faith. 00:34:48.308 --> 00:34:50.608 You can be saved only by faith. 00:34:50.608 --> 00:34:57.608 And the reason you can be saved only by faith is that it is faith in Christ, and that is what saves you. 00:34:57.608 --> 00:35:02.608 Because you are saved by works, but you're saved by Christ's works, not yours. 00:35:02.608 --> 00:35:05.708 Because sin is an infinite debt. 00:35:05.708 --> 00:35:16.208 And the reason that sin is an infinite debt, and the reason I have to explain this is because this is an understanding that has fallen away in modern times because our legal system has become so corrupt. 00:35:16.208 --> 00:35:25.608 But we used to understand that the nature of a transgression is partly incumbent. 00:35:25.608 --> 00:35:32.788 It relies partly upon the nature of the person against whom the transgression was committed. 00:35:32.788 --> 00:35:44.588 Another perhaps clearer and easier to understand way of saying that is that the person you wronged matters for the nature of your transgression, your crime, your sin. 00:35:44.588 --> 00:36:05.888 And the best example of this, and the one that I usually use, is we used to understand that there were different kinds of treason because there's high treason, treason committed against your sovereign, and then there's petty, which is just the French for small, not petty in the sense of what we think of petty these days, petty in the sense of lesser. 00:36:05.888 --> 00:36:14.448 So not high treason, not against the king, but petty treason against someone in a position of headship over you. 00:36:14.448 --> 00:36:23.808 The most common version of that would be either your local lord, or if you are a woman, your husband, or if you're a child, your father. 00:36:23.808 --> 00:36:31.768 And so the transgression is worse because it is committed against someone to whom you owe a certain sort of loyalty and duty. 00:36:31.768 --> 00:36:40.748 And we would also recognize that a crime committed against your own child is worse because you owe them a particular sort of duty. 00:36:40.748 --> 00:36:45.468 In the case of sin, the transgression is against God. 00:36:45.468 --> 00:36:49.268 God's dignity is infinite because he is God. 00:36:49.268 --> 00:36:57.508 And so the transgression that is sin is infinite because of the nature of the one against whom you have transgressed. 00:36:58.228 --> 00:37:03.848 And so it is only the infinite work of Christ that can be set in the scales against that. 00:37:03.848 --> 00:37:07.228 That's why nothing you do to never save you. 00:37:07.228 --> 00:37:14.888 It's why those who are in hell are there for eternity because they have elected to refuse Christ's gift. 00:37:14.888 --> 00:37:17.368 They have elected to refuse faith. 00:37:17.368 --> 00:37:21.608 And so what they are doing in hell is paying off their debt. 00:37:21.608 --> 00:37:25.048 The problem is their debt is infinite, and they are finite. 00:37:25.048 --> 00:37:28.668 And so it can never be paid in full, and so hell is eternal. 00:37:29.888 --> 00:37:37.308 And so you are saved by faith, but you are not saved, in the word of James, by faith alone. 00:37:37.308 --> 00:37:50.908 What he means by that, I know it sounds crazy to hear that coming from a Lutheran, but what he means by that is that a faith that is alone, a faith that does not produce good works is not faith. 00:37:50.908 --> 00:37:51.828 It's a dead faith. 00:37:51.828 --> 00:37:52.788 It's not a living faith. 00:37:53.408 --> 00:37:57.248 And so, again, that's one of the reasons that we put the things we put on the challenge coin. 00:37:57.248 --> 00:38:00.388 I lifted one up and I showed it last time. 00:38:00.388 --> 00:38:04.848 But a good tree produces good works. 00:38:04.848 --> 00:38:10.828 And so, if your faith is living, your faith is the good tree producing those good works. 00:38:10.828 --> 00:38:17.548 If your faith doesn't produce good works, it is producing bad fruit, which is, say, the absence of good works. 00:38:17.548 --> 00:38:18.768 It's a bad tree. 00:38:18.768 --> 00:38:20.248 It's a dead faith. 00:38:20.248 --> 00:38:21.328 Dead faith can't save you. 00:38:22.108 --> 00:38:24.308 And so, there's no contradiction there. 00:38:24.308 --> 00:38:28.748 You just have to understand, again, sort of the order of operations. 00:38:28.748 --> 00:38:34.168 You're saved by faith, and then because your faith is living, it produces good works. 00:38:34.168 --> 00:38:37.648 And we should also look at good works as a gift from God. 00:38:37.648 --> 00:38:41.768 It does say that good works were prepared beforehand, that you should walk in them. 00:38:41.768 --> 00:38:44.688 God is the one who set up these things for you to do. 00:38:44.688 --> 00:38:59.948 But one of the reasons he did that is because you can look to the good works that your faith is producing and be assured of your salvation because you recognize that your faith is living and producing those good works. 00:38:59.948 --> 00:39:02.208 So it's actually, it's good news. 00:39:02.208 --> 00:39:06.148 It's not law, it's not saying you must or you will be damned. 00:39:06.148 --> 00:39:15.748