Pantheon and Pandemonium X: Live Q&A April 2024

Summary

The Lord of Spirits Podcast

Episode: Pantheon and Pandemonium X: Live Q&A (April 2024)

Hosts: Fr. Andrew Stephen Damick, Fr. Stephen De Young
Date: April 12, 2024
Theme: The Seen and Unseen World in Orthodox Christian Tradition

---

Episode Overview

This special “all call-in” episode is dedicated to live questions from listeners. The hosts, Fr. Andrew Stephen Damick and Fr. Stephen De Young, tackle a wide array of topics related to Orthodox Christian theology, scripture, spirituality, and pop culture. Core themes include how the Orthodox Church approaches mission, eschatology, death and the afterlife, anthropology, the relationship between the material and spiritual worlds, and the continuing effects of Christ’s incarnation and resurrection for humanity and creation.

The episode’s tone is lively, humorous, and engaging, with both hosts displaying their trademark banter, deep scriptural insight, and patience in addressing both advanced theological issues and beginner questions.

---

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Orthodox Evangelism and “Casting Pearls Before Swine” (07:16–12:44)

• Question: Should we evangelize by using scripture with people outside the Church, or is this casting pearls before swine?
• Summary:
  • The Orthodox approach is less about arguing doctrines and quoting verses and more about inviting others into participation in the Church’s life.
  • The role of evangelism isn’t to argue people into faith but to introduce them to the living tradition, since "ultimately it's the Holy Spirit who reveals these things to people" (11:21, Fr. Stephen).
  • The phrase “casting pearls before swine” is understood as not exposing holy things to abuse and mockery, rather than withholding scripture from interested non-Christians.

Quote:

“You have to become part of the community of the faithful to really understand these things and have them make sense to you… ultimately it's the Holy Spirit who reveals these things to people. It's not the text itself.” – Fr. Stephen (11:21)

---

2. Purity, the Theotokos, and the Faithful Remnant (13:01–17:47)

• Question: Did Israel need to be “holy enough” for Christ to be born? Are the Pharisees and Jewish holiness connected?
• Summary:
  • The hosts distinguish between the Pharisaical idea that Israel’s collective holiness would lead to the Messiah and the Orthodox view that the Theotokos is the culmination of Israel’s faithful remnant.
  • The Theotokos is unique as the ultimate fruit of the faithful remnant, embodying the mission of Israel.

Quote:

“She [the Theotokos] is sort of the embodiment of that faithful and holy remnant in Israel...” – Fr. Stephen (16:26)

---

3. Culture and Fiction – Twin Peaks and Gnostic Themes (18:07–23:41)

• Question: Is Twin Peaks gnostic?
• Summary:
  • Fr. Stephen, a self-confessed Twin Peaks superfan, explains the show’s mythology. He argues the show’s "evil" is archetypal and processed through a Christian lens rather than purely Gnostic.
  • The show's presentation of cosmic evil is closer to Christian ideas of spiritual warfare.

Quote:

“Evil isn’t just the product of a string of human choices...but that it’s actual forces acting in the world and upon people...” – Fr. Stephen (23:05)

---

4. Visions at Death and the Afterlife (25:15–33:27)

• Question: Why do people of all faiths, including atheists, report visions of deceased loved ones before death?
• Summary:
  • Fr. Andrew cautions about drawing conclusions from anecdotal, subjective experiences.
  • Fr. Stephen offers a theological interpretation: these phenomena are tied to the universality of the bodily resurrection. At the end of life, all experience a “re-presentation” of their life’s relationships and actions, consistent with Orthodox eschatology.

Quote:

“Everyone’s life, at least aspects of it, become eternal in either a positive or negative way… so everyone’s life at the end becomes re-presented at the point of death, including the people in it.” – Fr. Stephen (31:02)

---

5. Soul Sleep, the Seven Sleepers, and Experience of Death (33:38–40:12)

• Question: Does the story of the Seven Sleepers of Ephesus support soul sleep?
• Summary:
  • Language of "sleep" is metaphorical in Scripture and Liturgy, referring to bodily rest, not the soul’s inactivity. The sleepers return with prophetic testimony—implying a spiritual experience, not unconsciousness.

---

6. Iconography and Pagan Parallels (40:17–42:55)

• Question: Is there a link between Theotokos icons and pagan goddesses?
• Summary:
  • Orthodox icons depict the same person (the Theotokos) in different ways—unlike pagan goddesses, which were multiple regional manifestations of ambiguous spiritual powers.

---

7. Praying for the Departed and the Limits of Repentance (43:09–47:12)

• Question: Can we pray for the salvation of non-Orthodox or unbelievers after death?
• Summary:
  • While the dead cannot repent, the living may pray for their mercy. Salvation is ultimately God’s gift and prerogative, and there are patristic examples of pagans benefitting from the prayers of saints (e.g., St. Gregory praying for Emperor Trajan).

---

8. Salvation of the Unreached and Judgment (47:35–51:24)

• Question: What about those who have never heard the Gospel?
• Summary:
  • God judges people based on what they did with what they received. Salvation, church membership, and mere external belief don’t always overlap; works matter, and faithfulness is the scriptural criterion for judgment.

Quote:

“God… is going to judge everyone according to what they do, with what it is they’ve received. And some people receive more and some people receive less.” – Fr. Andrew (47:53)

---

9. Land, Inheritance, and Christian Identity (55:54–67:06)

• Question: How do Old Testament land promises relate to Christians today, especially regarding “Jubilee,” geography, and ethnicity?
• Summary:
  • The land was a sign for ancient Israel pointing to the broader promise: the whole earth as the inheritance of God’s people. True “inheritance” is the renewed creation, not blood-and-soil nationalism.
  • Christians are called to be spiritual sojourners, not to claim exclusive territorial rights.

Quote:

“Biblically, the idea of some kind of blood and soil connection by a particular ethnic group to a particular piece of land is just ruled out… It's a pagan idea.” – Fr. Stephen (63:04)

---

10. Giants, Emperors, and Demonization (68:33–74:44)

• Question: Are Roman emperors (who claimed divinity) equivalent to Old Testament giants?
• Summary:
  • While Roman emperors used divine rhetoric, their supposed “divinity” was bureaucratic and disconnected from the full demonization attributed to the giants in the Old Testament. The latter involves a cosmic, metaphysical evil beyond mere power politics.

---

11. Theophoric Names and Translation (75:28–80:38)

• Question: How can we see where the biblical text uses personal names (especially theophoric, i.e., with a god's name)?
• Summary:
  • Context, cultural knowledge, and linguistic study are key; sometimes later redactors changed embarrassing names (like Ishbaal to Ishbosheth).
  • The NET Bible (with notes) is a useful study tool, though not Orthodox.

---

12. Predeterminism, Divine Goodness, and Human Freedom (81:47–89:47)

• Question: Is it possible to maintain determinism and still call God “good”?
• Summary:
  • The hosts contrast Platonic/Gnostic/Calvinist metaphysics with the Orthodox distinction between divine essence and energy.
  • God can create something truly other (creation), and it really is good, not evil by virtue of being “less than God.” Human freedom is not opposed to God’s benevolence but essential to it.

---

13. Adam, The Tree of Life, and Death (90:17–98:41)

• Question: Did humans possess immortality in paradise? Why be barred from the Tree of Life?
• Summary:
  • Only God is inherently immortal. Humans were only sustained in life by God’s grace; after the fall, separation from this grace led to mortality. Christ’s resurrection restores access to the "Tree of Life" (the Cross, the Eucharist).

---

14. Praying for the Dead (99:16–103:29)

• Question: Why do Orthodox pray for the dead? How does this connect to judgment and the afterlife?
• Summary:
  • Prayers for the dead presuppose both resurrection and personal judgment; Orthodox eschatology avoids the idea of a “River of Fire” as simply a neutral force. Judgment is personal, connected to our identity and works.

Quotes:

“We're not praying in memorial prayers, ‘make it more pleasant for them to stare into the orb.’” – Fr. Stephen (107:31)
“Judgment is personal. It's based on our identity in this life.” – Fr. Stephen (107:45)

---

15. Natural Disasters (124:40–132:02)

• Question: Why do we have natural disasters, and will they exist in the age to come?
• Summary:
  • Disasters are part of the world’s functions; the problem is not the world, but death and our alienation from creation. In the age to come, there will be no mortality—no disaster will harm.

Quote:

“The problem is not really natural disasters. The problem is death.” – Fr. Stephen (125:43)

---

16. The Two Wills of Christ (132:40–146:08)

• Question: If the person has a will, does Christ having two wills mean two persons?
• Summary:
  • Orthodox Christology distinguishes between the natural will (proper to each nature) and the gnomic will (individual decision-making). Christ, being perfect, had two natural wills (divine and human) but no gnomic will, as his human nature was never in discord with the divine.

---

17. Faith vs. Works, “Faithfulness,” and Salvation (147:45–154:30)

• Question: Are we saved by faith (“belief”) or by works (“faithfulness”)?
• Summary:
  • The Greek meaning of “faith” (pistis) is closer to “faithfulness, allegiance, or fidelity.” God’s grace saves, but our faithfulness is the means by which we receive it. Salvation is holistic, not a mental check-box.

---

18. Praying for People in the Past (156:19–160:37)

• Question: Can prayers affect people in the past?
• Summary:
  • Orthodox prayer is always oriented toward the present and future—addressing God in the present for His mercy. However, God is outside time, and prayers for the departed “reach back” in a way connected to the eternal now, but the tradition focuses prayer on the present needs.

---

19. Christ’s Baptism and Cosmic Cleansing (161:16–167:09)

• Question: Did Christ’s baptism purify the world?
• Summary:
  • Yes, Christ’s baptism is the beginning of His public ministry and the cosmic purification of creation ("bringing justice to overflowing"). This is reflected in the rich hymnology and prayers at the feast of Theophany.

Quote:

“He's touching the chaos of the cosmos and therefore setting the whole thing in order right through his baptism.” – Fr. Stephen (166:48)

---

Notable Quotes & Moments

• “Giant killers, dragon slayers, scorpion stompers, serpent stranglers, demon defenestrators…” – Fr. Andrew, setting the episode’s tone (01:07)
• On Twin Peaks: “We could do the next two and a half hours just on me explaining Twin Peaks.” – Fr. Stephen (19:06)
• “I have turned over a new leaf. See, I'm being nice. I'm saying I'm nuancing things now.” – Fr. Stephen (137:05)
• On Orthodox identity: “Our inheritance is in the life of the world to come. And so until then, we should live in the world in this nomadic way.” – Fr. Stephen (67:06)
• “Will there be tornadoes in the age to come?” “No.” (125:02)

---

Additional Highlights

• Ample banter about regional dialects, Twin Peaks, and Lincoln Logs.
• Callers from all over the world: Romania, Manitoba, New Zealand, and the U.S.
• Subtle but clear pastoral advice throughout: the importance of humility, prayer, and seeing things through Orthodox tradition rather than imported frameworks.

---

Episode Flow and Timestamps (Selected Highlights)

• [07:16] – Pearls before swine/scriptural evangelism
• [13:01] – Theotokos and faithful remnant
• [18:07] – Twin Peaks/Gnosticism
• [25:15] – Near-death visions and the resurrection
• [33:38] – Soul sleep and the Seven Sleepers
• [43:09] – Praying for the departed
• [47:35] – What about the unreached?
• [55:54] – Land, inheritance, and Jubilee
• [68:33] – Giants and emperors
• [75:28] – Theophoric names in the Bible
• [81:47] – Predeterminism vs. Goodness/Freedom
• [90:17] – Adam, Death, Tree of Life
• [99:16] – Praying for the dead and judgment
• [124:40] – Natural disasters
• [132:40] – Two wills of Christ
• [147:45] – Salvation, faith, and works
• [156:19] – Praying for the past
• [161:16] – Christ’s baptism: cosmic implications

---

Conclusion

This episode showcases both the breadth and depth of the Lord of Spirits podcast’s appeal—and Orthodoxy’s capacity to address questions about death, life, spirituality, and the cosmos. The hosts deftly combine humor, pop culture, scholarly evidence, and the living tradition of the Church to create a uniquely robust and pastorally sensitive Q&A.
For listeners wanting a lively, comprehensive exploration of pressing theological and practical questions, this episode is a must-listen.

Transcript

[A]

He will be a staff for the righteous with which for them to stand and not to fall. And he will be the light of the nations and the hope of those whose hearts are troubled. All who dwell on the earth will fall down and worship him. And they will praise and bless and celebrate with song the lord of spirits. First Enoch, chapter 48, verses 4 through 5. The modern world doesn't acknowledge, but is nevertheless haunted by spirits, angels, demons and saints. In our time, many yearn to break free of the prison of a flat secular materialism, to see and to know reality as it truly is. What is this spiritual reality like? How do we engage with it? Well, how do we permeate everyday life with spiritual presence? Orthodox Christian priests, Father Andrew Stephen Damick and Fr. Stephen DeYoung host this live call in show focused on enchantment in creation, the the union of the seen and unseen as made by God and experienced by mankind throughout history. Welcome to the Lord of Spirits.

[B]

Good evening. Giant killers, dragon slayers, scorpion stompers, serpent stranglers, demon defenestrators. You are listening to the Lord of Spirits podcast. My co host, the Very Reverend Doctor, six master's degrees. Father Steven DeYoung is with me from Lafayette, Louisiana. And I'm Father Andrew Stephen Damick with one master's degree and most of a second one here in Emmaus, Pennsylvania. And we are live. And if you are listening to us live, you can call us at 855-237-2346 and talk to us. Many of you have called already.

[C]

A lot of you right now are just live. You can, you can also call just.

[B]

Probably no one will again. Yes, no one will will be there.

[C]

Unless it's at an odd time. Right. Dr. Jeannie might answer or you might get somebody else.

[B]

That's true. Now we're not telling you to call into other shows and ask giant related questions, but we're not telling you not to either.

[C]

If that happened to be the time that you called, someone would answer in that instance.

[B]

That's right.

[D]

Yeah.

[B]

Yeah. So we are doing an all live, all call in episode tonight and Elijah will be taking your calls. And finally, finally someone is going to have to do some work over there at the studio for this pod broadcast. Before we get started though, Father Stephen, I have a question for you myself. So please explain to me in biblical terms the eldritch longevity of William Shatner and I'll take my answer on the air.

[D]

Okay.

[C]

It's a combination of things. Number one, he can't be killed with conventional weapons.

[B]

Okay.

[C]

So nothing is able to actually take him out. Right. And so it may just be a question of when he decides he's done with his run.

You know, he'll just sort of sit down one day and say, you know, it's been good.

Chatting her out.

[B]

Will his own death.

[C]

Right? And that'll be it. He may sort of vanish in a transporter field, you know, animation.

Because there's a danger we could start worshiping his relics. Right?

[B]

So. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, I hear you. Okay. I accept that. I accept that. Anyway, we are live and we're just taking calls tonight, so we. We actually have a full call board right now. All these people waiting in rapt anticipation.

[C]

Do they play, like, hold music or something? I don't know.

[B]

We should ask one of our callers.

[C]

Like, what they're actually. Are they just saying they're dead? Silence.

[B]

If it's not the girl from Ipanema, then they're getting a big rip off.

That's right.

[C]

We should get Elijah to sing that.

[B]

Hey.

That'S our expectation. Elijah. All right, let's go ahead and take caller number one. We have Louie, or is it Louis? What does your mom call you from South Carolina?

Lou.

[E]

Lou's wife. Yeah, Lou's wife. Lou's wife, but his mom calls him Louie, so I have it written down.

[B]

Wait, are you the mom?

[D]

Yeah.

[E]

No, I'm not the mom.

[B]

Okay.

[E]

And by the way, by the way, if they don't play music, they do not play music while they're on hold.

[B]

Oh, I am so sorry. Please give these people their money back.

[E]

We hear the voices of the fathers, and.

Thank you for taking our call. But this is mostly for father Father Steven Andrew, because I've heard you mention the road to Emmaus a lot.

You know, Amazing.

[C]

That's you.

[E]

Yeah. So you know how on the road to Emmaus, after the Lord is resurrected, it says that he. The scriptures say that beginning at Moses and all the prophets, the Lord expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself, Right? So to those people, he had already been resurrected. And they had already, I guess in modern day terms, you would say bent the knee to the Lord. They had already sort of given their hearts over to Christ crucified. You know, like as orthodox Christians worship Christ crucified. We don't do the Protestant, you know, coming in on a white horse, Jesus. We do Christ crucified. And so we were looking, my husband and I both, we've been looking in and maybe you can help us out. We've been looking in acts as well as the Gospel, for an example, where somebody who had not yet bent the knee, let's say somebody who wasn't yet saved. Somebody who wasn't yet, you know, Christian, really had this, you know, a similar thing happen where beginning at Moses and the prophets, everything was expounded. Like, in other words, even with Nicodemus, right. When the Lord is talking to Nicodemus prior to Nicodemus, accepting him as Lord and Savior, he talks to him like a child. That, you know, what is it, chapter three, where he says, you know, don't you know the difference between flesh and spirit? I read that to children, and children can understand that. And then also in acts, you know, St. Paul, like, when he's talking to the Greeks and they're so scholarly and smart, he comes at them like children. He's like, oh, I see you got this statue here of an unknown God. I know who he is, you know, but afterwards, after they get saved in the epistles, he's very detailed, and he gets into scriptures. So the only time that I can find where either The Lord or St. Paul is using scriptures with the Jews is when he's kind of like correcting them or refuting them or like, they say something wrong, and then either St. Paul or the Lord is like, no, no, no, you got that wrong.

[D]

So.

[E]

So, like, I was wondering, where does the orthodox church stand on proselytizing? And when we, like the Great Commission, go out and preach to all nations, when we preach to people, is it like pearls before swine if somebody's not saved and you get into scripture with them? Okay, did I ask that, right? Did that make sense?

[B]

I think so. Okay, so, I mean, if you read the Gospels, right, Jesus actually makes reference to the Old Testament all the time.

[E]

Yeah.

[B]

When he's correcting all the. But I mean, all the time. I mean, he. He's. He's making reference to it all the time.

But it seems to me.

For. You mean for, like, evangelistic purposes? Is that what you're asking?

[E]

Yes, yes.

[B]

I mean, St. Paul, of course, talks about. He talks to. Is it the Corinthians, Father, where he talks about our, you know, your fathers in the faith, even though they're literally not descended from.

Abraham. Yeah. I mean, they're making use of Scripture all the time. All the time. Right. Now, you apply it in different ways depending on your audience. So, you know, Luke and Cleopas on the road to Emmaus, you know, these guys are. Are both catechized already. Right. So obviously you can get much deeper into it. With them. And. And there's more to say at this point because he's risen from the dead. So it's all been revealed now.

[E]

Right, right.

[B]

So, yeah, I mean, living here in Emmaus, I do think about the road to Emmaus on a regular, regular basis.

[E]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

[B]

But I have to say, by the way, there's no way that you are from South Carolina, from New York.

[E]

What are you kidding me with.

[B]

Exactly.

[E]

There's no way to hide it. Right?

[B]

Yeah, yeah.

[C]

No, it's okay.

[B]

It's good to have dialect. I don't know. Father Stephen, is there anything that you wanted to add or. Or actually.

[C]

Well, no, not. I'm actually on this one.

[B]

Okay.

[C]

I'm holding those in reserve, but.

[B]

Okay. All right.

[C]

So the night is young. I mean, I think there is an element, too.

I don't think this is what is meant by casting pearls for swine, but there is an element, too, that sometimes you will see people, you know, just throwing Bible verses at atheists. Right. Or people who have, like, no connection to religion. And it is true that that doesn't mean much to them.

[E]

I don't mean. No, no. I'm talking about unsaved of any persuasion. So, like, whether it's Jew, Gentile, Muslim.

[C]

Right. That's what I mean. Just people who are not Christians at all, and they just sort of quote Bible.

[E]

No, I mean, like, not Orthodox. Like, not Orthodox as Orthodox Christians. Does the Orthodox Church have a particular.

[C]

Right, Right. And so I'm making a contrast. I'm making a contrast. Yeah, I'm making a contrast here between. Some people do that. Right. I don't know a lot of Orthodox people who do that, but some people do that, and I don't think that's helpful because I.

I don't think that a person who is completely outside.

The realm of the scriptures can understand the Scriptures or have the Scriptures mean anything to them. Right.

A lot of the tradition of the Orthodox Church is maintained intentionally, internally. Not that it's kept secret.

But.

You don't go out and try and argue people into believing individual doctrines or something either. Right. You have to become part of the community of the faithful to really understand these things and have them make sense to you.

Right. Because ultimately it's the Holy Spirit who reveals these things to people. Right. It's not the text itself.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

So I don't. I don't think it's wrong to ever.

Walk through a biblical passage with someone outside the church, but I also think in most cases it's. It's not all that helpful of an approach.

I think the, the, the casting Pearls Before Swine is more that at a certain point you have to kick the dust off of your feet. Right. Like if you're trying to talk to someone seriously about Christ and all you're getting in response is, for example, mockery or something.

Right. Then it's not good to just stand there and continue the mockery and let them mock holy things. That's not good for them. Right, that's. And that's not good for anyone else. That's what I think the Casting Pearls Before Swine is more about is. It's more about, you know.

Not just don't give something to somebody that they're not ready to receive, but don't give something to somebody that they're going to abuse or mock or. Right.

Cast aside, you know.

[D]

Yep, yep.

[C]

It's not worth it and it's not good for them.

[B]

All right, well, thank you very much for calling. It was nice to speak with you this evening.

Okay, we'll go ahead and take our. Take our next caller. So we've got Dan calling from Looks like California. So, Dan, welcome to the Lord Spirits podcast.

[D]

Father Andrew, are you listening?

[B]

I'm listening.

[C]

Is it Northern or Southern California?

[B]

It says Ontario, California.

[C]

Oh, okay. I know where that is. I. E. All right.

[B]

I don't know where that is.

[D]

It's just west of where Father Stephen used to grow up.

[B]

There you go.

So what's on your mind, Dan from Ontario, California?

[D]

So I have a question about the Pharisees and when Jesus had said that, do what the Pharisees have done, but don't do what they do because they were hypocrites. And I was kind of curious listening to the whole Counsel of God podcast. Father Stephen had said that because the Jews had become holy enough.

That is what allowed Jesus to then come into Mary because finally the people were holy enough to be around God. And it's kind of a two part question where I looked into a lot of things in the Orthodox Church. I grew up Lutheran, but I also joined the Mormon Church. And I see a lot of parallels between the Mormon Church and the Orthodox.

[B]

Are you Mormon now?

[D]

Not too sure.

[B]

Oh, well, in that case, the Mormons probably think you are, but anyway, yeah.

[D]

The Mormons probably think I am.

[B]

But you're on a list. You're on a list somewhere.

[D]

Yeah. Okay. I have attended quite a few orthodox services.

[B]

Gotcha, gotcha. Okay, go ahead. I just wanted to check just to make sure we know who we're talking to here.

Do we lose you, Dan.

[D]

No, no, I'm still here.

[B]

Okay. All right, what's your question?

[D]

I just kind of was wondering, you know, how parallel. I mean, am I seeing things that are. That I'm.

[C]

I don't know.

[D]

I guess, am I making connections that I aren't actually there? But I was really curious about the Pharisees.

And whether or not the Jews had just become holy enough to accept God in their presence.

[B]

Yeah, I mean, that. Father, that sounds like something that I know that you've said, but I don't think that's what you said.

[C]

Well, yeah, so I. I think there's two ideas there being brought together that are related but not identical. Right. So the Pharisees believed that when the people as a whole.

Had become holy by keeping Torah, that that's when the Messiah would come.

That was. And that was a communal, like the idea of the people as a whole. Right. And that was based on some pretty straightforward reasoning. Right. They read the Old Testament, they said, well, the reason we were put into exile in the first place, the reason all this happened to us in the first place, was disobedience to the Torah. So if we become obedient, then we'll be blessed instead of cursed.

[B]

Right.

[C]

So, I mean, that's a straightforward.

Piece of reasoning. So what I was getting at with the Theotokos, and this is the teaching of the Orthodox Church, is that the Theotokos is sort of the culmination, the ultimate culmination of the faithful remnant of the holy remnant within Israel that's being preserved and refined in holiness throughout the Old Covenant.

[D]

Oh, okay.

[C]

And so in that way, I think when I talked about. I. Well, I think one of the times I talked about this may have been in when we're going through Revelation and talking about whether the Woman in Revelation 12 represents the Theotokos or Israel. And my answer was, porque dolos dos? Essentially for this reason. Right. That she is sort of the embodiment of that faithful and holy remnant. Right, in Israel. That line, that family line that we see being drawn through.

Israelite history, sort of the culmination of it in the way that she's a culmination of that line in the way that St. John the Forerunner is the culmination of the prophets.

Of the Old Covenant.

[D]

Oh, okay.

[B]

Does that make sense, Dan?

[C]

Yeah. That's why she's the one who gives birth to the Messiah.

[B]

Yeah.

[D]

Okay.

[B]

All right. Okay. Well, thank you very much for calling in. And I'll just say that, you know, I hope you dump the Mormons and become an orthodox Christian. Just want to put that out there for you. Uh.

We would be glad to have you. All right, our next caller is Aaron, who apparently is interested in Twin Peaks. So, Aaron, welcome to the Lord of Spirits podcast.

[C]

Now we're talking.

[D]

Hi, guys. All right, so a couple episodes back, Father Stephen, you made a kind. What I would consider to be a fairly oblique reference to the mother from the Return season three. And so what I wanted to ask you was it was kind of a two parter first.

Do you think that on the whole, Twin Peaks ended up being a gnostic work of fiction and is what happened to Dale Cooper at the end? What do you think?

[B]

See, the lows never get questions like this.

[C]

Yes. No, but this is. See, this is. I live for this. This is the greatest night of Lord of Spirits ever.

Congratulations, Aaron, because I'm a ridiculous. I'm a ridiculous Twin Peaks fan. We could do the next two and a half hours just on me explaining Twin Peaks. And Father Andrew would.

[B]

I've never watched it run away. Yeah, yeah, never.

[C]

Like, I watched the original series on TV when it aired 35 years ago. Yeah, the premiere was 35 years ago, I think Monday, actually.

[E]

Oh.

[B]

I'm gonna look this up now so I have something to contribute.

[C]

But I watched the original two seasons when they originally aired, and then 25 years later, we got season three.

[B]

It was 34 years ago last Monday, this previous Monday, April 8, 1990.

[C]

1990. Yeah.

[B]

That was the year that you and I turned 15, Father Stephen.

[C]

Yes, I was in high school. Yes, it was on ABC.

At.

I think 10pm it ended up being because of the sometimes mature content.

So. Yeah. So.

Wait, the first question was about Judy, right?

[D]

Well, yes, essentially Judy is kind of like the demiurge in Gnosticism.

[C]

Sort of. Sort of, yeah. As an embodiment of. Yeah.

[D]

And then Bob is like an archon.

[C]

Yeah. Is like giving birth to. But yeah, So, I mean, I think I would. Sorry, sorry, Losing it over here. Yeah. We're talking about characters named Bob and Judy who are like, you know, supernatural archetypes.

Yes. And it was David Bowie who first spoke to us of Judy in the.

[D]

That's right.

[C]

But.

Yeah, so.

I wouldn't necessarily go to a Gnostic place with it.

[D]

Yeah.

[C]

And that's. That's partially because.

Of the owls. Right.

I think the owls are. Are tapping into some Arthurian kind of things.

Yeah. So I think what you're reading as Gnostic is more sort of an archetypal thing from paganism processed through a Christian Lens.

[D]

Sure.

[B]

Right.

[D]

Yeah.

[C]

Yeah. And so in that sense. Right. I think Judy is a more straightforward kind of devil figure. Right, right. And I think Bob and the others would be more in the sense of sort of giving birth to sort of embodiments of passions and that kind of thing.

Yeah. So. And I think. And I don't want to take too long, as much as I love this, I don't want to take too much of the time on this because I know there are a fair number of listeners left totally in the dark on this whole conversation.

[D]

Yeah, yeah.

[C]

But I mean, I was. I was posting on alt TV Twin Peaks back in the Usenet days, so.

[B]

Nice.

[C]

I have issues of Wrapped in Plastic anyway.

Which are, ironically, themselves wrapped in plastic.

[B]

But.

[C]

In terms of where Dale Cooper was, I think the key is that he's the wizard in the poem.

[E]

Yes.

[D]

Okay.

[B]

Right.

[C]

And so I think at the end. Right.

My read of the very end is that.

He attempted to. By.

Changing history.

[D]

Yeah.

[C]

To eradicate evil.

But the same evil persists. Meaning the evil isn't just the product of a string of human choices that if they. Right.

[D]

He was on the wrong track.

[B]

Right.

[C]

But that it's actual forces acting in the world and upon people, and therefore, it's. It's not that simple. Right. Like, the evil he was crusading against the whole time is a bigger and cosmic evil. And so you can't just crusade against it through, you know, solving or preventing individual crimes.

[D]

Yeah.

[C]

Okay.

[B]

Yeah.

[D]

Like, fantastic.

That's great.

[B]

I hope that solves all your problems, Aaron.

[D]

And, yeah, I'm still gonna think about that last shot for the rest of my life, but, yeah.

[B]

Okay. All right. Thank you for calling. Well, you heard it, everybody. This is now the greatest night of Lord of Spirits ever.

[C]

So from my perspective. Yes. Because I got to talk about Twin Peaks, even though Father Andrew was completely baffled by the.

[B]

Yeah, I mean, I've heard of it, you know.

And apparently a lot of people were dissatisfied with, like, when it came back recently. I don't know.

[C]

Well, that. See, those aren't real fans.

[B]

That's how it always goes.

[C]

Those aren't real fans.

[D]

No, no.

[C]

This is a show that ended 25 years earlier on a cliffhanger.

[B]

Oh, wow.

[C]

And then they made a movie, and instead of wrapping up the cliffhanger or anything else, the movie was a prequel.

[B]

Wow.

[C]

So if you came to season three, that was produced 25 years later, expecting it all to get wrapped up perfectly in a nice little bow, like you're not a real fan. Like, you haven't been paying attention to the whole show. Right.

[B]

Okay. All right, well, we have Michael calling next. So, Michael, welcome to the greatest night of Lord of Spirits ever.

[C]

Do you want to talk about Lost Highway?

[D]

Thank you, Fathers. I'm not familiar with what that is, so probably not.

[C]

All right, we'll have to move on from David Lynn.

[B]

Back to your regular scheduled giants and stuff.

[D]

So my. My question was, I read a book recently by a hospice nurse who's talked about her experience helping people to transition from this life to the next. And she said that in her experience, a very common thing that would come up is people would see their deceased loved ones or close friends or something like that coming to, like, coming to get them and take them to the other side. And she said this was so common that, like, when she initially started, she thought, oh, they're hallucinating. But apparently that was just like a thing that happens all the time. And the part that was puzzling to me about that was not necessarily people showing up, but then the fact that she said there seemed to be no pattern based on religion that she could detect it would be Christians and Muslims and atheists and whatever who would have these people show up as. I was just wondering what Yalls take on that was like, what are these people experiencing?

[B]

Yeah, like, why is it that there isn't maybe a preponderance of Christians who are seeing their dead loved ones and not so much with other people or something like that? Is that. Is that like, in the back of your mind?

[D]

Right, Because. Right, because my presupposition would be, okay, well, if the Christians are, like, going to heaven and the non Christians are not, as a general principle, then it would make sense that, like, other deceased Christians would come get them or something like that. Right. Or like, the angels would show up and get them, like you hear about sometimes in some of the various stories from the fathers and stuff. But there seems to be no correlation there.

[B]

Yeah, I mean. I mean, the first thoughts that I have about this is like, number one, it's anecdotal to begin with. Right. This is one hospice nurse's experiences. I'm not saying she didn't have these experiences. Right. But to take that and then try to establish a pattern and, you know, extrapolate some kind of meaning from that. You know, like a kind of sociology of. Of. Of the last moments of death. And then also the fact that different people are having various kinds of experiences and they're describing it in their own words. Or maybe, you know, relatives nearby are the ones who Are reporting these. Like, it's just. It's kind of. There's too many.

Too many variables that are, by definition, not objective that I think that you could actually, you know, kind of come to some sort of conclusions based on this right now. I mean, I would not say that these people, as they're dying, are not seeing something or not experiencing something or whatever, but there's so many questions about, like, what exactly. Who exactly are they seeing or experiencing? And what is the basis for the interpretation they're giving that experience and on and on and on. I mean, there's just kind of too much for me to be able to say, oh, this is what's going on here, you know? I don't know. Father Steven, you have any comments on this?

[C]

Well, other than I find it odd that you're saying there's not enough objective evidence for you to derive a scientific conclusion. Yeah, Okay. I mean, not Joe, I thought I was odd, but okay, yeah, no, but.

[B]

I mean, I'm saying, like, you know, like, Michael is asking about a conclusion. Right. He's asking about, like, shouldn't it be this way? Or shouldn't it, you know, shouldn't the pattern go in this direction?

[C]

Right, right.

[B]

So.

[D]

And for what it's worth, the way she describes it. Well, she says that when she initially encountered this, she just thought they were hallucinating. But then the other, like, hospice nurses that were training her said, oh, this is a common thing that shows up, like, throughout this care. Like, we notice this all the time. So it seems like it's not just her experience, but it's like, a widespread thing. And the way they were observing it was with the patients, like, talking to these people on an ongoing basis for, like, a few hours to, like, a day or so before they passed. So that's how they were figuring out, like, oh, this is who they're talking to, or whatever.

[C]

Right, but. So these. These are people they recognize, meaning these are people from their lives. Right.

So.

I don't know how deep to go into this. I'm trying to give Pageau rights to the video from Pageau Fest, where I talked about this in detail.

[B]

You can talk about things.

[C]

Well, no, eventually it'll be on the show, but, I mean, he's still got it behind a paywall. Right.

I'm a respecter of other people's paywall.

[B]

It's that lecture that he has behind a paywall.

[C]

But no, I am going to talk about the topic.

[B]

So.

[C]

I would argue that this phenomenon is a part of the bodily resurrection and the Bodily resurrection is universal.

[B]

There you go. That makes sense, right?

[C]

This isn't a function of. See, I think part of the dissonance is we've been so trained to this idea of you die and you're a Christian and you go to heaven and you die and you're not a Christian and you go to hell. So wait, why are the departed loved ones greeting the non Christian? Right. But that's not really.

Right. Our eschatology, including yours, I don't think that's actually the way you view things, right? Like, caller, I don't think that's how you view things.

But the. The dissonance comes from that sort of presupposition, right? So if we have a different presupposition. If we have a different presupposition that everyone experiences the bodily resurrection, so everyone's life.

Right?

At least aspects of it become eternal in either a positive or a negative way.

Right? Then we would expect the end of someone's life at the end of someone's life for them to be experiencing in some way their life to that point, right? I'm not just talking about like, oh, you're about to die and your life flashes before your eyes, right?

But they would be experiencing their past, their past decisions, right? Their past sins, their. Their past repentance, the people they knew, right? All of that would come to revisit them at the point of death, right. Regardless of their eternal destiny. Because again, that's part and parcel of the bodily resurrection in that it's part and parcel of our identity being maintained.

Through death and out the other side. So.

I would put it into that category that it's an experience related to the end of everyone's life and sort of the re. Experiencing of that life.

[D]

Right?

[C]

That life re presenting itself to the person at the end, including the people in it.

[B]

Would you classify that as an educated speculation?

[C]

I would categorize that as something I'm pretty confident about at this point, but I'd have. It would take the rest. It'd probably take a couple of. Not probably would. There will be a couple of shows in the future where we go all the way down this and I make the whole argument, right? We'll work through it, even expanding beyond that Pageot talk, right? But, you know, we'll spend six or seven hours in two shows going through all that. But I'd have to go through all that to explain why I'm reasonably confident about what I just said as an answer.

[B]

There we go. All right. What do you think of that, Michael? Does that does that seem to make sense to you?

[D]

It actually, it actually does. I'd be very curious to hear the rest of the whole. The whole episodes on that. But yeah, that, that tracks. So cool. Thank you.

[B]

Well, well, you know that that means the podcast not. Not going to end this week, so.

[C]

Yes, there you go.

[B]

All right, thank you very much for calling. We have a call from Romania. This is our friend Emilian, who I believe is very active in our Facebook group. Yeah.

[D]

Hello, Father.

[B]

Good. Actually it must be early morning for you.

[D]

Yeah, it always is.

But it's worth it.

[B]

Welcome, welcome. What's on your mind?

[D]

Yeah, so I have two questions if that is all right.

[B]

That's all right.

[D]

The main one would be about soul sleep. And I know you've talked about it before, before on the show, maybe in one of the Astronautology episodes, but I was wondering about the story of the seven holy youth from Ephesus or the seven sleepers from Ephesus.

[B]

Yeah.

[D]

Because in that stories is these young men.

Are basically.

Closed off in a cave by a pagan Roman emperor and basically they die without knowing it, but are resurrected.

I think hundreds of years later.

Centuries later. Yes. During a controversy in the church regarding the universal or the bodily resurrection in order to testify that the bodily resurrection will take place.

At the end. So given that they are not aware that they died, could someone understand that this story found in their synaxarian would teach that there is this idea of soul flip.

[B]

Hmm. I think. And cut in any time here, fathers, because I'm kind of shooting from the hip here.

My thought is that.

Their experience may well be something like the experience, although maybe it would be different too, but something like the experience that Lazarus had. Although this is obviously after the resurrection of Christ.

And even though for those in this life centuries would have passed.

It would not necessarily have been that for them. Right. That.

They wouldn't have experienced it as sleep. Right. Because they will have moved beyond the confines of linear time. So that's my. That's my semi educated speculation.

[C]

Yeah. Well, I'd say two things. First, the sleep analogy, I don't think we should read too much into.

[B]

Right.

[C]

Because they're called the seven sleepers of Ephesus.

They show up in the Quran. That's what's really fascinating about them to me.

Which caused averroes no end of troubles. But.

You know, they're referred to as sleepers. Right. But I mean, you read the New Testament, you know, Christ will say that someone is just sleeping and everybody laughs because they know they're dead. Right.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

So there are those who have fallen asleep in the Lord. Right. That. That metaphor is used a lot. But I would point out that metaphor is also used, for example, on Holy Saturday, we say that Christ awoke as from sleep when he rose from the dead.

[B]

Right.

[C]

But that's in the context of other hymns that say, right, his soul wasn't asleep. Right. His soul was harrowing Hades.

And he was also on the throne with the Father, the Spirit, and he was also in paradise with the thief. Right.

So that's a. That's a metaphor about the body.

[B]

Right.

[C]

It's a metaphor about the human body, that the body appears to be asleep while the soul is not in it.

[B]

Right.

[C]

And so.

If we don't read too much into the metaphor, the question becomes sort of, as Father Andrew was starting to address it, what was the experience of those seven youths and their dog? We can't understand, right, the dog. So we'll. We'll set the dog aside. Don't know what it's like to be a dog. But.

So the question of their experience.

I don't think can be adequately answered by them just having been asleep. Because when they reappear in the city of Ephesus.

After being raised, they don't just show up and say, yeah, we wait. What year is it? Right. It's not like Rip Van Winkle or something. Right. Or Buck Rogers. It's, you know, we're here to testify to you about this.

[B]

Right.

[C]

Which to me implies.

Not that it was like being put under anesthesia for surgery, where you close your eyes and then you open them at some later point in time with no experience of the passing time, but that they actually returned with some knowledge of the resurrection.

To impart and to testify to. Right. Because it's not just that they wandered into town and didn't know where they were and what year it is and why has everything changed? And where's my parents?

[B]

Right.

[C]

And then everyone concluded from that that there must be a bodily resurrection. It's that they gave testimony.

Meaning they returned from the dead with this sort of prophetic mission, which applies to me, that they actually did have.

Some kind of experience in there, Right. Related to their resurrection, but that that experience isn't something that you could literally describe in a kind of human sense of the succession of moments. Yeah, right. Where they could say, okay, we were dead for, you know, 200 years, and, you know, for the first 50 years, we were kind of confused. And then after that, this happened. Right. Like, that's not how.

That experience would be. We don't know exactly what it was, but it seemed to impart some kind of spiritual knowledge to them.

[B]

There you go. Okay, so, Emilian, what is your second question?

[D]

Yes.

A question regarding. I mean, I want to know if there could be or there is a link between the different versions of, or types of icons, especially of the Holy Mother of God and different hypotheses of the pagan gods. Is there something related about them?

[B]

Wow. I'm gonna say no. But.

I mean, you know, like, it's, it's. I mean, to me, this strikes me as, like when people say that, you know, different saints, like, correspond to different gods or something like that, you know, I mean, certainly, like some saints are associated with certain kinds of things, and then certain gods are associated with certain kinds of things, whatever. But, but to make a kind of one to one correspondence, I think is a big problem. You know, I don't know. What do you think, Father?

[C]

Yeah, so I think the major difference is that we're talking about different icons of the Theotokos, who is one person, not that the Theotokos subsists in.

These eight different forms that are sort of persons under themselves, yet they're icons of.

[B]

Her, not bodies of her.

[C]

Right.

And so, like, you know, you have, you have Artemis.

In the Peloponnese, and you have Artemis and Ephesus. They don't look the same. They're actually goddesses, quote unquote, of different things.

[D]

Right.

[C]

There. That. But, but the pagan belief was that these are two different embodiments.

Of ultimately the same spiritual power of the same spirit. Right. And that's not what we say about the relationship of icons of the Theotokos to the Theotokos. For the most part, the names of the different icons are ways of just distinguishing them based on visual features or the places where they came to rest, in some cases through various chains of events in order to distinguish them from others. Yeah, yeah, because they're somewhat different depictions or they're a particular icon that had a particular history or provenance.

[B]

There you go. All right, well, thank you very much for calling, Emiliane. We're going to go ahead and take one more caller and then we're going to have our first break. So we have Dave calling. Dave, welcome to Lord of Spirits podcast.

[D]

Hi, is that me?

[B]

It's you.

[D]

Hello. Okay, cool. Yeah, I'm confused because I usually go by David, but that's right.

[B]

Oh, what is your name?

[D]

It's David.

[B]

Oh, it's David. Okay.

[D]

Well, yeah, Dave to me is.

[B]

Sorry, I'm just reading the call Board. That's what it says right in front of me.

[D]

That's fine, David.

[B]

All right.

[C]

Somebody got lazy on the typing. They wanted to save one keystroke.

[B]

That's right.

[D]

Oh, it's fine.

[B]

No, my.

[D]

My question is, I've been listening along from the first podcast friend told me about a little while back, and so just going through a lot of the things.

Really, like, made sense of what things I've already had, kind of had an idea for, but couldn't explain to myself in a way, explain for myself. So, like the. Those putting on where. Where God put on flesh. Garments of flesh for Adam and Eve to give them the. The, you know, so that they wouldn't be crystallized in their evil, in their sin.

[B]

Yeah, the garments of sin.

[D]

Yeah, yeah. And the relation to that. And then one. One new thing that I hadn't heard before growing up with a background and, you know, Protestant background for the most part, was, you know, I never heard about or, you know, thought about how, you know, praying for the departed unbelievers who, you know, as if they could receive Christ or as if they could be saved then after. Is that not like knowing when their spirit leaves their body and is crystallized, you know? All right, is that the point where it'd be crystallized in there at that point, so then it wouldn't be too late for them? I didn't know if that was a. Trying to make sense of that.

[B]

Yeah, I think I know what you're saying. So there's a couple of things that are important to.

Pick apart a little bit from each other to distinguish, really. So.

St. John of Damascus in particular, but other church fathers say that the mortal body is what enables us to repent. So God gives us mortality. He gives us the garments of skin. That enables us to repent. How exactly that works, we don't know the mechanism, but he describes it, St. John describes it as being subject to changeability, essentially. Right. But obviously it's a particular kind of changeability that's required for repentance. And so when you're dead and your soul is parted from your mortal body, you no longer have that capability. You can't repent. Right. But salvation comes through the mercy of God. And people who are still in their mortal bodies can repent on behalf of someone who's not. Who's departed from their mortal body. Right. And God can have mercy on that person through. I shouldn't say God can. God does have mercy on people as he. As he wills. I mean, we can't force anything as he wills, he has mercy on people through the repentance of those who are still capable of repenting. So even though they're not able to repent anymore, that does not mean that their.

Eternal status is fixed. Right. There's saints who were given visions of the fact that they, through their prayers, that pagans. In one particular example I think we've mentioned before, St. Gregory the Great, also called Gregory the dialogist, was given a vision that through his prayers, the Emperor Trajan had been released from Hades. Which, I mean, that's interesting because Trajan was a pagan and I mean, he's the guy who, who martyred St. Ignatius of Antioch. And. Yeah, so there must have been something there to work with. Right. But, you know, through, through St. Gregory's prayers, he was released from Hades. So just because you can't repent anymore doesn't mean that there's not any possible hope for you now, for you in this life. This is your time to repent. Like, you can't say, well, I'm just gonna wait.

[D]

Right?

[B]

You know, I know that somebody's gonna pray for me when I'm gone, so I don't need to deal, you know. No, no, repent now.

[D]

Me. Yeah, yeah.

[B]

Today is the day of salvation. So anything you want, you know. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

[D]

Especially already having, like, heard and understood the gospel, it's been, you know, and I wonder if that. No, I just thought of this because.

There'S been the question that I haven't been able to answer, but I've been asked before, like who? You know, what about people who weren't presented with the gospel, you know, Native Americans, before settlers out here kind of thing. You know, how is that fair that they weren't, you know, exposed to the gospel and, you know, then they don't get to hear it and then they don't get to heaven.

[B]

Yeah. I mean, God is going to judge everyone according to what they do, with what it is that they've received. And some people receive more and some people receive less.

So if you have more, then you're more responsible.

[C]

Yeah. And there's emphasis there on what they do.

Right.

So part of the issue here is that.

The broad evangelical culture in the United States has bled into all of us where we have this idea that there is like hundred percent overlap between Christian member of the church and saved.

And those are three different categories that overlap a little.

A couple of them, a lot, but not entirely any of them.

[D]

Right.

[C]

So there are plenty of people who identify as Christians who won't find salvation Just like there are plenty of Israelites who didn't find salvation.

[D]

Right.

[C]

There are plenty of people who are in the church. Right.

[D]

Who aren't.

[C]

There are plenty of people who.

[D]

And.

[C]

There are people who will find salvation, like Trajan, who weren't part of the church and didn't identify as Christians.

Because what the scriptures say again and again and again, and we need to not be shy about pointing this out, because it's what the Bible says. In the parable of the sheep and the goats, Christ does not say, you heard and believed the gospel, therefore you are sheep at my right hand. You didn't hear it or heard it and rejected it, so you are goats.

That's not what he says. What the scriptures say over and over again from beginning to end is that God, through his Messiah is going to judge everyone according to their works.

According to what they have done in this life.

[B]

Right.

[C]

St. Paul makes this very clear. It's not those who hear the Torah. Right. It's not being Jewish and having the Torah.

But doing it, keeping it. Yeah, yeah, keeping it. That's who's justified. Right.

So the emphasis there in what Father Andrew said, God judges all of us by what we do with what we were given.

[D]

Right.

[C]

Is exactly right. And that emphasis is on do.

Right, on do. And so we in the church have been given an awful lot.

[D]

Yes, yeah.

[C]

And in this era, especially more than any previous generation of Christians, we have access to and available to us at our fingertips. Right. And so we're going to be accountable for what we do in this life with that. Not what we think, not what we post online and signal about, but what we actually do. And the person who has much less. St. Paul also talks about in Romans 10, remember the fact that. And in Romans 1, he's more positive in Romans 10 that those people out there in the nations, you know, before they heard the gospel, had heard something like the gospel.

He literally says through astrology, but through. Through the creation.

[B]

Right.

[C]

Through the created order, they had a kind of access to the divine. They had it of an understanding. And that there were those. He talks about them in Romans 2 also. There were those who didn't never heard of a Torah in their life right out there in the nations, but who kept the Torah and were a Torah unto themselves, he says.

So all that is to say when it comes to prayers for the departed. Right. This is why we do memorial services for departed Christians.

[D]

Right.

[C]

We're praying for the souls of departed Christians. So it's not like, oh, well, they were Christians, so we don't have to worry about it.

[D]

Right?

[C]

Yeah, that's, it's everyone Christian and not for every tribe, tongue, people and nation, right, is going to stand before the judgment seat of Christ and you're going to count for what they did in this life.

And, and from those who have been given much, much will be required. From those who have been given little less will be required. But only ultimately.

Christ, God himself knows how that judgment goes. Right. And who it is. And so we can pray for everyone who's going to stand before that judgment seat, including ourselves, that God would show mercy on them.

[B]

All right. Well, thank you very much, David, for calling to the Lord of Spirits podcast. Great to talk to you. Okay, we're going to go ahead and take our first break and we'll be right back after this.

[A]

Father Andrew, Stephen Damick and father Stephen DeYoung will be back in a moment to take your calls on the next part of the Lord of Spirits. Give them a call at 855-237-2346. That's 855-AF-RADIO.

Vestibule of Heaven, A new story by Katherine Bulger Hyde. When professional house restorer Kelly Mason inherits a historic bungalow from an unknown benefactor. She plans to fix up the house and donate it to the community. But when she visits the place, she feels an unexpected emotional pull and decides to move in. As she works to restore the house, Kelly senses a ghostly presence guiding her to some startling discoveries about her own past. Her co workers, the McCarthys, and especially their enigmatically appealing friend Nathaniel encourage her to unlock her history and find the home and family she's never known. But to do so, Kelly must open her rational mind to the unexplainable and her bricked up heart to forgiveness and love. Coming mid March from Ancient Faith. For more information, you can go to Store Ancient faith again, that is store.ancient faith.com. we're back now with the Lord of Spirits with Father Andrew, Stephen Damick and Father Stephen DeYoung. If you have a question, call now at 855-237-2346. That's 855-AF-RADIO.

[B]

Thank you, Voice of Steve.

I like that ad. It had kind of like spooky music in the background. That was pretty cool.

[C]

That was kind of Stephen King ish.

[B]

Yeah.

I have to tell Catherine that.

All right.

[C]

By the way, that gum you like is going to come back in style.

[B]

Okay. We're doing all calls tonight, so if you don't call, then I get to go home early. And I'm always happy to sleep a.

[C]

Little bit more call in.

[B]

But at some point. I'm cutting you all off. Right now, though, we have James calling all the way from tomorrow because James is in New Zealand. James, Was it about 11 in the morning, noon there?

[D]

Hello. Yes, it's about 11 in the morning.

[B]

All right.

[C]

Yes, we hear you.

[B]

I think you are our first New Zealander to call in.

[C]

Yes, the first New Zealish person with which we have.

[D]

Yes, I'm pretty sure I am.

Okay, so my question.

So basically it has to do with the fact that Israel was given all this land by God. All of this land is supposedly being transferred to Christ in the church, though I don't exactly understand how that plays out practically in any way apart from just something that is said. And then even moreover, from that, the church makes its way out into the entire world.

There are all these sort of jubilee laws in the Old Testament. How on earth can that even be applied when there aren't even. We don't exactly have boundary markers for who in England is supposed to get what in the Torah. I suppose that makes sense. So I don't know exactly how that's supposed to work, but maybe you could help me understand it.

[B]

Yeah. Okay. So Father doesn't say at the end of Joshua that all of the land promises were fulfilled.

[D]

Yes.

[C]

It does literally say that. So I think.

So.

There'S a deliberate wordplay, especially when you get into the New Testament, because this wordplay works even better in Greek than it does in Hebrew, where the word for earth and the word for land are the same word.

[B]

Right?

[C]

So, for example, when Christ in the Beatitude says, the meek shall inherit the earth.

[B]

Right?

[C]

That phrase shall inherit the earth is the same phrase in Greek that's used to talk about inheriting the land in Deuteronomy and Joshua in the Greek translation.

So we translated earth there, Right. So.

I think that the way to understand the land promises and what's set up there is that it serves the purpose of a sign.

In the sense that very commonly when a prophecy was given.

In the Old Testament, but also in the New Testament.

Some immediate sign was given.

That would serve as a kind of assurance of the larger promise that was projected out into the future.

[D]

Right.

[C]

So there are some very simple examples of this. Like when the angels come to the shepherds at the birth of Christ, they say, you know, the Messiah has been born. The stars sing and everything. And then they say, this shall be assigned to you. You will find a baby wrapped in swaddling clothes, laying in a manger, laying In a food trough, right? That's not something you see every day, right?

So they were saying, go now, go. Look, you will see this and then you'll know that what we're telling you is true, that that baby is the Messiah, right? It serves as a sign.

Same thing is true in the original context of Isaiah 7, which is where the virgin will have a son or the young woman will have a son.

There. It's during the Syro Ephraimite war. And Isaiah says everyone's concerned because the northern kingdom of Israel and the Syrians have teamed up to attack Judah. And.

Isaiah prophesies, you know, this woman here is going to have a child. And before that child is old enough to know right from wrong, right, before he's fully suckled from his mother, God will have delivered you, right? And so when the people saw her give birth to that baby, right? They would say, okay, look, there's the baby, right? This is the sign that God is going to deliver us from these armies that are arrayed against us, right?

[D]

So.

[C]

The land promises to Abraham function in the same way. Because in those promises there are sort of two tiers of those promises to Abraham. The first tier is, I'm going to give you a bunch of descendants, right? Even though you currently have none. And during his life, he only really saw one.

Who was going to inherit at least.

Four, if you count everybody. But I'm going to give you this incredible number of children and I'm going to give you this land. I'm going to give this land to them, to your descendants. But then there was also this promise of you will be like the stars of heaven. You will camp in the gates of your enemies. All nations of the world will be blessed through you. This idea of sort of the singular seed, that there was something coming at the end of this line of Abraham beyond just the seed, plural in general, right? The literal physical descendants. And so.

The land and the sort of more material, not really material descendants. That's the wrong word. The direct descendants of Abraham coming into and possessing the land was the sign of those larger promises. This is how Hebrews treats it. For example, it talks about Abraham actually hoping for a promised land, that is the new heavens and the new earth, right? The resurrection.

So.

Those promises were fulfilled at the end of Joshua as the assurance to the people of Israel that the broader promises were true. That further then was nuanced into the hope of the Messiah coming once we have David is sort of the model of that. And.

The particulars of the bodily resurrection that emerge over the course of the old covenant, in their understanding of how exactly those larger promises.

Are going to play out. And so ultimately, because the land that material land is pointing to is the new heavens and the new earth.

[B]

It.

[C]

Is inclusive of the whole earth. Right. The people of God will dwell in the whole earth. Right.

And so I take like the specific land allotments and the year of jubilee and everything which was never practiced, not once did it actually happen in Israel. We're told that in Jeremiah at the other end, before the exile, that's part of the reason for the exile. But those principles are laid out in the Torah for other reasons, for principles of explaining what economic justice actually looks like. For example, that it is neither.

No one has any property nor.

People are allowed to live in generational poverty and generational wealth.

[D]

Right.

[C]

It's neither of those extremes.

And not. Not directly related to that. But what all of that means is that biblically, the idea of some kind of blood and soil connection by a particular ethnic group to a particular piece of land is just ruled out.

That is a pagan idea. I can show you that idea in all kinds of paganism, starting with Athenian, Greek paganism, that there is some connection between a particular people and a particular.

Piece of soil. That's just not a biblical or scriptural idea at all.

The scriptural idea is that the sons of God inherit the whole world, the new heavens and the new earth.

[B]

All right.

[D]

Okay, okay, okay, okay. No, no, I have some. I need to specify some things. Oh, sure, yeah. And so it's. It sounds like. So that means praq. Okay. No, actually, I'll start with this bit. So first off, there was this part where the fact that. So God made us promise to Abraham and then he got cut in half or something. And then that was supposed to fact that he didn't. This is in Genesis. And the fact that he couldn't keep it, it was sort of the fact that he did get cut in half or something to that degree on the cross and that renewed it. And that. That's sort of floating around my mind. But it sounds like what you're saying is that practically speaking.

The year of jubilees. Well, yeah. So no one per se inherits any. Any land. Exactly. But now what the church will focus on is making sure everyone has at least enough.

[C]

Right.

[B]

And.

[C]

And we, you know, the goal is that all of the kingdoms of this world become the kingdom of our God. Right? That Christ's authority. Because Christ. Right. All authority in heaven, on earth has been granted on him to him. Right. He's the king of all the nations. Right. That. That would. Which is true, but that. That would manifest itself on the earth. Right. That kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven.

[D]

Right.

[C]

So that's our goal. Right. But that doesn't mean that any particular person is tied to any particular parcel of land in the new heavens and the new earth.

Right? That, that. Or now.

In that same way. Right. And there's. So there's. There's another. There's another layer here.

[B]

Right.

[C]

And that, that other layer is.

Starting in Genesis. So this is in the Torah also. And, and moves all the way into the New Testament. But the, the idea that nomadism is better than settled life.

Because settled life brings forgetfulness.

[B]

Right.

[C]

So even while God is enumerating, you know, in numbers, they lay out all these land grants, and then in Deuteronomy, God says, as soon as you go and take that land and settle there, you're going to forget about me and you're going to fall into wickedness.

[D]

Right.

[C]

And sort of at the other end of that, when Jeremiah's in the context where Jeremiah is pointing out all the way that you never did the Sabbath year, let alone Jubilee year, Right. You never did any of these things related to the land. Praise is given to one particular clan that never set down roots, that continued to live in tents.

That the Israelites had in the wilderness. And so St. Peter takes that and applies it to Christians, that Christians should live as aliens and strangers and sojourners in the world.

The way Abraham did in the land.

Because for us, we don't have a promised parcel of land in this world. Right. Our inheritance is in the life of the world to come. And so until then, we should live in the world in this nomadic way.

[D]

Okay. Okay. Okay.

[B]

All right.

[D]

So and so. Okay.

[B]

Why don't you join that for a while, James?

[C]

This is a lot, I know.

[B]

Yeah. Especially if you're used to kind of maybe some dispensationalist theology, whatever.

So thank you very much for calling. So honored to have a caller all the way from the other side of the world. Next, a lot closer to home, Samuel, who I think has called us many times before from the Holy land of Virginia. Samuel, welcome to the Lord of Spirits podcast.

[D]

Hello again, fathers.

[B]

Yes, hello again from East Virginia.

Actually, did you know that Virginia goes further west than West Virginia? Just wanted to put that out there.

[D]

I did know that because I went to college at the part that's west of West Virginia.

[B]

There you go.

North Virginia.

[D]

And now I'm in northern Virginia.

[B]

Which is kind of. Not really Virginia. Exactly.

But anyway, technically. Welcome. What's on your mind, Samuel?

[D]

Well, I have a question about the connection between giants and emperors, particularly Roman ones. All right, well, in previous episodes, you've talked about how being a giant isn't necessarily a genetic thing and it's participating in the practice of giants. And I noticed something about. So the first dynasty of Roman emperors, in particular, one of their titles they claimed was Diwi Filius, son of a God, referring to.

A guy who got stabbed a lot.

[B]

The salad guy.

[D]

Yeah. And that made me think of how you guys have talked about the way giant.

Are described in the Old Testament and how they often set themselves up as God kings.

Okay, so am I onto something there?

[B]

So you're wondering, are Roman emperors who claim to be divine, is that the same kind of thing as the giants that are described in the Old Testament? Is that what you're saying?

[D]

Are they participating in the practices of the giant clans?

[B]

You know, I don't think that there's. Correct me if I'm wrong, Father, but I don't think that there is reference to that particular kind of ritual. Even though the Roman emperors did understand themselves to be divine.

Yeah.

[C]

And it's. So.

Roman emperors are interesting and complex beasts. That's beasts used there very deliberately.

In that.

First of all, most of them were not proclaimed to be divine while they were alive.

Most.

And the claims to their divinity when they were alive was largely related to, like the genius of the emperor. The idea that there was some demonic spirit, spirit associated with or indwelling the emperor.

And sort of giant and demon possessed person is not a 100% overlap.

But also.

The Roman emperors suffered some really complex pathologies.

[B]

Right.

[C]

So like, if you think about candidates for giant. Right. Probably like Caligula and Nero would be near the top. Right.

Just in terms of doing, like, really evil stuff and persecuting the church. But Nero, for example, had this really complex relationship with religion because he'd killed his own mother.

And of course, publicly did not kill his mother. Right. But privately knew he had killed his mother. And so he would go to, you know, famous temples and places where Greek mysteries were practiced because he was fascinated by them, but he would never participate. And there were temples he wouldn't enter because he thought he would be killed for having killed his mother.

[B]

Yeah. The Furies would get him.

[C]

Yeah. Like, he really thought if he tried to get. If he tried to approach the divine in any way, that that stain on him from having killed his mother would kill him. Right. He would he would be killed for it.

And even though at various times in his life, he did sacrifices and things that he thought would expunge it, he was never confident enough that it had been expunged until the day he killed himself to.

Really deal with that. So, I mean, I think my ultimate answer to that is that the ancient God kings and the giants in the ancient near east.

The Roman emperors, as people, as men, were, like, not on that level.

[B]

Right.

[C]

They were. I mean, I think there's a reason why, like, in Daniel's vision, as you go forward in time and get to the right, you go from gold to, like, iron.

[B]

Yeah. You know, it also occurs to me, right. Like, there's a certain kind of.

I don't know that vitality is the right word that I want, but there's a certain kind of vitality with the ancient God kings, you know, who are more sort of directly holding power over smaller groups of people, versus Roman bureaucracy, where the idea is to get hold of the bureaucracy and the military. You know, like, it's. It's about power through mechanisms rather than power through kind of this demonic presence, this direct demonic presence, the way you have with those clans and tribes and individual cities and that sort of thing.

[C]

Yeah. So if we take a giant to be a person who's been sort of fully demonized.

[B]

Right.

[C]

As far as a human can go in that direction. Right. Sort of the opposite of theosis. They've been sort of fully demonized. I think even if you're looking at, like, Nero and Caligula and Domitian and Diocletian, they're all too human when you look at them.

[B]

No one's calling them heroes.

[C]

Yeah. They're more tormented by demons than being demons themselves.

So I think that would be the distinction I would make with the Roman emperors. Not that you're not on the track of something. Right. I see what you're seeing, but I think ultimately we're talking about evil on a whole other level, beyond. Beyond the Roman emperors, when we're talking about the giant clans.

[B]

Yeah. All right, well, thank you very much, Samuel, for calling in.

Next, we are going to take James, who I think is calling from Maryland. James, welcome Lord of Spirits podcast. You're our second James for the night.

[D]

Yeah, I heard that earlier with your caller from New Zealand. That's great.

[C]

Do you mind calling you Bruce so it doesn't get confusing?

[D]

Hey, well, let's make it even more confusing. My father's name is Bruce.

[B]

Okay.

Does he teach philosophy at the University of Wallomalo? Just Throwing that out there.

[D]

He's a retired nurse. Not so interesting.

[B]

All right, all right.

So what's on your mind, James from Maryland?

[D]

Yeah. So I had a question for you about theophoric knee. This was inspired by something that came up in a past. I think it may have been past podcast you did about. Oh, I can't remember it. Anyway. Well, you were talking about how names sometimes get translated in weird ways by translators who don't want to deal with, like, the personal nature of some of the powers described in the Old Testament. And I think, Father Andrew, you made a pun about, like, how somebody might translate your name as the crowned man. And it got me thinking about how we can find things like that in the scriptures if we're reading them for personal study. The question is generally, is, is there a way to look at the text as they were in their original language and tell when the writer is intending to describe a personal name as opposed to a word that has a same or similar meaning?

[B]

Oh, wow.

So speaking from a kind of linguistic point of view, I mean, in some cases, the form of the word says that it's a name. Right. But in others, it's not so obvious, and you have to know from context. And sometimes knowing from context is not just about knowing the text of the scripture, but also knowing the cultural and religious context. Right. So, like, you know, Father Stephen has mentioned.

You know, in the Psalms, where it. Where it asks for protection from the arrow that flieth by day. Well, you know, that's a reference to Reshef, but if you don't know who Reshef is, or Reshef is a God that shoots plague arrows, then you're just gonna know that it seems to be a word that means arrow. Right. As an example. So I don't know that there's an easy way, especially when you're reading in translation, which, you know, most of us are doing. Right.

You know, to just instantly tell. Right. So I think that's why a lot of study can help if you're trying to understand the Scriptures at. At that level. I don't know. You have anything to. To add, Father?

[C]

Yeah, there's. There's another. There's another sort of wrinkle there, especially when you're talking about the Old Testament, and that's that some of the names are changed.

[B]

Oh, yeah, yeah. By later editors and stuff.

[C]

Yeah. Because of that. So, for example, one of Saul's Old Testament Saul.

One of Saul's sons, was named Ishbaal.

So he had a theophoric name With BAAL in it.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

And Ishbaal means man of baal.

That usually. That gets changed.

Most of the time, almost every time he's referred to. To Ish Bosheth.

Which means man of shame.

[B]

Right.

[C]

But here's why this especially applies. Right.

Should we read that? And most translations just copy the Hebrew name and just refer to Saul's son Ish Bosheth.

[B]

Right.

[C]

As if that's his name.

But is that the correct way to translate it? Or would the correct way to translate it be to say Saul's son, the man of shame?

Right. Are they saying that's his name, which wasn't his name, or are they calling him that as a description?

[B]

Yeah. As an idol, an epithet or nickname?

[C]

Yeah, yeah.

[D]

Almost like a pun, too, I think, with that name. Right. Where they're sort of playing on what it means and what they interpret his life as or something like that.

[C]

Yeah, yeah.

So because Ishbaal, in addition, the name BAAL means lord or master. So you could translate Ishbaal as the lordly man.

Or Mr. Man, the shameful man. Right. So the lordly man, the shameful man. Right. Yeah. So it's very complex, and it's hard to bring all that out, like everything I just said there by just a particular way of translating the name.

[D]

Right.

[C]

To sort of get at that, you need a decent study Bible note to kind of get at all that. Right.

And so that's one of the reasons why I recommend people get the Net Bible full notes edition. I don't think the N E T Bible is a great translation, and I don't think everything in the notes is correct. But there's a wealth of that kind of translation information in the notes.

[D]

Yeah.

[B]

And we should add, though it is put together by Protestants, so there is a Protestant slant in terms of interpretation going on in the notes.

[C]

Yeah, that's what I meant by not everything in the notes is correct. But there's a wealth of information there that you can access.

[D]

Yeah.

[B]

I mean, the linguistic stuff is generally pretty. Just objectively true. Yeah. Yeah. So does that help?

[D]

Yeah, it definitely does. Thanks. I appreciate it.

[B]

All right. All right.

[D]

And if you can tolerate being up past your bedtime, I might call back in with another question on the law to stay on.

[B]

All right, thank you very much for calling. Okay, next we have Corey calling from the land of the cheeseheads.

[D]

Welcome, Corey and cheese hearts. Thank you for taking my call, Father.

[C]

Nice.

[D]

Yeah.

[C]

I don't know. I'm torn. I have so much family in Minnesota on the One hand yet. I also have my internal Dutch love of dairy products, so I don't know whether which way I should go on.

[D]

This call, but, I mean, I haven't tried their deep fried curds, but I would be surprised if they can pass us. It's a land of milk and cheese curds out here for sure.

[B]

There you go. All right. So what is on your cheesy mind and cheesy heart?

[D]

God, don't get me started on puns. I'm hoping to get your take on a question about predeterminism coming from a Calvinist that led to an atheist that led to perhaps a heretical view of Christianity. If I'm being honest, I haven't been able to shake a belief in determinism throughout all of those transitions. And I don't see how to conceptualize God as omni benevolent, omniscient, omnipotent.

And still see a space for my free will.

I was hoping you could respond. Maybe I could throw out a provocative example. I think there is space for free will in the sense that God is creating that free will within us, even right now. And the arch center I've heard you reference.

I think there's a space. Cain's actions is predetermined. And Reid, his sacrifice of Abel as not sinful in the sense of jealousy or envy, but in the sense of him trying to appease a God who has judged his prior sacrifice quit. He's saying to God, am I my brother's keeper? Because if he is, that would imply that he had to sacrifice the work, the effort, the labor that he put into Cain, and that's what he was trying to appease God with. So I see there is a way to read the Bible in this kind of predetermined sense that says, yes, we're sinners in that we judge the world as evil. God has created is good.

[B]

Okay, well, I mean, Father Stephen, you came out of a reformed background, so.

[C]

That escaped with my life.

[D]

No.

[B]

These are waters you have swum through many times.

[C]

Yeah. So. Right. So as you said, if you're going to describe God as omni benevolent, that means there is good and evil. Right. And God is on the good side of that. He isn't evil. Right. So then my question is, is tyranny a good.

[D]

As created by God? I would say yes.

[B]

Wow.

[C]

Wait, well, what do you mean by.

[D]

As created by God.

Created tyrannical control over?

[C]

Well, but. But you're not arguing that God is. And therefore it's. God is good, therefore God's Tyranny is good. You're arguing to me that for God to be omnibenevolent and omnipowerful, he has to be a tyrant.

[D]

Yeah, I think. I don't see how you could have a God who's not fully in control, a God who's wielding us as objects.

[C]

Because that is somehow good.

[D]

Yeah. And I have listened to your God is so good episode, and maybe I wasn't able to piece something together there, but.

[C]

No, but I'm just. I'm trying to understand again.

[D]

Yeah.

[C]

What, so if God allowed human freedom, he would. He would. He would not be good?

[D]

Well, no, I think what God is doing is creating in us human freedom.

[C]

No, I'm not asking for your argument. I'm saying.

If God allows human freedom.

If he has to be a tyrant in order to be all good and all powerful.

Then that means that him giving freedom to creatures would be evil.

In some sense.

[B]

Yeah, because he'd be backing off of being in control of every single little everything.

[D]

Right. Well, I think there is an interesting point in the second day of creation when God is separating the waters, where he seems to not say it is good immediately, and that seems to only come later. And I would point to that as like maybe a pause, a divine idea that, yes, there is something other here. And if God is creating other than himself and he is all good, doesn't that have to, by some definition, be evil?

[C]

Well, so would that make everything he creates evil then, wouldn't it? Because everything he creates is other than himself.

[D]

Yes, save for the redemption of Jesus Christ. And that is why Christ is so necessary.

[C]

Well, then what is redemption? Is redemption metaphysical? See, this is Gnosticism.

Right. Because then redemption would have to be. Everything becomes God. Everything is no longer other than Him.

[D]

Isn't that theosis? Isn't that the process we're undertaking?

[C]

No, that's not theosis at all. That's not what theosis is. Theosis is not ceasing to be a creature. No, no. Theosis is coming to participate ever more fully in the divine energies. Not the divine essence.

We don't participate in the divine essence.

Okay, so that's.

[D]

That's that.

[C]

Yeah, that's a big. That's a big distinction for us. So on the. The. And I'm not using gnostic here as a pejorative. I'm using it as a descriptor. I'm definitely.

[D]

I'm definitely familiar. Yeah. Yeah.

[C]

So I'm not. Yeah, I'm not. I'm not saying that it's like oh, that. Right. I'm just. As a descriptor, the kind of gnostic paradigm you set out. Yeah. That does require. That does require determinism. That's why the Manicheans were determinists. That's why the. Right. That's probably where St. Augustine got some of that stuff.

[B]

But.

[C]

Right.

[B]

So.

[C]

But I think. So the core of our disagreement is not actually about determinism. The core of our disagreement is about metaphysics. The core of our disagreement is about whether God can create something other than himself that is good. Right. And I'm glad you called and asked about this, because I think this is important. I don't think people understand when I talk about Platonic metaphysics and why it doesn't work with orthodox Christianity. People don't understand what I mean. This is what I mean. Right. Platonic metaphysics says that if the one is good, anything other than the one must be minimally less good.

[B]

Right.

[C]

Which means, to some extent, evil. Right. Which is what I see you arguing. Right. So I think your argument is very consistent with the Platonic metaphysics.

I think Gnosticism is consistent with the Platonic metaphysics. That's why in the Nag Hammadi library, you find Plato's Timaeus.

[D]

Right.

[C]

So, but I. That, I think, is the point where we diverge. That's. That's the point where we diverge. Whereas I would hold out that God can create other than himself and it can be good that there are created goods that are good in a true sense of the word goodness. And in fact, when we speak of good, we're actually speaking of created goods. And yeah, the God is so good episode is all about how it's actually tricky to determine exactly what we mean when we call God good. And the ultimate answer in that episode is that what we mean when we call God good is that we say God in his working in and through creation, which is what we can talk about. That. That is good.

[B]

All right, Corey, I hope that gives you a lot to chew on.

[C]

So, yeah, I didn't really answer your question, but I think we've at least elaborated our impasse and our. Our disagreement. Right.

[D]

No, I appreciate that so much. If there are any further additional readings, I'll definitely go back and listen to the God is so good episode. But anything else you could recommend beyond that, I'd greatly appreciate it. But thank you so much for taking my call.

[B]

Yeah, thanks for calling, Corey. All right, we now have Eric calling from the Empire State. Eric, welcome to the Lord of Spirits podcast.

[D]

Hi, Fathers. Can you hear me?

[B]

We can hear you.

[D]

Awesome.

So my question is. So I've been listening to your bodies episodes, particularly bodies and bodyless.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Yeah, yeah.

[B]

I've actually.

[D]

I've been going through all the old ones and trying to, like, really absorb some of this stuff because it's just so much at once sometimes.

But so my question relates to Adam and Eve and the garments of skin and the Tree of Life and.

The nature of death in the world. So if I understand correctly, death wasn't an ontological like reality for biological beings prior to the expulsion from the garden. Am I correct in that? Well.

[B]

There are. There are.

There are some indications in the Church Fathers. I'm not going to state this dogmatically. I'm hedging it a little bit. There are some indications, Church Fathers, that there may well be death for animals and plants going on.

[D]

Okay.

[C]

Yeah.

[B]

Not humans, but not for humans.

[D]

Okay, well, so I'm trying to figure out the best way to formulate my question here. So, okay, if humans weren't capable of dying prior to the expulsion from the garden, and God's logic sort of for expelling us from the garden is so that we wouldn't eat from the Tree of Life and become immortal.

Why would we need to eat from the Tree of Life to become immortal if we were already immortal?

[B]

So it wasn't. I would say it's not a matter of becoming immortal. Right. And also we should remember that the kind of death that God gives at that point is the death of the body because their souls had already become, I don't know, dying at that point because they had separated themselves from God.

Right. And so. So what God gives then is the mortality of the. Of the material body so that we would be enabled to repent.

The tree. There's the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and the Tree of Life. Right. And so if. And but here's the thing about immortality is that it is not something that humans have ever had in themselves. It was always sort of continuously granted and sustained by God.

Only God is immortal in himself.

Right. Humans were never. We're not even created immortal in ourselves. So. So what's going on there is they're being cut off from that sort of supply of life, as it were.

I don't know. What do you think, Father?

[C]

Yeah, well, yeah. And so you notice they were not forbidden to eat of the Tree of Life while they were in the garden.

[D]

Yeah, yeah.

[B]

Just the other one.

[C]

They're barred from eating it after.

The sin.

[B]

Right.

[C]

After evil enters in that's when they're barred from it.

[D]

Okay.

[C]

And so every. And you know, we shouldn't get too woodenly literalistic about this, Right. We're not talking about two, like literal trees with literal fruit that produce magical effects.

[B]

Right?

[D]

Right.

[C]

This is a way of conveying to us a spiritual reality.

[B]

Right.

[C]

Which is absolutely true in the fullest sense, but.

It'S a spiritual reality to which we no longer have access because we're outside of paradise.

So exactly what, for example, Adam and Eve sort of technically man and woman's experience of God was in paradise, right. Isn't something we can define or describe. And this is why you find some of the church fathers saying that essentially they fell immediately.

That there was no time, as we understand it now, between when they were created and when they fell.

Right. Because even time, the experience of time, was something different in paradise, right? So.

You know, it's not that, you know, oh man, if we could just get over the wall and get past that cherub and eat it, we'd live forever. Right. Like that's.

Like you could do some Ocean's Eleven style heist movie and you know, like.

[B]

Oh man.

[C]

Right. So.

But yeah, so I, I think it's that. Right. But it is important that there's only that one tree you're not allowed to eat of. And it's not the Tree of Life beforehand, right. But that it's after evil is ended and you can't eat of it. And so that makes that. Can't eat of it anymore.

Yeah, right.

[D]

Okay. Yeah, I guess I had it like, it seemed like a sort of like progression, I guess the way I was like understanding it. Like, you know, they're, they're forbidden from eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil until they're ready. And then God would have decided to give it to them, like, and then they would have been given fruit from the Tree of Life, I guess is how I was kind of understanding it because I, in trying to like square this in my own head, like I was. The idea that I had come to was that they were actually mortal in the garden, but not necessarily like subject to death because they were in the garden with God and if everything had just gone according to plan, they would eat from the knowledge. They would eat from the Tree of Knowledge and then eat from the Tree of Life and then, you know, they're technically mortal in that state. But death would have never really had been a factor given that they were going to be within the garden and you know, work to expand out.

[B]

Yeah, I Mean, part of the difficulty is the, the, the. It would have been this way. Like, we don't know what would have been. We only know what, what has been. But other thing I'll add, you know, is that the cross is now regarded as the tree of life, and we do partake of the tree of life in the Holy Eucharist, which is then called the medicine of immortality.

Right. So it comes back around, you know, and exists now within, within the church. So I hope that helps.

[C]

Let me also add, though.

[B]

Oh, yeah, go ahead too.

[C]

In terms of how. Right. So I'm not saying there's a one to one correlation here, but if you want an example of a physical human body.

Right.

That is.

In some ways not technically immortal.

But not subject to death, you can look at Jesus body before his death and resurrection.

[D]

Oh, okay, right.

[C]

Because. And I said not a one to one. I'm not saying Adam and Eve's body was the same. Right. I'm just saying here's an example of. Right. Christ has a real physical body, but he isn't subject to death. He says that repeatedly in St. John's gospel. He dies voluntarily.

Everything he suffers, he suffers voluntarily.

He's not subject to any of it.

[B]

Right.

[C]

But he's still, for example, physically aged. Yeah.

[B]

Right.

[D]

All right, okay.

[C]

So whereas his body in the resurrection is immortal, his human body is immortal in the fullest possible sense. Right?

[D]

Yep.

[B]

Okay, well, thank you very much, Eric. We're going to take one more call before. Before we take our second break, but I just wanted to note that in our YouTube chat, Liz asked if she could call in with Firefly questions. And all I can say to that is, curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal. All right, we have Tyler calling from Kentucky. So, Tyler, welcome to the Lord of Spirits podcast.

[D]

Fathers.

[B]

Good evening.

[E]

Can you hear me?

[B]

Yeah, we hear you, Tyler. Welcome.

[D]

Hi. Well, thank you.

So I had an interesting background coming into Orthodoxy. I've been orthodox for about three years, and before that I kind of went to a more mainline and progressive church, and I was spending some time with some friends from there recently, and they asked why we pray for the dead as Orthodox Christians. And I said to them, it really kind of presupposes there will be a resurrection and there will be a personal judgment, or else it doesn't really make any sense to pray for the dead. And so we talked about that for a little while and then we talked about the eternal state. And I mentioned that I've heard lots of orthodox priests say that people kind of experience the energy and the Presence of God positively or negatively for eternity based on how they live their lives. And that, that's kind of a more comforting picture to me than like a fiery hell that God like created to burn you in. And the next day I started thinking about, it was like those two ideas don't combine for me. So.

I guess my question is, what does it work like that? Does it work like we, we encounter the river of fire or whatever in a, in a way that our lives have prepared us for, to receive it either as judgment or as love or mercy. But if that's the case, it seems like God could just be some.

Giant crystal to just like emanate the judgment. Like there's no personal decision. Like, does Christ examine my life and make a personal decision about my life that determines the outcome or is it just kind of automatic? It doesn't seem like it can be both.

[B]

Yeah, I hear you. Yeah, so there's a little bit of background to this image that you're talking about, which I remember seeing a patristic scholar once describe this idea is that hell is just heaven differently experienced.

[D]

Yeah.

[B]

So there was a very popular article by a guy named Alexander Kalamiros called the river of Fire, which really made the rounds for the last, I don't know, 20 plus years, I would say, particularly, you know, English speaking, orthodox Internet world. And I think a lot of people find that idea that like, well, God is just sort of loving everyone in the same way. And you know, some people receive it as good and some people receive it as bad. And I've even heard some people say things like, you know, it's like when your, your old great aunt, you know, grabs hold of you when you're a little kid and gives you a big smooch. You know, she loves you but you hate it. Right. I've seen that as the description. Right. I don't know if you've seen that, but I've seen that. And you're right. Like it seems to take away this sense of actual agency and judgment from God that he's just this kind of force. Right. Which is not how the scriptures depict him. Like if you look at Matthew 25, there's a sense of, you go over here and you go over here. Right. God is.

[D]

Even that, even that story, Christ says depart from me, which does not sound like they're in his presence, but not enjoying it.

[B]

Right. You know, we, we did an episode on, on Damnation. So if you haven't listened to that yet, you should definitely check that out. But I'll also I'll also say that.

You know that image of the river of Fire that both refines and burns, I mean, there's. It's not that that's wrong. Right. But when that gets pushed, and maybe Father, you can correct me if I'm going over the edge here, when that gets pushed too hard, which I think my, my personal opinion is that that piece by Kalo mirrors does that. When it gets pushed too hard, then you have an impersonal God.

[D]

Right?

[B]

Right. Not all the images that we use for judgment and whatever need to be completely compatible with each other because they're all kind of pointing at something that we don't completely understand or even partially understand, really. We only have little understandings of. So, yeah, I don't know. I'm going to kick it on over you to Father Stephen.

[C]

Well, yeah, I mean, I think.

I have moved on that whole construct. Like, I'll go ahead and say it's wrong.

I'll just go ahead and say it's wrong.

[B]

It's not based on nothing. It's not based on nothing. Right.

[C]

It's not based on nothing, but it's wrong. Right. I mean, the Beatific vision in the west is not based on nothing, but it's wrong. And it's wrong for some of the same reasons.

Right. It's wrong for some of the same reasons. I mean, the Beatific vision is let's all go stare at the orb for eternity.

[B]

I remember when I read that critique of the Calamiris article from the patristic scholar who's now a bishop. Actually, I remember him saying, you know, you don't find this language in the Church Fathers. Now, I'm not a patristic scholar, but I remember him saying that, that this is not.

[C]

We don't find it about this.

[B]

Yeah, yeah.

[C]

That's not what the river of Fire is doing in Daniel. But, yeah. So if, if the be. But. But I think it's based on the same paradigm. So if the Beatific vision is we're all going to stare at the orb for eternity, the orb here being my stand in for the divine essence, whatever that would mean.

An orb, I guess, is as good as anything. Right. To try and represent that.

And, you know, then this is. Well, yeah, everybody's gonna stare at the orb for eternity, but some people are gonna just love staring at the orb. And other people, it's gonna be horrific pain to stare at the orb.

None of that sounds remotely like Christian eschatology, anything in the Bible or anything of the Church Fathers to me.

[B]

At all.

[C]

Right. At all. And the big place where that it runs smack into is the bodily resurrection.

It does not work with the bodily resurrection. Neither of those views.

Work with the bodily resurrection. Because the bodily resurrection requires that our identity is maintained.

That I am still in some sense me.

Right. That I will in some sense still be the same person. There will be a continuity of my identity, Father Stephen DeYoung, into eternity. Right. And that's at the core of what is reflected by the bodily resurrection, is that continuity of identity.

But neither of those views maintains anyone's identity in any way.

Right. And that's why it runs afoul.

Of the bodily resurrection.

[B]

Right?

[C]

And again, as we've said, in answer to another question, it's the teaching of the Scriptures from beginning to end that God is going to judge the world through his Messiah, through Jesus Christ, right? Jesus even says, father will not judge anyone. He has given all judgment to the Son. Jesus is the one who's going to judge Jesus. The person is going to judge us for what? For what we've done in this life, the concrete life we've lived.

That is the subject of his judgment. And we're praying to him for mercy.

Right. We're not praying in memorial prayers. Make it more pleasant for them to stare into the orb. Right.

That's not what we're praying. I'm sorry, that's not what we're praying. So this is all sub Christian eschatology.

That'S growing out of weird half Christianized Plato and. And other things, Right. It's not coming from the Scriptures and the Fathers and. And from our tradition. Right. So you are correct. The judgment is personal. It's based on our identity in this life.

[D]

Right?

[C]

And if we understand bodily resurrection and judgment and the life of the world to come prop. To come properly, it does the opposite of what those views do. Because what those views do is make this life virtually irrelevant.

Because all that identity is lost. All of the relationships are lost, other than maybe the one with God, although that's transformed into gazing.

And it's just a question of, well, do whatever you have to do in this life so that. That eternity is pleasant rather than painful.

And other than that, this life and the world and the other people in it are irrelevant.

[B]

Right?

[C]

Whereas if we really understand the bodily resurrection, the personal judgment of Christ that we all stand before the judgment seat of Christ, it makes everything we do and think and say in this life of ultimate eternal importance.

And that's the danger of those other views.

Is in making. Making this life anything less than the most important thing in our existence.

[B]

All right, thank you very much for calling, Ty.

Okay, we're gonna go ahead and take our second and final break, and we'll be right back with Lord of Spirits podcast.

[A]

Father Andrew Stephen Damick and father Stephen DeYoung will be back in a moment to take your calls on the next part of the Lord of Spirits. Give them a call at 855-237-2346. That's 855-AF-RADIO.

The Orthodox Christian tradition is filled with wisdom and guidance about the biblical path of salvation. Yet this guidance remains largely inaccessible to parents and often disconnected from the parenting challenges we face in our home. Parenting Toward the Orthodox Christian Principles of Child Rearing by Philip Mamalakis, PhD, will help you make the connections between the spiritual life as we understand it in the Orthodox church and the ongoing challenges of raising children. It takes the best child development research and connects it with the timeless truths of our Christian faith to offer you real strategies for navigating the challenges of daily life. You can find this book and others like [e-mail] Again, that is store.ancientfaith.com.

[B]

We'Re.

[A]

Back now with the Lord of Spirits with Father Andrew, Stephen Damick, and Father Stephen DeYoung. If you have a question, call now at 855-237-2346. That's 855-AF-RADIO.

[B]

Welcome back. It's the Lord of Spirit Spirits podcast, and we're. We're doing all calls tonight. So we're making people actually work in Chesterton, Indiana, where normally they just sit and sip coffee or whatever it is they do while Father Stephen monologues. And occasionally I say, oh, how about that?

[C]

I think they build elaborate structures with Lincoln Logs. I think that's actually what's going on.

[D]

Lincoln Logs, man.

[B]

I haven't thought about that in a long time.

Okay, I'm done thinking about it.

[C]

I think the Lincoln Log is superior to the Tinker toy, but that might be a spicy take.

[B]

Ooh, how about an erector set?

[C]

Erector sets are cool, but the problem is you lose the screws in your motor brakes and, yeah, nothing's as fun after that.

[B]

It's true. It's true. Okay, well, we have a Canadian calling. We have Levi calling from Manitoba. So, Levi, welcome to the Lord of Spirits podcast.

[D]

Hey, can you hear me?

[B]

We can hear you.

[D]

Hey, fun fact, I actually just listened to one of the other Q and A things that was pre recorded, and Father Stephen had guessed that the person's from Manitoba just by their Accent, So I thought that was pretty impressive.

[B]

So hopefully.

Let'S say, Father Stephen, does he sound Manitoban again?

[C]

I'd say so.

[D]

Okay, awesome. Yeah. Specifically from the Mennonite region of Manitoba. So maybe there's fragments of Low German in there. But anyway, so my. My question. I have two. In case the first one isn't any good, but. So the first one's about ancient monotheism. I know you guys have talked about it a little bit on the show before where there's some new. New, I don't know, studies showing that more like hunter gatherer tribes that we've discovered over the time, you know, there's clear indication that their first religions were monotheists. And so I had a question about that in regards to some of the missionary stuff that happened in Alaska. I've been listening and reading some of Father Michael Oleski's stuff about Alaska and the missionary activity that went on there. And the way he talks about it, he talks as if, like, you know, the people of Alaska, you know, they were so ready to hear the message of Christ and all these things, even though obviously they didn't have the word Yahweh and the word Christ and the same biblical stories. He talks about some of these stories, and they just fit in so well with the biblical narrative and principles and all these things. And so it just got me wondering, like, how do we think about that? Like, was the God they were already worshiping, could that be Yahweh? Or could they be still following one of these good spirits that was leading the nations after the Tower of Babel? Is it. Is there a chance some of them preserved some of these people, like the people in Alaska, so that they'd be ready to hear the message.

[B]

Okay, lots of stuff packed in there. I want to first say, by the way.

You know your mention of the late Father Michael Alexa, he went to high school in Emmaus, Pennsylvania.

[D]

Yes, he was from Pennsylvania. Yeah, I remember.

[B]

And not just from Pennsylvania.

[D]

Here.

[B]

He was from here, right where I am right now.

[C]

He was born on that spot. Father Andrew's desk. Probably not on my desk.

[B]

The desk is imported from, I don't know, Detroit or something. But.

Well, okay, several things. Right. Number one, and it's funny, we get this question all the time, like, is it possible that there are any of the.

Spirits of the nations that did not fall? And, like. Well, you know, post Babel. Right. If that were the case, then why would God create Israel? Why would he need a new nation? Right. If there was still a nation out there? That that was still worshiping him. And you know.

No, I mean, all, all the nations fall, right? So that's why there's this new nation.

I don't know. I don't know very much. Beyond the tiniest outline of Alaskan paganism. The idea that they were really monotheist. I mean, that's kind of a category we've, I mean, in our earliest episodes we talked about this. This is kind of a, a category that gets sort of invented in the Enlightenment, right? The idea that only one God exists.

[D]

Believe in multiple spirits. Like, yeah, like they have, like, like there's a lot of animal stuff going on there. Like they believed in multiple spirits, but they only worship the Creator. And then all. Saint Innocent of Alaska, he. There were writings about some conversations he had with shamans where the shamans, instead, they were taught by these spirits. The spirits wouldn't let them worship them. And so Saint Innocent assumed that maybe this guy was actually in contact with angels because the things that morality wise, anyway, the things these spirits were teaching him seemed to, you know, they fell in line with Christian morality.

[B]

I mean, it's, it's entirely possible that angels showed up in Alaska to prepare these people for the coming of Saint Innocent.

Right.

And would have told them, you know, don't. Look, we know you're used to worshiping spirits when you see them. Don't, you know, don't worship us. That's entirely possible. I mean, there's no reason why that could not be the case.

Right?

So, yeah, I don't know. Father, is there anything you wanted to add or subtract or multiply?

[C]

So I think there's an important category in all of these kind of discussions that's gotten lost. But it's a biblical category, right? It comes right out of the New Testament. And you see this, for example, in the perpetual Online things where some ecumenist pan heretic will come out and say that Jews and Christians and Muslims all worship the same God. Right? And then, you know, a thousand trads will rise up in anger and say, no, they don't. Right.

And point out the differences, the obvious differences that should be obvious between the Jewish and Muslim and Christian views of God, right? To say that those aren't the same view of God. That's not the same God. Right. But what we find in the New Testament.

Coming from both Christ himself and St. Paul is that there's this other category. So Christ is talking to Saint Photini about the Samaritans and what the Samaritans do in their temple. They didn't actually have the temple, but what they do on Mount Gerizim. Right. In offering sacrifices to God in their minds.

[B]

Right.

[C]

And he doesn't say, well, you guys are really worshiping a different God because your understanding of God is different. And he could have. Because in that passage he makes a reference to the worship of the Holy Trinity.

[B]

But.

[C]

Right. What he says is, you worship what you do not know.

Right. St. Paul.

Acts 17.

[B]

Right.

[C]

Says, Let me tell you about this unknown God who you're worshiping, this God who you worship, who you do not know.

Which means there's a category between true worship of the true God and false worship of a false God.

Right. Which is.

Ignorant worship. Wrong worship, false worship of the true God.

[B]

Right.

[C]

And regardless of.

How we would categorize it, because St. Paul goes on in that context in Acts 17, to quote a pagan hymn to Zeus.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

And apply it to the true God. Now, obviously, Zeus, not the God of Israel. Right. These are not.

[D]

Well, they're both old men in the clouds though, right?

[C]

Yes.

[B]

But he gets married seven times for them to close relatives, and he's a serial rapist.

[C]

Yeah. Right. There are clear differences here. Right, Right.

But so an approach taken in evangelism and I think the apostolic approach that was taken in the mission to Alaska. Coming back to the question proper. Right. Was to not approach it in the sense of antithesis. Right. You are all demon worshipers.

[B]

I see you are very religious men of religion.

[A]

Yes.

[C]

You must turn from, we must shred your culture and you must all become Russians.

There were some other Christian missionaries who took that approach.

In the new world.

[B]

Right.

[C]

And there were even worse approaches, like, we must shred your culture and you must become our slaves. Right.

[B]

But.

[C]

That'S not the approach they took. They took the approach that St. Paul took.

Which is we are going to form a new, say, Aleutian culture.

Which is going to be the existing Aleutian culture transfigured in light of Christ. And so they approached the worship and worship is actually existing religion. They approached the worship of the Aleutian people as something that needed to be corrected and informed and redirected, rather than something vile to be rejected and replaced.

[D]

Right.

[C]

Now we see St. Paul doing that in Athens, which means it's possible. And we see Christ doing that with the Samaritans.

Who are, at the very least, heretics from a Jewish perspective at a minimum.

[D]

Right.

[C]

So I think that's part of what's going on in that approach.

[D]

Right.

[C]

And so we shouldn't conclude from that Any more than we should clue. Conclude from Acts 17 and St. Paul's quote there that really Zeus, Yahweh, you know, what's the difference? Right. That would be a false conclusion. Right. I also don't think we should just say. And I don't think the Alaskan missionaries said, oh, well, you're already worshiping the true God. Good, okay, no problem. Just keep doing what you're doing. Right.

[B]

They talk about different. A different kind of worship.

[C]

So they weren't saying this is. There's a one to one. But they were saying, you know, there are pieces of the truth because you're living in God's creation. Right. Romans 10 that I referred to earlier. Right. God has revealed himself to you in some ways and to some extent. And to some extent, some of you have been faithful to it. And so we start there and build from there to bring you into the fullness of the truth.

[B]

All right. I hope that helps, Levi. But before we let you go.

Our own Matushka Trudy, who is apparently from Manitoba on some level, she wants to know if you're from.

[C]

There are levels of being from Manitoba.

[B]

Yes. I mean, she's also from South America.

[C]

Okay. I do not understand.

[B]

Yeah. Matus Kachruti is from a Mennonite background. Yeah, yeah. Yes. Yeah. She wants to know if you're from Winkler, Manitoba. Are you from Winkler, Manitoba?

[D]

Absolutely, I am.

[C]

Oh, I am.

[D]

Yeah. I was originally from the village just outside of Winkler. Ganadental had two streets.

[B]

You go.

[D]

But, yeah, no, I'm from the. The segment of southern Manitoba which is all Mexican Mennonites of. Yeah, Mennonites that came from Prussia to Canada and then Mexico and then back.

[B]

Yeah, There you go. There you go.

[D]

Well, Mr. Schatrudi were probably related then.

[B]

I bet she's very happy right now. Okay, thank you very much for calling, Levi. We're going to take Stephen next.

[C]

Apparently, the Nucky Stani origins are a complex and convoluted topic.

[B]

It's true. It's true.

We're going to take Stephen from Texas who claims that Texas is God's country.

We don't need to talk about that. But, Stephen, welcome to the Lord of Spirits podcast.

[D]

Hey there, fathers.

[C]

Good evening. The experience of God in much of Texas, especially during the summer, is as a flaming fire.

[D]

Very true.

[B]

Yes. Or if you're in, you know, Houston, it's a boiling cauldron.

[C]

Yeah, yeah.

[B]

All right, Stephen, what's on your mind?

[D]

I just wanted Father Steven to riff on natural disasters.

How did they start? Who controls them? Do some people deserve them and some don't? And will we see tornadoes in the age to come?

[B]

All right.

Will there be tornadoes in the age to come, Father Stephen?

[C]

No.

[B]

Oh.

I don't know if I'm disappointed. I feel disappointed by that in some way. I've never been in a tornado, so if I had been, probably, I would not feel.

[C]

Yeah.

[B]

So.

[C]

Yeah. So what we generally call natural disasters are, for the most part, phenomena related to, right. The Earth as a whole. Whether we're talking about the atmospheric system, whether we're talking about plate tectonics, whether we're talking. Right. These are all vital parts of how the world functions at least currently, right. Materially. And the problem is not really natural disasters. The problem is death.

Yeah, right? So, I mean, blazing forest fires that renew forests, right, that perform this essential function in the life of a forest.

Are not a problem if no humans are harmed.

[D]

Right?

[C]

They're not an evil. Sometimes natural disasters get treated as if they're an evil de facto, right? An earthquake is not an evil, right. The shifting of the Earth's plates is not an evil de facto, unless human beings are harmed and human beings suffer from it, right? So the core problem is our mortality.

And our mortality which stems from our sin.

That sin contains with it our alienation from the natural world. So after the expulsion from paradise, the whole world was dangerous to us.

Not just natural disasters, but disease.

Wild animals.

Just falling off of things.

[B]

Ticks.

[C]

Yeah, ticks, right. Snake bites.

Right? But fall, you know, physically falling, lacerating ourselves, right? There are, you know, the whole world because of our disjunction from creation and because of our mortality, right? We face all of these manifold dangers in the world.

So the question.

We have then, right, Imagine, right? So you have to imagine the first two people cast into this world.

With the clothes on their backs, literally.

[B]

The.

[C]

Level of danger they faced.

Right? Long march of civilization, right? We've discovered antibiotics. We've discovered ways to produce mass quantities of food to feed billions of people. We've, you know, on and on and on ways of clothing ourselves so that we can live in extreme environments and building shelters where we can live in extreme environments that aren't conducive to human life, right? Like Manitoba. No, so, but.

Right, we've done all of these things, right, to sort of protect us. And so now in the 21st century, in some parts of the world.

Like probably most of the corners, not all, but most of the corners from which most of our listeners are listening, we have a great sense of safety and security that Previous generations of our ancestors lacked.

[B]

Right.

[C]

I don't sit around Lafayette worried about that. The city is going to be suddenly invaded by foreigners and we're all going to be put to the sword and my home's going to be burned.

[B]

Right?

[C]

I don't worry that the Black Plague will find its way back here and kill everyone I love. I don't worry. You know what I mean? On and on and on and on and on. If I get a cut and it gets infected, I don't work well. Now I'm dead, right?

And my ancestors could not say that, right? And so because we have this profound sense of our own safety, we see something like a natural disaster as this violent intrusion. So that the question emerges, well, who controls that? Who is sending that natural disaster? Who is sending that danger at us, right? And the reality is that's just one of the things that's still not under our control, about which we don't even have the illusion of control yet. And so it scares us. The real question is, the real question is, what is the source of our actual safety and security in a hostile world?

Because contained within the explanation I just gave, the explanation we give ourselves is that, well, we've taken control of a lot of it.

We're safe now because we humans smart and we invent things.

Right?

Until they start running the stories about antibiotic resistant bacteria and we start getting nervous again, right? Because the reason we start getting scared by those stories is because our sense of safety and well being is not coming from God, right? But it's coming from our own ingenuity and our trust in science and our trust in these other things that natural disasters fly in the face of. So the reason I haven't had a heart attack today or been hit by a bus or been in a car accident or had something from a plane fall on me and kill me or gotten a terminal disease or developed a terminal cancer, today, as far as I know, is because of the mercy and grace and goodness of God blessing me. That's why. That's the only reason why.

[D]

Right?

[B]

All right?

[C]

And if we live with that understanding.

And we bring that to, you know, the hurricanes that hit Lafayette every so often, right? Then when the hurricane comes, my trust is in the same place it is when I get in the car and drive somewhere or I close my eyes to sleep at night.

Or someone I love leaves the house, right? It's always God is the one who's going to protect and provide safety.

And healing for the sick, right? It's always God. And so Natural disasters aren't even really any different than that.

But in the age to come, people aren't going to get hit by buses either.

[B]

So.

[C]

Because the whole mortality thing is gone.

[B]

But will there be buses? We don't know. Okay, thank you very much for calling, Stephen.

[C]

Only church buses they will hit.

[B]

Get hit only by.

[C]

No, all other buses are reprobate.

[B]

Okay, we're going to take a call now from what in a previous episode has been referred to as the Poor man's Ohio. This is Brent calling from Indiana. So, Brent, welcome to the Lord of Spirits podcast.

[D]

Good evening, fathers. Yes, I am in the Poor man's Ohio.

My question is about the two wills of Christ. The Ancient Faith recently did a podcast about that, you know, where they interviewed a lot of people from a non Chalcedonian background. And I guess one of the things that confuses me about the whole thing is something that one of the non Chalcedonian speakers said that.

You know, a will, kind of.

Like a will is something that a person has, a person does. And so if there are two wills, it kind of sounds like two persons. And I know that's not the case because, I mean, the Lord says, not my will, but thine be done. And he's got so kind of help. I think you've talked about this before, but maybe if you could unpack a little bit more about what we mean when we talk about wills in Christ.

[B]

Yeah, so just to clarify a little bit, I mean, for those who didn't listen to that documentary and why didn't you.

But it was more generally about the two, you know, whether the two natures. Right. Which is something of a broader category than will. The will issue is subsequent to that and gets worked out in later councils beyond Chalcedon, but obviously it's kind of implied in Chalcedon. So, you know, the natural will. Right. You know, so from, from the point of view of Chalcedonian orthodox, which is what we are.

You know, will is. Because I can't. I can't speak for non custodians, because I'm not one.

Will is natural, so meaning that it's. It has to do with the nature. And that therefore.

If you have the nature of a human, then your humanity is moving in the direction of being.

Fully what it is a human should be.

The will of a tree is to grow into a tree, for instance.

And so Christ being of two natures, being in two natures, fully human, fully divine, at the same time, he has two wills, right? Because if he does not have Two wills, then that means that he's not entirely human or he's not entirely divine, whichever will you want to kind of chuck out.

The reason why I think that this is a bit confusing for us as modern people is because we tend to think of will as being the choosing faculty, right? Like shall I have ice cream or shall I have baklava? Right. That's how we think of will. I'll have this or that. But that's not the patristic understanding of will, which is much more in line with that. I think it's Aristotle. I don't know if that's correct, Father, but.

Defining will as being sort of a thing coming to be fully what it is, right? Which is why Christ in the garden, he desires not to die because he's human and humans desire not to, you know, their will is not to die, Right. And yet his human will for self preservation is submitted to the divine will for redeeming mankind. Right. It's not that there's this conflict of choosing within Christ, because obviously not. He's not sitting there going, should I do this or should I not? I don't know. Let me think about this for a while longer, right? That's not what's going on. He never. Jesus doesn't waver because he doesn't. His will doesn't do that. Right.

He's not fallen, frankly. So I don't know if that helps or if I'm getting anything really wrong here. I mean, I'm not a patristic scholar. This is kind of the seminary level education in Christology that I received.

[D]

Yeah, it does help.

[C]

And so I can nuance that a little.

[B]

Yeah, nuance it, Father Stephen.

[C]

See, I'm being nice. I'm saying I'm nuancing things now.

[B]

That's so nice.

I feel cared for right now.

[C]

I've turned over a new leaf.

So, yeah, so, yeah, Aristotle's physics is what. Yeah. Is where you find a good laying out of the idea of the natural will. And so.

And it's thelema in Greek. The will is.

An internal movement.

Which everything has, which moves it towards its telos, towards its end, its purpose, its completion, its perfection.

[B]

Right.

[C]

So, yeah, like the example Father Andrew used, right. An acorn has the same nature as an oak tree.

Right. But you plant the acorn, the acorn then has this internal movement, right. That moves it forward to grow, to thrive, to take on nourishment, to grow into the oak tree, right. To come to fullness, sort of, and completion.

And so humans have and that's called a natural will because it's different based on what nature a thing has, right? So the nature of an oak tree and the nature of a duck are different, right? So you do not have a baby duck that grows into an oak tree. You do not have an acorn that grows into a duck, right?

And so that. But so that internal movement is specific to that nature. And so humans also have a human nature, a specific human nature. And the human nature has this internal movement that causes a zygote to become an adult human eventually, if unimpeded, right? To grow to fullness, completion, maturity.

Right?

[B]

Perfection.

[C]

And then that idea of a natural will is applied, as we've talked about before, right? To God, meaning not univocally, right? Because God is different than every created thing in substantive ways, but the energies of God, his activity in creation expresses an internal movement of God outward into creation.

[B]

Right?

[C]

And that internal movement then becomes the divine energies. This is why we also say Christ has two energies.

He has the divine energies because he's God and he has a human energy, right? Human activity. Because that internal movement of our will then expresses itself through our energy, through our works, through our actions in the world.

Right? That is part of how we come to maturity.

And so we see something paralleled that we can talk about in terms of, of God's energies. And then Christ having both natures would possess both. The decision making will that Father Andrew is talking about, Saint Maximus refers to as a second movement of the will or the gnomic will.

Which is not the natural will of a gnome.

[B]

But.

[C]

It is the sort of a better way to translate that would be the particular will, right? That makes particular choices in particular situations. And that second movement of the will for St. Maximus emerges after the expulsion from paradise.

Because it's necessitated by the darkening of our noose. As we've talked about before on the show. Our noose is that faculty, like a sensory organ that allows us to see spiritual realities, right? One of those spiritual realities is the divine energies is God's working in the world to perceive how and where God is working in the world so that we can participate in it. It because in our fallen state, our noose is now not clear, right? It's like having a cataract in an eye, right?

We can't see clearly.

Where God is working in the world. And so that internal movement of ours, that is our natural will.

Doesn'T know how to correctly express itself.

In the world, doesn't know what to do, right? To actualize for us to come to maturity to us, to become what we were created to be. It's now not clear to us. And that means we have to have this second movement of the will to make choices for what we think.

[B]

Is.

[C]

The right way to go.

So this is why St. Maximus will say that Christ does not have a gnomic will.

Because he doesn't need one.

[D]

Okay.

[C]

Because his human noose, Right. His human mind. Right. However we want to translate noose always saw clearly. Right. Perfectly clearly what God, the Holy Trinity, right. Is doing in the world and participated in it fully.

[B]

Right.

[C]

So I think the objection you referenced in your question, right, that will is something we see a person do is talking about that gnomic will.

We're not saying Christ has two gnomic wills, we're saying he has zero of those.

And it's avoiding the idea.

Of the natural will, which is the central use of the word will for us. And the gnomic will is kind of this defective other thing that's coping with the fact that we don't see clearly the way to our purpose.

[D]

Yeah.

[B]

Because we waver.

[D]

Yeah, yeah. That makes it really hard to imagine. I mean, you always talk about what it like to be a bat and sometimes we forget be hard to imagine what it would be like to be Christ. Because I can't imagine human existence without that secondary sense of will that you're describing. The. No.

[B]

So, you know. Right, right. But I will say it's that you probably have some experience of it. And the way, and obviously it's partial, it's incomplete, it's imperfect, but there are things that you do that you do them so habitually that they become, and we use this term, phrase, second nature to you. Right. That you no longer have to like make a decision rationally in your head to do this thing. Right, right. And this is the way that often virtue is described as growing in the Christian life is at first you have to really, like decide to do it and kind of force yourself to do it. But gradually, over time, the virtues become planted in you and you no longer have to think, okay, I. I gotta do this now, okay, I don't want to do it, I better do it. You just do it. Right. And that is our foretaste of what it's like to live without our will being gnomic.

[D]

Right. That makes sense. One final follow up, just very quickly, does that mean there's only one natural human will? Just like they talk about there's only one divine will.

Not that, not the gnomic will, which would be unique to each person. But.

Because I know they say that the three persons of the Trinity are three persons, but there's only one will. Is the same true for, like, humans?

[B]

I want to say yes, but I'm afraid to err on Christology and anthropology.

[C]

Okay, let me. I'll just. I'll just address this, right?

[B]

Yeah, yeah, please.

[C]

So the natural will is the same for all humans.

[B]

Right?

[D]

Okay.

[C]

But the gnomic will is a second movement of the same will.

[B]

Okay.

[C]

So it's the gnomic movement that separates us.

[D]

Yeah. Right.

[C]

And that, as a result, then also separates our activities, our energies in the world. But so when. When Christ prays to the Father.

In St. John's Gospel and prays that we would be one, as he and the Father are one, this is what he's talking about.

Because the persons of the Holy Trinity have one nature, one will, one energy.

[B]

Right.

[C]

They are united. Human beings have one nature.

Will. We start to divide, and then energy, we go in different directions.

And so what he's praying there is that within the context of our salvation being worked out.

[B]

Right.

[C]

That we would be redirected to all come together.

To. To full, to come to perfection and maturity, which is what St. Paul's always talking about. His epistles. Right. Coming to the telos. Right. Our nature. Right. Our renewed nature in Christ. And then because of that, that our activity would be one and would be one in participating in God's activity in the world. That's the unity that, for example, St. Paul in his epistles, is seeking in the church and that Christ is praying for in that prayer.

[D]

Okay, thank you.

[B]

Thank you very much. Thank you for calling, Brent. Okay, we're going to take a few more. We have George calling from Illinois. George, welcome to the Lord of Spirits podcast.

[D]

Thank you. Good evening, Fathers.

[B]

Good evening.

[C]

Shouldn't it be pronounced ille noir?

[B]

Probably.

[C]

Anyway.

[B]

Very French of you.

[D]

Yes. Okay. Common.

Common comment or common theme is that I hear from you is that faith, Abraham being saved by faith. We're saved by faith. Means faithfulness.

[B]

Yes.

[D]

I think I came across one of you on someone else's program. Refer to some other author who makes that point. And I didn't.

Make a note of that. Can you point me to other people who make this point?

[C]

Oh, this is easy.

[B]

Oh, go ahead, Father.

[C]

There's a book. There's a good one Stop book. Especially if you come from a Protestant background or you're talking about this with someone from a Protestant background who's resistant to the idea. And that's A book by Matthew Bates.

[B]

Oh, yeah, I've heard of this one.

[C]

Called Salvation by Allegiance Alone.

Obviously, he's still a Protestant, and so I disagree with him about a lot of theological things, but he makes the case for this understanding of Pistis as faithfulness, loyalty, fidelity, you know, rather than.

Belief in the way we think about it in modern terms. He spent some time trying to make that fit into a Protestant theological paradigm. Right. Which I think we just avoid. But. But it is. It is a good book laying that out from that perspective, and especially if you're talking to someone or if you yourself are from that kind of background, it could be helpful because he speaks the same language and it's not an orthodox person or a Roman Catholic person trying to trick you into Begum.

[B]

Right.

[C]

So people could receive it a little more easily sometimes.

[D]

Yeah. I have come from that background.

Some 50 long years ago, I left Roman Catholicism and did the born again thing.

And a verse that I leaned on at that time was Ephesians 2:8:9. For by grace are you saved through faith, not of yourselves, the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. So that was my understanding for decades.

Before coming around to orthodoxy. Little over 10 years ago.

Not long ago, I was talking to someone who I've known from that longo time, and I was asked the question, when did you stop believing in salvation by faith and begin by believing in salvation by works? And I. I kind of fudged and I said, well, I haven't changed my beliefs. I still believe I'm saved by faith. Was I being a tad dishonest there or.

[B]

You might have been engaging in a good old Jesuit tradition, which is equivocation. Yeah, but.

So here's. Okay, so here's how I would unpack that passage you just mentioned, right? Number one, we are saved by grace. Right? We are saved by grace. So that. That's. That's God. That's God acting. God is the one who saves. We're saved by grace through faithfulness. So faithfulness is the means by which we receive that grace that saves us. Right. And it says that it is the gift of God.

Meaning that the way of faithfulness, this is how you repent. This is given to us by God. It was not invented by human beings. Okay. And, you know, lest anyone should boast, well, here's the thing. Now, this is not within a Jewish context, within the pagan Greek context, there are people who believe that you could become one of the gods by. By virtue of your great action. You know, like, this is totally A thing. You know, Heracles is a classic example of this. He basically, now he starts out a demigod, you know, good for you, Heracles. But.

He achieves his glory, right, by virtue of his great feats. And that's the contrast that St. Paul is making there. He's not talking about, he's talking to the Ephesians, he's not talking about.

The Torah there. He's talking about, you know, great feats of strength and glory and you know, cleos as they would call it in, in Greek, you know, that sort of everlasting glory, right? So, so yeah, it's God's grace who saves us, which saves us. It's through our faithfulness that we receive it. The only reason we even have the path of faithfulness is because God gave it as a free gift. And following that is not some great accomplishment on our part. We're just doing what God said to do. So that's how you can parse that out from an orthodox point of view.

[C]

Yeah, and this is, I mean, this is basic all through the Scriptures, right?

God comes to Abraham and gives him promises. Those promises are a gift, right? We're never told what Abraham did to deserve them, why it was him and not someone else, right? God comes and gives those promises. But to receive those promises, Abraham has to be faithful.

[B]

Right?

[C]

He comes to the people of Israel, he gives them the Torah as a gift. They didn't earn the Torah.

Right? And he makes that very clear, right? He says in Deuteronomy 5, I did not choose you for your own righteousness, for you are a wicked and stiff necked people.

That's not why I picked you guys, right? Because you were so great. But to receive the benefits that God promises them, the blessings God promises them in the Torah, they have to keep it. They have to be faithful to it. God gives them a covenant they didn't ask for, they didn't earn, right?

But they have to keep it to receive those benefits. And St. Paul does the exact same thing in Romans. While we're still sinners, Christ dies for us as a gift. The way of salvation is established for us as a gift.

What do we need to do to receive it? According to St. Paul, just one thing. You be faithful to Christ.

And then you receive those benefits. And if you're faithless, if you're not faithful, then you won't receive those benefits.

[D]

Yeah, this makes total sense. But the mindset, you know, the evangelical mindset is so tied up. And it's also tied up with.

Once saved Always saves. It's like a ball pull. One string gets caught on another, you know, something else in the ball and it's hard to unravel the whole ball. It's.

[B]

Yeah, Yep.

[D]

Yeah.

[B]

Yep. So, all right.

[D]

Recently I came across Jordan Peterson and he was talking about, he said, he said, if you ask me if I believe in God, he said, that's not a simple question, though. First of all, what do you mean by God? You know, what am I? What do you ask I believe in? And then he said, what do you mean to believe? You know, that believing is what you do, you know, just being faithful. It's how you show that in your life. Not, you know, not this box you've checked off in your head.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

Let me say that comment by, by Jordan Peterson is the most amazing way to dodge a question.

Right? Like, next, next time I come home and my wife is like, did you spend more money on books? I'm going to be like, what do you mean by spending? What do you mean by money?

[B]

Money's.

Anyway, well, thank you very much for calling, George. Nice to talk to you.

All right, we're going to go ahead and take Timothy, who is calling from the magical land of South Florida.

[C]

So, Timothy, welcome to the Lord of Spirits podcast. Tim.

[D]

Thank you. Thank you. Fathers love the show. Like, I work a job where I travel around a lot, so I've been catching up on all the old episodes. So thank you for doing this for free.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

Thank God we are the commuter's friend.

[B]

It's true. We have a lot of truckers that are listening to us.

[D]

Well, it's nice too, because I can send like specific episodes to non orthodox friends and kind of expose them to the idea. So I really like that. So. But my question is it's about prayer. So God's outside of time and space and we've kind of talked about that. And I know a lot of people pray for, like, I know a lot of girls who pray for their future husbands. A lot of people pray for their kids, you know, descendants, things like that. How should we pray for people in the past? Like, is that effective? Is that worth doing? Like, when I pray, for example, when I pray, St. Timothy is my, my, my saint. So, you know, I pray for him to be a good bishop and, you know, when I'm asking him to send some, some prayers up for me. So what if, if that's effective, what, how should we do that effectively praying for people in the past or things like that?

[B]

You know, while I would say that I do believe that Prayer has a kind of trans, temporal character, for sure, Right. Within the actual liturgical, traditional prayers of the church. And the prayers that you see in scripture.

They don't, like, address.

The past.

Right. Like, you know, it's always about the present. And from the point of view of the person praying, it's, it's about the present and the future. Right.

So, you know, while I might say, lord have mercy on my children, God through that prayer may well have been working already, you know, for some time or whatever, but I, I, it would not make sense for me to say.

You know, God, please heal my child of that accident that he had last year that he's completely healed from now. You know, it wouldn't make any sense to do that right now if he's still suffering from that accident. It would make sense to say, God, please, you know, relieve that suffering now. Right.

And certainly we don't pray for saints, we ask for their prayers.

So, yeah, I mean, I think from an orthodox point of view, how should we pray is a pretty easily answered question in that we have this huge tradition of liturgical prayer. Right. That doesn't mean that we don't sometimes pray spontaneously in our own words and so forth. But as much as possible, those kinds of prayers should be very much related to the norms of liturgical prayer. How should we pray? We should pray like this, right. You know, when, when, when Christ himself gave, you know, answered that question, how should you pray? He gave a prayer that we then repeat word for word. Our Father, who art in heaven. Right, yeah. So, you know, those are, those are the norms. And I think it can be a little dangerous to go outside those norms from an orthodox point of view, because, like, there's, it's not like there's anything that our liturgical tradition of prayer doesn't cover. You know, it's so vast. It's so just enormously complex and interesting and poetic and variable and all encompassing, you know.

So that would be my response to that, is to look at the norms of church life. You know, they're there. They're simply there. Father Stephen, anything you wanted to throw.

[C]

In, it's a minor addition, but just, you know, I think a lot of what would normally be covered in prayers about the past are really covered by prayers for the departed.

[B]

Yeah, yeah. And even then, like, the wording of them is have mercy on them, forgive their sins, you know, that, that kind of thing.

[D]

So that's what I wanted to ask.

[B]

About it, because.

[D]

Is it a waste of time? Because a lot of the prayers are very present, focused, because everything about the liturgy is we're all at the same time and place.

[B]

Yeah. Yeah. All right. Thank you very much for calling, Timothy.

[D]

Thank you.

[B]

All right, we are going to take one more call. And so, Abby, you are our final caller on this that Father Stephen has already said is the greatest night in the Lord of Spirits podcast. So welcome to Lord of Spirits.

[C]

You have the same name as my new dog.

[D]

Well, I'm very honored, whatever that's worth.

[B]

The dog is honored.

To have your name.

[E]

Well, thank you guys so much. I know it's been a long night. I'll make this short. I have been using this Lenten season.

[D]

As someone who came out of fundagelical Protestantism.

[E]

Nice to study sin as a concept.

[D]

So I've been listening to some of Father Steven's old talks on this.

[E]

I've read Father Andrew's really wonderful book, Arise, O God, about the defeat of.

[D]

Demons, sin, and death. And my big question, as I'm pondering, pondering some of the events of the.

[E]

Gospels, does this, considering the taint of.

[D]

Sin in the environment, was this in.

[E]

Any way an impactful part of the reason why Christ had to be baptized and why he submitted to baptism?

[B]

Yeah, that's a good question. I mean, there's an immediate answer, right, in the Gospels where he says that I have to be. I have to be baptized to fulfill all righteousness.

[D]

This.

[B]

Right. So I think then the question would be like, how do we unpack exactly what that means.

And certainly my understanding of part of what is going on there. I mean, the primary thing that's going on there is he's. He's making our baptism a thing.

But I would also say that there is.

This is a beginning of his public.

Atoning work. Right. That he's purifying the world through his presence. Because when he touches what is unclean, it becomes clean. Right. Like, Christ doesn't become unclean by touching a dead body or whatever. Instead, what happens is the dead body comes back to life. It becomes not dead.

I won't say undead, because that's a different thing. But. But yeah, I mean, I. I definitely believe that there is a sense of cleansing the world from taint that occurs in that. And if you look at, for instance, the. The prayers that are set at theophany. Right. So, you know, just a few months ago. Right.

[D]

Wait, there's gods in the water.

[B]

Yeah, right, exactly. Dragons down there crushing the heads of the dragons that lurk in the water. Right, right. Or even. I mean, it's mostly the same prayers, although kind of A shortened version that you would see at a baptism, unless a person's getting baptized on theophany or the eve of theophany, which is really awesome. But a long, long morning in church. But ask me how I know.

[C]

But I mean, it's awesome.

[B]

It's awesome. It's absolutely awesome. You know, there's still that sense of the banishing demons from the water and, and, you know, crushing the evil spirits and. And all that kind of stuff that is there, you know, stomping on Leviathan, right? Like, that's. That's all within those prayers. And if you can get a copy of, like, the. The full prayers of the. The great blessing of water done on theophany, it is absolutely astonishing to read them. And, and I mean, as a priest, whenever I read them in the service, it is hard for me to not get choked up by just how.

Just moving they are and how just awesome is the right word. And I don't mean awesome like that's totally awesome, like we used to say in the 80s. But truly awesome, like it causes awe, because it really does. It is an awesome thing. Yeah, Father, I mean, is. Is Christ's baptism, is it doing something cosmic too?

[C]

Yes.

[D]

There you go.

[B]

Get the short answer. So usually you get the short answer for me and the long answer from Father Stephen, but no, he was just saying yes.

[C]

And yeah, that was the short answer. Now here's the longer answer.

[B]

Yes.

So.

[C]

Yeah, think about Saint Athanasius view of the atonement on the Incarnation, remembering what atonement actually is. That atonement actually is that purification of the world from the stain of sin. And this is how Saint Athanasius understands that in the Incarnation, God touches every part of humanity.

And therefore atones for every part of humanity, purifies every part of humanity.

Right through the Incarnation. And because Christ shares our human nature, he is doing that to human nature, Right? And then let's retranslate without the religious jargon. Fulfill all righteousness, right?

Bring justice to overflowing.

[D]

Right?

[C]

Christ is justifying all things in his baptism. He is setting all things right, setting all things back in order.

[B]

Right?

[C]

Starting with the water, which is chaos, right? So if you're going to set all things in order, you go to chaos itself, and you set that in order.

[D]

Wow.

[B]

Right?

[C]

You blessed, you purify that. And so he's touching, right, the chaos of the cosmos and therefore setting the whole thing in order right through his baptism. And as Father Andrew pointed out, that's meditated upon in these prayers and hymns from Theophany.

[B]

So there you go, Abby. Does that help?

[D]

Well, that's super deep. Yes. And it's a blessing to talk to you guys.

[E]

So thank you very much for answering that for me.

[B]

It's a blessing for us to talk to you. Thank you very much for calling.

[E]

I appreciate you so much.

[D]

I hope everyone has a great night.

[B]

You too. God bless you. Well, that's it. That's it. We're not going to take any more calls because I don't want to go to bed super late the way I normally do when we do this show. That's okay. We're almost to three hours anyway, so it's still not like it's this short little show.

So, yeah. Thank you very much everyone for listening. That's our show for tonight. If you didn't get through to us live this time, we'd still like to hear from you. You can email us at lordofspirits and ancient faith.com you can message us at our Facebook page. You can leave us a [e-mail] LordOfSpirits Our next episode, by the way, is gonna be all speak pipes. And if you have basic questions about Orthodox Christianity or you need help to find a parent parish where you actually do this Orthodox Christianity thing, head over to orthodoxintro.org join us for our live.

[C]

Broadcast on the second and fourth Thursdays of the month at 7:00pm Eastern, 4:00pm Pacific.

[B]

And if you are on Facebook, you can follow our page, join our discussion group and leave lyrical comments like the thing that Father Stephen didn't just do. Leave reviews and ratings everywhere, but most importantly, share this show with a friend who is going to benefit from it and might even like it.

[C]

And finally, be sure to go to ancientfaith.com support and help make sure we and lots of other AFR podcasters stay on the air.

[B]

Thank you, good night and God bless you.

[A]

You've been listening to the Lord, Lord of Spirits, with Orthodox Christian priests, Father Andrew, Stephen Damick and Father Stephen DeYoung. A listener supported presentation of Ancient Faith Radio. And I beheld and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders. And the number of them was 10,000 times 10,000 and thousands of thousands, saying with a loud voice, worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power and riches and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and Blessing. Revelation, chapter 5, verses 11 through 12.