WEBVTT 00:00:03.720 --> 00:00:05.740 Welcome to the At Any Cost Podcast. 00:00:05.740 --> 00:00:06.600 I am Corey J. 00:00:06.600 --> 00:00:10.620 Mahler, and it is the 4th of December, 2025. 00:00:10.620 --> 00:00:16.100 This is episode six, which also happens to be the sixth Q&A episode. 00:00:16.100 --> 00:00:22.540 I have a number of questions that were submitted various ways, including via the forum, thankfully. 00:00:22.540 --> 00:00:24.320 I'll go over that at the end. 00:00:25.380 --> 00:00:29.060 I think that I will be able to get through all of the questions tonight, most likely. 00:00:29.280 --> 00:00:32.300 I think that it won't take more than an hour or so. 00:00:32.300 --> 00:00:35.560 Watch it wind up taking an hour and a half now that I've said that. 00:00:35.560 --> 00:00:40.340 At any rate, I see green for all of the platforms except for Kick. 00:00:40.340 --> 00:00:42.580 I know why that one's not working. 00:00:42.580 --> 00:00:46.840 It's because apparently their bitrate cap is even lower than I thought it was. 00:00:46.840 --> 00:00:59.560 So either I might not use them, or I'll figure out some way to transcode that so that the quality is not terrible elsewhere, because other platforms happily accept a higher bitrate. 00:00:59.560 --> 00:01:02.740 It's just apparently Kick does not. 00:01:02.740 --> 00:01:04.680 So... 00:01:04.680 --> 00:01:10.580 That being said, there will be links, of course, to where you can submit questions and everything like that. 00:01:10.580 --> 00:01:14.360 In the description should already be there in this case. 00:01:14.360 --> 00:01:23.840 And high quality audio is available after the fact, usually a day or two lag for that, because I record the audio locally and then upload that high quality audio. 00:01:24.780 --> 00:01:27.680 And you can subscribe to that the same way you would any other podcast. 00:01:27.680 --> 00:01:38.560 You can use the direct RSS link, which is obviously recommended, because that can't be censored, unless Cloudflare decides to censor me, in which case, there's nothing I can do about that. 00:01:38.560 --> 00:01:44.020 So, that being said, we will jump into the first question here. 00:01:45.600 --> 00:01:51.460 The first question is about introductory resources for Lutheranism. 00:01:51.460 --> 00:01:58.100 What books would you recommend as an introduction to Lutheranism, especially for someone from a reformed background? 00:01:58.100 --> 00:02:03.180 I read long, dense books, so I'm open to reading such resources if they are worthwhile. 00:02:04.700 --> 00:02:17.080 Now for that, obviously, the first recommendation is just going to be the Book of Concord, which will already get you about 1,000 to 1,200 pages worth, so I guess that meets the requirement for long, dense books. 00:02:17.080 --> 00:02:19.460 But parts of it aren't that dense. 00:02:19.460 --> 00:02:26.360 The Augsburg Confession is very readable, the Catechism is very readable, but it is a long book. 00:02:26.360 --> 00:02:28.780 And so that would be my first recommendation. 00:02:28.780 --> 00:02:33.780 I was going to see if I had it on my desk here, but it's up on my shelf, so I won't bother grabbing one. 00:02:33.780 --> 00:02:41.320 You can either read that via the physical book, you can purchase that from CPH, or find it secondhand, you'll find it much cheaper. 00:02:41.320 --> 00:02:44.380 Any of the translations that exist in English are going to be fine. 00:02:44.380 --> 00:02:45.340 You don't have to worry about those. 00:02:45.340 --> 00:02:49.280 They have not played games with translating the Book of Concord yet. 00:02:50.220 --> 00:02:52.480 So, whichever one you want. 00:02:52.480 --> 00:03:17.720 I would recommend the Reader's Edition second, not because it's my favorite in terms of the translation quality, and by that I don't mean, I want to be specific, I don't mean that the other translations are inferior in terms of accuracy, but the type of English that is used in the translation, I prefer the older, more complex English of the Triglada, which is available free online. 00:03:18.260 --> 00:03:21.680 That's the website that I maintain, the bookofconghor.org. 00:03:21.680 --> 00:03:24.940 So either way is fine. 00:03:24.940 --> 00:03:31.220 But in addition to that, you should grab Melonkhthen's and Caridion, his basically small catechism. 00:03:31.220 --> 00:03:34.920 He has a condensed version of what Lutherans teach. 00:03:34.920 --> 00:03:40.460 That has always been very highly recommended down through the centuries, so I would definitely recommend grabbing that book. 00:03:40.460 --> 00:03:44.200 In addition to that, Luther on Galatians is an excellent book. 00:03:44.200 --> 00:03:46.520 That one is just a general recommendation for any Christian. 00:03:47.360 --> 00:03:55.520 Luther treats the Gospel in the Book of Galatians excellently in that volume, so go ahead and grab his Commentary on Galatians. 00:03:57.280 --> 00:04:09.500 For those who want denser materials, and so that goes to sort of the second part of this question, or the subset of the question, Martin Chemnitz is going to be the general recommendation. 00:04:09.500 --> 00:04:12.380 Now, many things by Luther are of course worth your time. 00:04:12.380 --> 00:04:14.060 You can go and read those. 00:04:14.060 --> 00:04:15.200 Pick whichever one interests you. 00:04:15.320 --> 00:04:16.460 He has collections of sermons. 00:04:16.460 --> 00:04:18.000 He has commentaries on various books. 00:04:18.000 --> 00:04:21.320 He has an eight-volume set on Genesis, for instance. 00:04:21.320 --> 00:04:23.720 I have that on my shelves here. 00:04:23.720 --> 00:04:33.400 But Martin Chemnitz is going to be the one you want for sort of a dense theological treatment of these topics from a Lutheran perspective. 00:04:33.400 --> 00:04:35.660 In particular, I'm looking at the set here on my shelves. 00:04:35.660 --> 00:04:37.340 That's why I'm looking at direction. 00:04:37.340 --> 00:04:47.480 In particular, he treats the Council of Trent in four volumes, so that's a response to the Roman Catholics, the Council of Trent being their response to the Reformation, to the Lutherans. 00:04:47.480 --> 00:04:49.480 He also has a multi-volume. 00:04:49.480 --> 00:04:56.480 It's three volumes, but unfortunately, CPH published it as two, which means the second one is enormous, quite frankly. 00:04:56.480 --> 00:05:02.180 His Losy Theologiki, which is various different subjects in theology. 00:05:02.180 --> 00:05:04.020 That one is very worthwhile. 00:05:04.020 --> 00:05:09.020 He has an apology of the Book of Concord, which goes into depth on some of those things a little bit. 00:05:09.020 --> 00:05:10.000 Those are very worth grabbing. 00:05:10.740 --> 00:05:32.960 In addition to those resources, two that I would very highly recommend, particularly for someone in the American context, Franz Pieper, his Christian Dogmatics, which is a three-volume, goes over basically all of theology in three volumes, does a very good job of it, many references in that, so you can find additional resources. 00:05:32.960 --> 00:05:36.320 And then CFW Valter, the founder of the LCMS. 00:05:36.320 --> 00:05:43.700 He has a number of volumes, really almost anything written by him, you're going to enjoy reading, and it will be profitable. 00:05:43.700 --> 00:05:50.740 But particularly in this case, I would say, grab Law and Gospel, and his book on predestination for obvious reasons. 00:05:50.740 --> 00:05:57.160 If you're coming from a reform background, you're going to have questions about the differences with regard to our teachings on election. 00:05:57.160 --> 00:06:00.360 And so his volume on predestination is excellent. 00:06:00.360 --> 00:06:09.420 And then finally, if you are really into sort of the getting into the weeds, Gerhard would be the recommendation from the Lutheran camp. 00:06:09.420 --> 00:06:17.720 That's not a general recommendation, because most people will not read him very profitably, but it's there if you are deeply invested and interested in these subjects. 00:06:17.720 --> 00:06:19.500 And he has many volumes. 00:06:19.500 --> 00:06:25.560 They have not all been translated yet, so I guess bonus points if you know Latin and German, and a few other things. 00:06:25.560 --> 00:06:29.280 But if you don't know those, many of them have been translated. 00:06:29.280 --> 00:06:32.640 CPH is currently working through translating them, so you can grab many of those volumes. 00:06:32.640 --> 00:06:34.940 I have a number of those here on my shelves as well. 00:06:36.160 --> 00:06:37.420 Those are the basic recommendations. 00:06:37.420 --> 00:06:43.700 And then probably grab a copy of the Lutheran Study Bible, because the notes in that are actually very good. 00:06:43.700 --> 00:06:47.480 I object to relatively little in them, which is surprising. 00:06:47.480 --> 00:06:53.020 I'm sure you all know that's surprising, but it is a very good resource, really, for any Christian. 00:06:53.020 --> 00:06:54.000 I would highly recommend that. 00:06:54.000 --> 00:06:58.000 It's probably the best Study Bible currently available. 00:06:58.000 --> 00:07:00.580 So moving on to the next question. 00:07:00.580 --> 00:07:04.080 This is a continuation from last week. 00:07:04.160 --> 00:07:04.840 Someone asked a question. 00:07:04.840 --> 00:07:08.520 I didn't really answer the entirety of it. 00:07:08.520 --> 00:07:13.720 It was about Germany's alliance with Japan and why Japan didn't open a front with the Soviet Union. 00:07:13.720 --> 00:07:23.320 I answered the second part, but not really the underlying question of, when should Christians form alliances with non-Christians? 00:07:23.320 --> 00:07:29.180 Because obviously, in this case, Germany, a Christian country, Japan, not a Christian country. 00:07:29.180 --> 00:07:32.220 Still to this day, Japan, not a Christian country, unfortunately. 00:07:34.020 --> 00:07:36.960 Largely due to MacArthur, of course. 00:07:36.960 --> 00:07:49.000 But insofar as alliances are concerned, I guess the general way that I could start would be by saying, Christians are permitted to use the imperial laws. 00:07:49.000 --> 00:07:59.280 Now, that's going to sound perhaps crazy to modern ears, but what that means, and the context in which that was said originally, was during the Reformation. 00:07:59.280 --> 00:08:10.840 Because you had the Anabaptists and others who were basically saying that Christians shouldn't have any dealings with the world, they shouldn't use anything that is so-called secular, which is kind of ironic, given they're dealing with the Holy Roman Empire at the time. 00:08:10.840 --> 00:08:14.900 It's not even actually truly secular like our modern government. 00:08:14.900 --> 00:08:27.100 But the general rule is that Christians are allowed to use the secular courts, the secular laws, all of these things that are not indeed Christian, and today, unfortunately, are anti-Christian in many cases. 00:08:27.240 --> 00:08:37.540 Because you are permitted to live your life, and states are also permitted to do things, like have alliances with other states, even if they are not Christian. 00:08:37.540 --> 00:08:39.120 And so it's going to be a wisdom call. 00:08:39.120 --> 00:08:40.200 This is a political call. 00:08:40.200 --> 00:08:42.680 This is not really a Christian call. 00:08:42.680 --> 00:08:47.000 It's not really a religious or a theological question so much. 00:08:47.000 --> 00:08:48.760 This is politics. 00:08:48.760 --> 00:08:53.200 Whether or not you have an alliance with another nation is a matter of politics. 00:08:53.200 --> 00:09:01.600 Now as Christians, should we try to use that in order to have missionaries in those lands, to try to convert them to Christianity? 00:09:01.600 --> 00:09:03.740 The answer, of course, is yes. 00:09:03.740 --> 00:09:10.900 To go back to the example of Japan, MacArthur should have told the emperor, you're Christian now, convert your people. 00:09:10.900 --> 00:09:13.120 That would have been the Christian response. 00:09:13.120 --> 00:09:15.900 In fact, that's how most Christians were converted. 00:09:15.900 --> 00:09:21.280 They didn't go around trying to convert every single man on the street as it were. 00:09:21.280 --> 00:09:27.540 They converted the kings, they converted the princes, they converted the tribal chieftains, who then converted their people. 00:09:27.540 --> 00:09:29.440 That is the usual way it goes. 00:09:29.440 --> 00:09:32.160 And so politics has a role to play. 00:09:32.160 --> 00:09:35.400 I could go back to the Book of Concord, which I just mentioned. 00:09:35.400 --> 00:09:38.220 The documents in that are signed by Christian princes. 00:09:38.220 --> 00:09:39.540 They're not signed by pastors. 00:09:39.540 --> 00:09:41.980 In most cases, there are some documents that are. 00:09:41.980 --> 00:09:50.060 But the men who presented those things, the men who advanced them, the men who championed them, made them possible, were politicians. 00:09:50.060 --> 00:09:53.760 Were, of course, hereditary politicians because it was an aristocracy. 00:09:53.760 --> 00:09:55.880 This is the Holy Roman Empire. 00:09:55.880 --> 00:10:01.400 But those men were not first and foremost pastors or theologians. 00:10:01.400 --> 00:10:03.100 This was a matter of politics. 00:10:03.100 --> 00:10:12.160 And so there is an intersection between Christianity and politics that many men modernly do not want to recognize because it makes them uncomfortable. 00:10:12.160 --> 00:10:13.520 There are a number of reasons for that. 00:10:13.520 --> 00:10:25.900 I won't get into them now, perhaps in response to a future question, but I think that generally addresses the question here of what Christian nations should do with regard to alliances specifically with non-Christian nation. 00:10:25.900 --> 00:10:27.780 The answer is, it's politics. 00:10:27.780 --> 00:10:29.360 It's a wisdom call. 00:10:32.600 --> 00:10:37.140 The third question here, I will read the content of that one. 00:10:37.140 --> 00:10:43.580 Can you recommend works that explain to me why some art is beautiful and some art is degenerate? 00:10:43.580 --> 00:10:46.420 What factors make art beautiful or degenerate? 00:10:46.420 --> 00:10:52.200 I know Jackson Pollock paintings are degenerate, but I cannot entirely explain why. 00:10:52.200 --> 00:10:55.280 Do the transcendentals play into this? 00:10:55.280 --> 00:10:59.100 And so the answer, of course, to the last question there is yes. 00:10:59.100 --> 00:11:00.800 The transcendentals play a role in this. 00:11:00.800 --> 00:11:08.500 In fact, the transcendentals are a huge part of this, because beauty is a transcendental. 00:11:08.500 --> 00:11:13.080 And so what you're really recognizing is that some things are not beautiful. 00:11:13.080 --> 00:11:19.800 And there are a number of ways that Christians down through the centuries have explained this, have addressed this topic. 00:11:19.800 --> 00:11:27.560 But to answer the question here for reading recommendations, really, and then I'll get into the transcendentals a little more, perhaps. 00:11:27.560 --> 00:11:36.260 You are going to find this in many of the Church Fathers and many theologians, but not necessarily an in-depth treatment. 00:11:36.260 --> 00:11:42.880 We are going to find a deeper treatment, perhaps more expansive, would be St. 00:11:42.880 --> 00:11:45.920 Augustine deals with this in his Confessions. 00:11:47.300 --> 00:11:59.420 I believe it's Book 10, but he deals with the issue of beauty and incidentally also the issue of art, because anytime you are dealing with beauty, you are going to be dealing with art, because that's the question here. 00:11:59.420 --> 00:12:03.200 Is there a sort of connection between the two, a necessary connection? 00:12:03.200 --> 00:12:04.840 The answer is yes. 00:12:04.840 --> 00:12:08.100 Art that is beautiful is art. 00:12:08.100 --> 00:12:10.820 Art that is ugly isn't actually art. 00:12:10.820 --> 00:12:21.980 It's deliberately destructive, it's subversive, and of course, you see the Jews involved very deeply in art that is meant, so called art, that is meant to undermine society and destroy it. 00:12:21.980 --> 00:12:28.280 They'll call all sorts of things art, but really the goal is the destruction of the beautiful, so it's sort of the antithesis of art. 00:12:28.280 --> 00:12:29.220 It's an anti-art. 00:12:29.220 --> 00:12:31.620 It's something deeply evil. 00:12:31.620 --> 00:12:36.460 But to keep up with the recommendations for readings, another one would be St. 00:12:36.460 --> 00:12:38.520 Thomas Aquinas in his Summa. 00:12:38.520 --> 00:12:40.880 He addresses this in the first part. 00:12:42.860 --> 00:12:53.100 Boethius is going to be a general recommendation here that you're going to see from basically anyone who answers this question and is familiar with the literature, the Consolation of Philosophy. 00:12:53.100 --> 00:12:54.480 He deals with the issue in that book. 00:12:54.480 --> 00:12:56.560 I would highly recommend that one. 00:12:56.560 --> 00:13:01.400 Pseudodinicius is going to be another recommendation you'll see here. 00:13:01.400 --> 00:13:02.300 Someone of a mixed bag. 00:13:02.300 --> 00:13:06.740 He gets into the mysticism a little bit more than I would prefer anyway. 00:13:06.740 --> 00:13:08.560 Perhaps he will find something valuable there. 00:13:09.640 --> 00:13:11.240 That is another potential reading for you. 00:13:11.240 --> 00:13:14.200 The Divine Names will be the book you want from him. 00:13:14.200 --> 00:13:19.760 And then I actually have a specific recommendation other than those ones as well. 00:13:19.760 --> 00:13:22.760 I'll go into sort of the philosophy a little bit more in a second here. 00:13:22.760 --> 00:13:30.780 But another recommendation I have that came to mind when I was looking at this question would be Leisure as the Basis of Culture. 00:13:30.780 --> 00:13:36.020 And I would recommend getting the double volume that also has The Philosophical Act, which is an essay. 00:13:36.020 --> 00:13:37.980 Those are by Josef Pieper. 00:13:38.320 --> 00:13:42.980 I grabbed my copy off my shelves before I started recording here. 00:13:42.980 --> 00:14:00.640 I don't know that I would recommend it to everyone, but any man who is Christian or even not a Christian and has an interest in the transcendentals, in beauty, in art, in philosophy particularly, I would very highly recommend reading this book. 00:14:00.640 --> 00:14:04.540 It is a very good, very important book. 00:14:04.540 --> 00:14:16.040 And you can think of it in some ways as sort of a superior philosophical, theological version of Hayek's Road to Serfdom. 00:14:16.040 --> 00:14:24.080 It's more than that, but that can sort of couch it for men who are more familiar with that side of things than philosophy and theology. 00:14:24.080 --> 00:14:26.700 But definitely highly recommend grabbing that book. 00:14:26.700 --> 00:14:29.580 I think it's a pretty cheap book these days. 00:14:30.640 --> 00:14:44.600 But insofar as, I'll go with Thomas Aquinas, insofar as Thomas Aquinas is concerned, he describes beauty and, of course, the convertibility of the transcendentals because God's nature is one, God being one. 00:14:44.600 --> 00:14:47.800 He is not composed to parts, the transcendentals are all one. 00:14:47.800 --> 00:14:51.060 We speak of them in different terms because we're human and we're limited. 00:14:51.060 --> 00:14:56.100 We can only deal with them in this sort of partitioned state and sense. 00:14:56.100 --> 00:15:02.620 We can't deal with them in terms of the totality because that would be dealing with an infinite, and we're a finite. 00:15:02.620 --> 00:15:05.720 We can't deal with the infinite, of course. 00:15:05.720 --> 00:15:11.160 But insofar as that goes, I actually want to pull up his quote here. 00:15:12.220 --> 00:15:14.040 I'll give it in Latin first. 00:15:14.040 --> 00:15:25.760 But the quote from Aquinas is integrita siva perfectio debita proportio sive consonanti et claretas, which translated is just integrity or perfection. 00:15:25.760 --> 00:15:29.080 This is speaking of the nature of the beautiful. 00:15:29.240 --> 00:15:31.380 And so, it ties into artwork. 00:15:31.380 --> 00:15:35.900 Integrity or perfection do proportion or harmony and clarity. 00:15:35.900 --> 00:15:39.200 That is how he described beauty. 00:15:39.200 --> 00:15:44.880 Those are the things that go into making up what we perceive as and call beauty. 00:15:44.880 --> 00:15:51.080 And so, again, we're dividing this into parts in order to speak of it in human comprehensible terms. 00:15:51.080 --> 00:15:52.360 Because, again, God is infinite. 00:15:52.360 --> 00:15:54.760 We can only look at him in portion. 00:15:54.760 --> 00:15:56.140 We can look at him in part. 00:15:56.140 --> 00:16:00.240 Except, of course, beholding Christ in which the fullness of deity dwells bodily. 00:16:00.240 --> 00:16:04.720 So that's a different topic for a different time, perhaps, though. 00:16:04.720 --> 00:16:11.060 But insofar as the reading recommendations go, I think those are probably a good starting place. 00:16:11.060 --> 00:16:17.740 And then you can get into a few of the other Church Fathers deal with beauty. 00:16:17.740 --> 00:16:19.840 But I would say start there. 00:16:19.840 --> 00:16:25.160 And if you read through all of that and want more recommendations, I can maybe make some more recommendations, or you'll find them along the way. 00:16:25.860 --> 00:16:32.860 Because some of these men will reference other authors, and then you can get into that stuff as well, sort of like looking at the footnotes. 00:16:32.860 --> 00:16:37.720 They're not going to have footnotes in most cases, but effectively the same thing. 00:16:37.720 --> 00:16:47.640 But insofar as beauty and artwork is concerned a little more generally, yes, we're dealing with the transcendentals here. 00:16:47.640 --> 00:16:52.920 And so something that is not good, ultimately is also not beautiful. 00:16:53.680 --> 00:16:59.380 Something that is not true ultimately is not beautiful because of the convertibility of the transcendentals. 00:17:00.540 --> 00:17:08.100 So when you look at artwork that is degenerate, you recognize that, hopefully, you recognize that. 00:17:08.100 --> 00:17:21.140 You should be very worried if you don't, because if you don't recognize something as degenerate when you see it, then it means that your sense of the beautiful, the true and the good has been dulled. 00:17:21.760 --> 00:17:29.000 You have been poisoned by the culture to the extent where you no longer recognize these things when you see them. 00:17:29.000 --> 00:17:43.740 So I think, of course, as partly as an attorney and partly as someone who's dealt with the philosophy and things, I think of the famous comment from one of our Supreme Court justices when he was dealing with obscenity, speaking about pornography, he said, I know it when I see it. 00:17:43.740 --> 00:17:53.900 And he's absolutely right, because you do know evil when you see it, and you do know the good when you see it, because God has given you those things, he has built that into you. 00:17:53.900 --> 00:17:59.840 You have a conscience, and you have a sense of the beautiful, you have a sense of the true, you have a sense of the good. 00:17:59.840 --> 00:18:14.040 And things that run counter to those, which is to say, things that are opposed to God, things that run counter to God, are going to trigger that sense in you, and you're going to recognize them as degenerate, as wicked, as evil. 00:18:14.040 --> 00:18:22.200 And that's why when you see paintings and other things by these evil men, and that's part of it, of course, you can look at the nature of the man who created the work. 00:18:22.200 --> 00:18:24.640 It is almost always going to follow. 00:18:24.640 --> 00:18:26.520 Seldom is there going to be any disconnect there. 00:18:26.520 --> 00:18:28.320 I can't even think of an example. 00:18:28.320 --> 00:18:30.340 As I sit here, I'm trying to think of one. 00:18:30.340 --> 00:18:32.140 I can't bring one to mind. 00:18:32.140 --> 00:18:42.900 But even, I mean, maybe there are going to be men who are truly wicked degenerates in their life and produce a great work of literature. 00:18:42.900 --> 00:18:51.520 That sometimes happens, but you're going to know it when you see it, when it comes to artwork that is degenerate. 00:18:51.520 --> 00:18:57.540 There are certain things, and of course, you can get into the mathematics, and you can start trying to break these things down. 00:18:57.540 --> 00:19:00.680 But ultimately, it is a Gestalt. 00:19:00.680 --> 00:19:03.800 It is something that is greater than the sum of its parts. 00:19:03.800 --> 00:19:15.360 And so just looking at the fact that it has the golden ratio, or it has these other proportions that are pleasing to the human eye, or it does this, that, and the other, those things are important. 00:19:15.420 --> 00:19:23.080 There's nothing wrong with studying it in that way, but you have to recognize that it is a larger whole. 00:19:23.080 --> 00:19:25.900 There is more to it than just those parts. 00:19:25.900 --> 00:19:27.660 But it's sort of like studying God. 00:19:27.660 --> 00:19:37.240 We can study the different aspects, as we call them, of God, in an attempt to understand something of the totality, something of the whole. 00:19:37.240 --> 00:19:41.440 You'll never get to the whole in that way, but you will gain something. 00:19:42.260 --> 00:19:45.740 By studying God's goodness, you will gain something. 00:19:45.740 --> 00:19:48.560 It won't be a full understanding of God, but that's not the point. 00:19:48.560 --> 00:19:55.980 It's sort of similar to when I make arguments for the existence of God, and someone will tell me, well, you didn't prove the existence of the Christian God. 00:19:55.980 --> 00:19:57.960 I'm not, that's not what I'm doing. 00:19:57.960 --> 00:20:02.060 I'm proving the existence of God first, and then you build up from there. 00:20:02.060 --> 00:20:04.540 It's similar to what you do here. 00:20:04.540 --> 00:20:12.820 So, yes, you have a sense of the beautiful, and when you recognize something is degenerate, it's because it's gone against that sense of the beautiful. 00:20:12.820 --> 00:20:15.240 It's triggered a revulsion in you. 00:20:15.240 --> 00:20:20.200 The same sort of thing that happens when functional men see homosexuality. 00:20:20.200 --> 00:20:25.040 They respond in the same way they respond to literal garbage and rotting meat. 00:20:25.040 --> 00:20:26.560 That's because God has built that into you. 00:20:26.560 --> 00:20:37.380 Unless society and your own degenerate behavior have so dulled your sense of the beautiful, of the true, of the good, you are going to recognize evil when you see it. 00:20:38.260 --> 00:20:44.600 And so, that's sort of my short answer on artwork and beauty and related matters, the transcendentals. 00:20:44.600 --> 00:20:47.320 But definitely look at those reading recommendations. 00:20:47.320 --> 00:20:53.260 I think those are probably, definitely the top ten, in the top ten, not the fullness of the top ten. 00:20:56.440 --> 00:21:01.500 The next question is also a theological question, perhaps not surprisingly. 00:21:02.740 --> 00:21:05.240 You have said that God hates sinners, not just sin. 00:21:05.620 --> 00:21:10.240 How should we reconcile that with Romans 5.8, which says that God loves sinners? 00:21:10.240 --> 00:21:15.640 And related to that, do you believe God has any love for the damned? 00:21:15.640 --> 00:21:20.540 So, this one I actually want to start off by reading through a number of different verses. 00:21:20.580 --> 00:21:22.520 This is a little bit of a Bible study here. 00:21:22.520 --> 00:21:28.760 I will pull up Logos for that, because I think that's going to certainly help us here. 00:21:30.000 --> 00:21:36.100 And so, it probably helps if I have it open on my screen as well. 00:21:36.100 --> 00:21:39.880 Okay. 00:21:39.880 --> 00:21:42.780 We will start in the New Testament. 00:21:42.780 --> 00:21:46.120 We will start with 1 John. 00:21:46.120 --> 00:21:50.000 And I'm sorry for the keyboard noise, but I have a mechanical keyboard. 00:21:50.000 --> 00:21:52.760 And I did not swap out for my quieter one. 00:21:54.460 --> 00:21:58.700 Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love. 00:21:58.780 --> 00:22:00.920 And that's an important place to start. 00:22:00.920 --> 00:22:06.120 We're sort of getting back to the previous question with the transcendentals and the nature of God. 00:22:06.120 --> 00:22:08.620 But God is his attributes. 00:22:08.620 --> 00:22:12.280 But God is also described as hating, and there are many places in Scripture for that. 00:22:12.280 --> 00:22:14.280 I won't sort of jump ahead here. 00:22:14.280 --> 00:22:18.340 But obviously, the next one has to be John 3.16. 00:22:18.340 --> 00:22:23.380 We have to deal with this one, because obviously this is going to come up anytime we're talking about love. 00:22:23.380 --> 00:22:29.740 For God so loved the world that he gave his only son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. 00:22:29.740 --> 00:22:36.640 And I'll stop there for now, although you should certainly go on and read the rest of at least John 3, perhaps the whole book of John. 00:22:36.640 --> 00:22:47.500 But then the verse from Romans here that was part of the question, But God shows his love for us, and that while we were sinners, Christ died for us. 00:22:47.500 --> 00:22:54.320 Which of course is true, absolutely, because we're all born in sin, and sin, to my mother, conceived me to quote the Psalms. 00:22:55.240 --> 00:23:01.620 However, it's worth noting for this particular verse, that it says, while we were sinners. 00:23:01.620 --> 00:23:08.880 This is speaking of those who are among the elect, those who are going to be justified before that happened. 00:23:08.880 --> 00:23:12.080 And so, is this speaking of all sinners? 00:23:12.080 --> 00:23:13.500 Not necessarily in this case. 00:23:13.500 --> 00:23:20.400 I'm not going to say, and I'm not saying here, that God doesn't love sinners in a certain sense. 00:23:20.400 --> 00:23:29.380 Because that is the ultimate conclusion here that I'm going to draw, is that God both loves and hates sinners, those who are still in impenitent sin. 00:23:29.380 --> 00:23:40.000 But to continue the sort of hodgepodge Bible study here, we will go also in Romans, but back to chapter 2. 00:23:40.000 --> 00:23:49.080 Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God's kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? 00:23:49.080 --> 00:23:52.100 And we'll come back to that one in just a little bit here. 00:23:52.140 --> 00:23:58.400 In fact, I'll open a new window, so I don't have to type that one again. 00:23:58.400 --> 00:24:01.580 But continuing on here, we'll go to 2nd Peter. 00:24:04.160 --> 00:24:13.420 The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promises, some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. 00:24:13.420 --> 00:24:18.400 And of course, this is a constant refrain throughout all of scripture. 00:24:19.480 --> 00:24:24.140 God does not desire that any one spend eternity in hell. 00:24:24.140 --> 00:24:26.340 God wants all to repent. 00:24:28.120 --> 00:24:35.780 And in keeping with that theme, we'll go to basically what Peter is paraphrasing here, which of course is Ezekiel. 00:24:35.780 --> 00:24:37.780 Actually, I will pull this up in the Septuagint. 00:24:37.780 --> 00:24:40.280 I'll open a new tab here. 00:24:43.860 --> 00:24:47.060 Always better to use the Septuagint when the option is there. 00:24:48.040 --> 00:24:50.380 Say to them, I live, says the Lord. 00:24:50.380 --> 00:24:53.080 I do not wish the death of the impious. 00:24:53.080 --> 00:24:56.720 Rather, that the impious turn back from his way and live. 00:24:56.720 --> 00:24:59.020 Turn back from your way by turning back. 00:24:59.020 --> 00:25:02.480 And why are you dying, O house of Israel? 00:25:02.480 --> 00:25:05.500 This is essentially what Peter is paraphrasing. 00:25:05.500 --> 00:25:08.800 God wants the wicked to turn from their way. 00:25:08.800 --> 00:25:11.520 He wants them to return to the right path. 00:25:11.520 --> 00:25:13.700 He wants them to repent. 00:25:13.700 --> 00:25:15.680 And that is for all sinners. 00:25:15.780 --> 00:25:18.680 God does not begrudge anyone's salvation. 00:25:18.680 --> 00:25:22.440 God has not damned anyone from eternity past. 00:25:22.440 --> 00:25:23.720 That is not how this works. 00:25:23.720 --> 00:25:26.000 God wants everyone to repent. 00:25:26.000 --> 00:25:30.980 And so does he love them necessarily, of course, or he wouldn't want them to repent. 00:25:30.980 --> 00:25:32.660 He would just cast them into hell and be done with it. 00:25:32.660 --> 00:25:36.560 There wouldn't be any desire to see them turn from their wicked ways. 00:25:36.560 --> 00:25:38.580 And so, yes, God does love sinners. 00:25:42.700 --> 00:25:46.280 But, of course, we have to deal with verses like... 00:25:48.500 --> 00:25:50.740 Actually, I don't want that one. 00:25:50.740 --> 00:25:57.500 This is what happens when you are dealing with the Septuagint versus the Masoretic text. 00:25:57.500 --> 00:26:00.100 Of course, the numbers are different. 00:26:00.100 --> 00:26:03.800 But David, of course, you know which one I want here. 00:26:03.800 --> 00:26:05.740 Do I not hate those who hate you, O Lord? 00:26:05.740 --> 00:26:07.100 I hate them with a perfect hatred. 00:26:07.240 --> 00:26:10.040 I count them my enemies, right? 00:26:10.040 --> 00:26:22.620 And so, when you are dealing with this, you have to deal with the fact, this is David speaking in the Spirit, saying what God desires. 00:26:22.620 --> 00:26:24.080 God hates sinners. 00:26:24.080 --> 00:26:35.780 And this sort of gets into sort of a philosophical problem here for the other side of this, not on my side, because I think my side is very consistent, and I will prove that here. 00:26:36.580 --> 00:26:43.560 If someone says that they hate murder, that doesn't really have any meaning. 00:26:43.560 --> 00:26:47.520 Okay, you hate the abstraction that is murder. 00:26:47.520 --> 00:26:49.600 Great. 00:26:49.600 --> 00:26:51.560 But murderers commit murder. 00:26:51.560 --> 00:26:54.980 And without a murderer, there is no murder. 00:26:54.980 --> 00:26:56.520 The same thing for sin. 00:26:56.520 --> 00:26:59.540 Without a sinner, there is no sin. 00:26:59.540 --> 00:27:05.100 And so you can't just hate the sin, because you don't just hate some abstraction. 00:27:06.080 --> 00:27:11.560 You hate the person who is doing the thing that you find detestable. 00:27:11.560 --> 00:27:16.740 And so God hates the sinner, because God hates sin. 00:27:16.740 --> 00:27:18.780 The sinner is the one who commits the sin. 00:27:18.780 --> 00:27:20.440 Without the sinner, there is no sin. 00:27:20.440 --> 00:27:22.420 Back to the murderer example. 00:27:26.540 --> 00:27:30.640 Then to go to Hebrews, before I go back to Romans. 00:27:32.660 --> 00:27:45.520 For if we go on sinning deliberately, after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for us, but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries. 00:27:47.060 --> 00:27:49.200 So does God love sinners? 00:27:49.200 --> 00:27:50.380 Yes. 00:27:50.380 --> 00:27:53.260 Does God hate impenitent sinners? 00:27:53.260 --> 00:27:54.900 There's no other way to deal with this verse. 00:27:54.900 --> 00:27:57.180 The answer is yes, he certainly does. 00:27:57.180 --> 00:28:03.920 And then to go back, as I said I would, to the book of Romans, starting with verse five this time. 00:28:03.920 --> 00:28:12.940 But because of your hard and impenitent heart, you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath, when God's righteous judgment will be revealed. 00:28:14.300 --> 00:28:20.480 And so I guess that leads into the question, the last question there, in the series of questions here. 00:28:21.840 --> 00:28:23.780 Does God have any love for the damned? 00:28:25.160 --> 00:28:32.420 I think that the necessary answer to that is yes, because God loves the good. 00:28:32.420 --> 00:28:37.360 And I've gone into this previously in previous episodes, but I'll do it here as well. 00:28:37.360 --> 00:28:38.840 Go over this again. 00:28:40.480 --> 00:28:43.880 Everything that God creates is good. 00:28:43.880 --> 00:28:47.160 Sin is not part of your essence. 00:28:47.160 --> 00:28:50.600 Speaking in philosophical terms, difference between essence and accident. 00:28:50.600 --> 00:28:52.600 An accident is a non-essential thing, basically. 00:28:52.680 --> 00:28:54.660 It's the summary of that. 00:28:55.860 --> 00:29:03.340 So, your essence is good, because your essence, your nature, these things created by God, corrupted by sin. 00:29:03.340 --> 00:29:07.240 So, sin is the accident corrupting your nature. 00:29:07.240 --> 00:29:09.440 God does not love sin. 00:29:09.440 --> 00:29:11.820 God hates sin. 00:29:11.820 --> 00:29:19.020 And so, insofar as those who are in hell are impenitent sinners, God hates them. 00:29:19.020 --> 00:29:21.460 But God loves them because they are his good creation. 00:29:22.660 --> 00:29:29.820 This is, of course, somewhat difficult to deal with, but we recognize that there are times where you can hate and love something at the same time. 00:29:29.820 --> 00:29:34.720 God can do it in an infinite way, because God is infinite and we are not. 00:29:34.720 --> 00:29:40.620 So, the short answer is that, yes, God loves sinners, but he does also hate sinners. 00:29:40.620 --> 00:29:54.400 And, of course, it should be a call to repentance, because you want to be someone who is in Christ, someone who is no longer juridically, someone who has been declared righteous for the sake of Christ. 00:29:54.400 --> 00:30:03.600 And so, you are no longer counted a sinner, even though, of course, in this life, you are still a sinner up to the end, but you are not counted a sinner, because you're in Christ. 00:30:03.600 --> 00:30:21.860 So, all of these verses about wrath and eternal fire and all those things, and God's hatred for sin, and, yes, the sinner should be a call to repentance, a call to be in Christ, to be someone who is no longer counted as a sinner, because you are covered by the blood of Christ. 00:30:26.340 --> 00:30:35.320 The next question here, those are actually all the questions that I had from the forum for this particular episode. 00:30:35.320 --> 00:30:38.060 I don't believe there were any that I missed. 00:30:38.060 --> 00:30:40.280 I will check just briefly here to make sure. 00:30:40.280 --> 00:30:50.120 But I saw a few in the chat, so I will address those now, since I think we've got plenty of time right now, so. 00:30:53.200 --> 00:30:59.700 Those are all of the questions from the forum for this episode, so I will scroll through the chat to look for some other ones. 00:30:59.700 --> 00:31:04.120 I noticed one before I started recording, so I will address that one first. 00:31:05.460 --> 00:31:08.480 The question that I noticed was about the Tish Raiden. 00:31:08.480 --> 00:31:13.620 And I've addressed this one a number of times, and I could of course just point to that. 00:31:13.760 --> 00:31:25.280 I've posted about it on X and my Telegram channel, but one of the things you have to understand, first and foremost, about Tish Raiden, is that they're unreliable. 00:31:25.280 --> 00:31:28.660 Because what a Tish Raiden is, is table talks. 00:31:28.660 --> 00:31:32.620 It's table speeches, but table talks, you can translate it either way into English. 00:31:32.620 --> 00:31:38.180 For those who are wondering what on earth I'm talking about here as I keep saying a German word, table talks. 00:31:38.180 --> 00:31:44.780 You've probably heard them only in regard to two men, Martin Luther and Adolf Hitler. 00:31:44.780 --> 00:31:52.040 And they're almost always used to attack those men by those who hate those men. 00:31:52.040 --> 00:31:54.800 The problem is the essence of the thing. 00:31:54.800 --> 00:32:02.300 A table talk is basically a dinner conversation, often involving beer, particularly in Martin Luther's case, of course. 00:32:02.300 --> 00:32:09.400 At this point, Adolf Hitler didn't drink, so not in his case, but in the case of Martin Luther, he was probably drinking beer while he was saying these things. 00:32:09.400 --> 00:32:27.340 If he said them, which is the problem here, he probably didn't say them because it is recorded second, third, sometimes fourth hand, sometimes many years after the fact by someone who talked to someone who perhaps another level of abstraction talked to someone who was there. 00:32:28.680 --> 00:32:39.440 Probably not the most reliable memory if you spent an evening drinking beer and joking, and then someone records it years later after a game of telephone. 00:32:39.440 --> 00:32:45.220 So this is not the sort of source that a Christian should use or consider reliable. 00:32:45.220 --> 00:32:57.880 We should rely on the writings and the actual speeches of these men that we have in copious amounts in both cases, instead of relying on hearsay, which is what would be called in a court of law. 00:32:57.960 --> 00:33:07.520 And it would not be admissible in a court of law, because it's completely ridiculous, the circumstances under which it was supposedly recorded and then transmitted. 00:33:07.520 --> 00:33:11.500 Is that to say that there's nothing in there that either of those men said? 00:33:11.500 --> 00:33:14.780 No, the answer is probably they said some of those things. 00:33:14.780 --> 00:33:21.060 But we cannot possibly discern which the men said and which the men did not say. 00:33:21.060 --> 00:33:31.260 And so the Christian is going to want to rely on sources that are reliable, sources that are provable, and there are many of those. 00:33:31.260 --> 00:33:38.540 In some case where Tisch-Reytner all that you have, that's a more difficult call, because then it's the only resource you have. 00:33:38.540 --> 00:33:39.900 What do you do? 00:33:39.900 --> 00:33:42.900 Well, you probably, as a Christian, give the man the benefit of the doubt. 00:33:42.900 --> 00:33:49.520 But in the case of these two men, there's no reason to resort to table talks. 00:33:49.520 --> 00:33:54.140 There's an entire bookshelf, a large bookshelf worth of Martin Luther's writings. 00:33:54.140 --> 00:33:56.160 We can go to those to see what he actually thought. 00:33:57.240 --> 00:34:02.060 In the case of Hitler, of course, we have his book and many speeches. 00:34:02.060 --> 00:34:04.340 We can go to those to see what he thought. 00:34:04.340 --> 00:34:12.420 And so, of course, the part of the question here is Gerber's diary and the table talks dealing with supposed anti-Christian sentiments. 00:34:12.420 --> 00:34:17.600 And I'll deal with Gerber's diary after this bit here about the table talks. 00:34:20.180 --> 00:34:24.360 When it comes to the table talks, again, unreliable, and so we look at the words of the man. 00:34:24.440 --> 00:34:32.060 But one in particular that I want to turn to here, so I will actually pull up the browser here. 00:34:32.060 --> 00:34:34.300 Let me pull that up. 00:34:34.300 --> 00:34:38.660 I want to read just a little bit of a quote. 00:34:38.660 --> 00:34:41.920 The Almighty created our nation by defending its existence. 00:34:41.920 --> 00:34:43.620 We defend his work. 00:34:43.620 --> 00:34:51.100 The fact that this defense is linked with unspeakable misfortune, suffering and pain beyond compare only makes us more attached to this nation. 00:34:51.720 --> 00:34:56.760 But it also gives us the hardness we need to fulfill our duty, even in the worst crises. 00:34:56.760 --> 00:34:58.520