No.1 Christianity Expert: The Truth About Christianity! The Case For Jesus (Historian's Proof)
Watch on YouTubeVideo summary
In this high-profile discussion, historian and theologian Wesley Wildman addresses Steven Bartlett's profound existential questions regarding faith, meaning, and the nature of God. Wildman begins by challenging the modern notion that human worth is derived solely from actions or achievements, arguing instead that humanity possesses intrinsic value because it bears the image of a Creator who exists in perfect relationship within the Trinity. He contextualizes his argument against the backdrop of rising mental health issues among younger generations and the decline of traditional religious adherence, suggesting that an overly individualistic society has left many "unanchored." Wildman posits that while science can explain biological mechanisms—comparable to a botanist analyzing a rose's chemical composition—it cannot account for meaning, purpose, or love. He uses the parable of Betty the Botanist and Jerry the Lab Assistant to illustrate how scientific data often misses the deeper intent behind creation, such as a gift given out of love, arguing that Christianity offers answers to these metaphysical questions that science alone cannot provide. A significant portion of the conversation focuses on historical evidence for Jesus Christ, with Wildman leveraging his expertise in papyrology and paleography to defend the Bible's reliability. He notes that despite the passage of time between events and written accounts—a gap often cited by skeptics—the ancient world was less literate than modern times, making oral traditions more robust before being recorded within decades rather than centuries. Wildman highlights that Jesus is one of the few figures in antiquity with four biographical accounts (the Gospels) alongside early eyewitness testimony from Paul and other sources dating to the first century. He addresses common objections regarding miracles and evil by explaining that hell represents a state of separation from God's goodness where justice is fulfilled, allowing mercy to be extended only to those who submit to Christ. Furthermore, he clarifies his stance on evolution, stating he accepts an intelligent design thesis rather than neo-Darwinian processes alone, believing humans were created as such while acknowledging adaptation in other species. The dialogue also tackles pressing contemporary issues, including the rise of artificial intelligence and its potential to cause a mass identity crisis by displacing jobs that currently give people their sense of purpose. Wildman expresses concern not about AI taking over humanity, but about the resulting loss of meaning for those whose identities are tied solely to their productivity or contributions. He connects this fear to historical shifts like the Industrial Revolution, noting that while society adapted in the past, the speed of current technological change poses a unique threat to human stability and mental health if not addressed with a worldview that affirms intrinsic worth beyond utility. Additionally, Wildman discusses his personal journey from paralysis at age 11 due to acute transverse myelitis to full recovery within months, an event he attributes to divine intervention rather than random chance or medical error alone. This experience solidified his belief in the supernatural and motivated him to investigate faith intellectually alongside other religions like Islam before ultimately finding conviction in Christianity through a combination of historical evidence and personal testimony. Wildman concludes by emphasizing that heaven is not merely for "good people" but specifically for those who acknowledge their inability to meet God's standards alone, whereas hell is where individuals experience the full weight of rejecting divine grace. He encourages Bartlett and his audience to read the Bible directly, particularly Romans 12:9-21, which calls believers to live in harmony with others, overcome evil with good, and leave vengeance to God. The conversation underscores a shift from asking "Is God real?" to "Is God good?", driven by observations of true evil like the Epstein scandal, which highlights humanity's need for an objective moral standard provided by scripture. Ultimately, Wildman presents Christianity not as a means to earn salvation through works but as a relationship with a loving Creator who entered history in Jesus Christ to restore broken connections and provide a mission that transcends mere survival or societal contribution.
Read the full video transcript
Am I going to hell? Yes.
But here's the thing, everybody is going
to hell. And it's not because they don't
believe in God. And look, I'm a
historian and a theologian. So, I study
ancient biblical manuscripts. And if you
truly understand what this book is
saying, I don't want you to experience
that.
>> This is not a place I want to go. So,
what do I do about that?
>> It's not about trying to earn my way
into heaven. It's not about checking
off, "Oh, I read the Bible this many
times. I didn't lie. I didn't steal. I
didn't cheat." Like, it's none of that.
But, here's the problem. Unfortunately,
we bought the lie that we are the sum of
our actions. We're we're chasing after
things that aren't going to give us what
we actually need. Which is also why we
live in a world that is lacking in
purpose and meaning.
>> But the part that I've always struggled
with is that the answer being religion
as an antidote to that feeling. Because
I require really high standard of
evidence because of the way that I am.
Well, I think not only can it provide an
antidote, it can provide the antidote.
And I'll explain why. But how can we
trust human accounts of these things?
And then how do you take people who
agree that there's clearly something
missing to believing that what's written
in the Bible is the thing that should
guide my life? But also, Do you have any
doubt? Oh, of course. Especially when
there are times of struggle and pain and
suffering. [music] Like, the whole
Epstein thing right now. We are seeing
examples of true evil. So, there are
moments where I think, "How could there
be a good God?" However, [music]
from my investigation, I'm convinced
beyond a reasonable doubt that there's
actual evidence for the existence of
God, the historical reliability of the
Bible, and the philosophical
explanations for meaning and purpose.
And what is that?
>> First, we have
How is some of the most persuasive
evidence one can receive?
Guys, I've got a quick favor to ask you.
We're approaching a significant
subscriber milestone on this show, and
roughly 69% of you that listen and love
this show haven't yet subscribed for
whatever reason. If there was ever a
time for you to do us a favor, if we've
ever done anything for you, given you
value in any way, it is simply hitting
that subscribe button. And it means so
much to myself, but also to my team, cuz
when we hit these milestones, we go away
as a team and celebrate. And it's the
thing, the simple free easy thing you
can do to help make this show a little
bit better every single week. So, that's
a favor I would ask you. And um if you
do hit the subscribe button, I won't let
you down and will continue to find small
ways to make this whole production
better. Thank you so much for being part
of this journey. Means the world. And uh
yeah, let's do this.
>> [music]
>> Wesley, I have this fascinating uh graph
in front of me here.
And it shows several things that I find
to be really really interesting. One of
them is that as of 2024,
the decline of religion has started to
level off and actually increase a little
bit. And now 63% of US adults identify
as Christian, which is roughly 160
million people. In 2025, Bible sales hit
a 21-year high in the United States with
19 million units sold. Weekly Bible
reading amongst US adults has increased
to 42%, which is up 12% since 2024.
And in 2024, Christian and gospel music
streams in the US increased by roughly
20% according to the Washington Times.
Wesley, what is
going on in society if we zoom out? I
think we're in a unique
bubble
where we found ourselves in
a time frame where
we're connected more than ever.
We've kind of come out of a period of
time where
the new atheism is very very popular.
You had Dawkins, Daniel
uh Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris,
uh Christopher Hitchens. And they made a
big impact in the early 2000s. I think
we should probably just give some color
to what new atheism is.
>> Sure, yeah. Um I've actually got a graph
here which I'll throw up on the screen
which shows the rise and then the the
fall of new atheism. Yeah. I was
pulled in by new atheism. Mhm. And that
meant that I And again, I should
probably preface my beliefs because
people are going to want to know what my
bias is when I'm asking questions. I
grew up in a very Christian household up
until the age of 18. I then became
agnostic/atheist when I started
consuming a lot of this stuff from
Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris and all
of these people. And then I find myself
at a point now where I'm just
open-minded and curious. Mhm. But I have
lots of questions. Yeah, you had these
individuals who are writing these very
influential works. But I sometimes
wonder whether the new atheism movement
worked a lot more effectively in print
than it did in actual real life. Like in
terms of the practicality of
the application of the things that were
being talked about, especially in
regards to meaning,
if you apply ideas like you being a
product of time plus matter plus chance,
what does that actually give you in
terms of the ultimate identity
questions? And so, I think I think
that's true in a lot of circumstances
where you have these seeds that are
planted and they grow
and they produce
trees that produce fruit that are kind
of hard to digest in their actual
application. And along with that, we
have a world that's very complex. We're
more connected than we ever have been. I
don't know if we're truly
we were ever truly meant to know as much
information as we do, especially about
things that are going on around the
world and things that are hard to to
comprehend. And so, what I think that
all kind of adds up to is people asking
questions about, "Okay, I'm here.
I'm right now trying to figure out
what's going on. How do I actually find
out the answers to a lot of these
questions that just go beyond the here
and the now that I'm experiencing." This
is what um individuals like James K. A.
Smith called the dynamics of
disenchantment, where
people are struggling with these
transcendent questions. Questions that
are metaphysical, that go beyond just
the here and the now in the world. Why
is the 3 lb of gray matter in my brain
able to comprehend the complexities of
the universe? How do I How do I come up
with a solution to that problem? So, I
think that's part of it. I think it's
kind of moving on in a world that just
is probably more messy than it's ever
been.
A lot of countries, the UK, Europe,
Canada,
America, all of these Western countries,
they
they were founded on these
Judeo-Christian ethics
of foundations that come from the Old
and the New Testaments, what we call the
the Bible.
And a lot of people kind of attempted to
divorce
the
religious aspect from the societies, and
societies became less and less overtly
religious in those natures. And then a
lot of people saw that their parents
were no longer going to church, like the
Bible wasn't part of kind of the
household any longer. And I talked to a
lot of young people who look at that,
and they say, in almost like a rebellion
against their parents,
they're now interested in that. Their
parents rebelled by
disassociating from religion, and now
[clears throat]
I wonder if there's
part of a rebellion in kind of looking
back and trying to
reclaim some of that religious stuff. I
think in part as well, this younger
generation, Gen Z's, and I guess to some
extent as well also millennials, have
been told to live
more individualistic lives, and that's
really been glamorized, like be your own
boss. Now we work remotely, and stand on
your own two feet, and we're even seeing
people getting into sort of
relationships later and later in their
lives, and having less children. So,
they're more It appears people are more
unanchored than they've ever been, and
that was to some degree glamorized.
Um but it also appears that when we are
unanchored, when we don't have
responsibilities or we're not part of
something,
mental health issues um are quick are
quick to follow. Yeah. And for this
generation, they're suffering the most
with those types of mental health
issues. And then one would assert that
they would therefore be searching more
for
answers to some of these existential
questions.
>> Mhm. Expressive individualism. I think
it rose. That's the kind of the
terminology in social in the
sociological literature that they're
referring to. But I I think you touched
on a good point in that like as we
remove God, part of the intellectual
light enlightenment was that we would
move away from the shackles of
religiosity and the concept of a
creator, and that would lead us into a
utopia. And I think the more and more
we've removed that from society, that
hasn't decreased our levels of anxiety
and depression and meaning, I I think
it's increased it. Yeah, and especially
celebrity worship, social media,
building a following of your own.
Totally.
>> of low-key narcissism. Yeah. Has made us
more and more and more and more
important, and that seems to correlate
with worse and worse and worse mental
health. When you start to become more
individualistic and think more and more
about yourself
>> Mhm. and self-importance
>> Mhm. versus others and bigger picture.
Mhm. I think we are created for
community. I think we are as human
beings a creature that is created for
community. Ultimately, like cards on the
table as a Christian because I believe
we are created in the image of a God who
exists in a set of living loving
relationships. Like that's what the
Trinity is when we talk about that idea
within Christian theology. God exists in
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
And so being created in the image of
God, part of that is you are created for
relationship. And so in a society that's
continually removing us, you know, you
need to be an influencer. You're
influencing everybody else. Mhm. When
>> [clears throat]
>> I think we're not created to be lone
wolves or lone rangers, we're created to
live amongst community
and have that be something that likewise
gives us fulfillment. It's not that
people who are leaders or you know, rise
to the top are wrong by any stretch, but
in a society where we're alone together
because
we are sitting behind computer screens
Mhm. and we're talking to hundreds of
thousands if not millions of people in
some cases, but but we're secluded. Mhm.
I think that that does something to our
souls because we were made to be in
relationship with other people. I
agree with everything you've said as it
relates to the sort of crisis of meaning
in society, and I also agree with many
of your reasons as to why that's
occurred.
The part that I've always struggled with
is then the answer being Christianity
>> Sure.
>> or any other religion. Sure. And I agree
with, you know, so many of the things
you've said, but then I think my brain
has I think especially after the age of
18 when I started reading about all this
new atheist stuff and these questions of
evil and am I going to hell and
all these other things, I've not been
able to get there. Mhm. But I'm having
this conversation with you today because
I am open-minded.
And although I've got like difficult
questions to ask, I'm in pursuit of the
truth, not any particular
ideology or answer. So, how do you take
someone like me who agrees that there's
clearly something missing, who believes
that there's something [clears throat]
transcendent, it would be a crazy thing
to assume that this is it, I I think.
Yeah. How do you take them from this
position to
believing that what's written in this
book in front of me, the Bible, yeah, is
the thing that should guide my life?
Right. Because I I like again, I say
that I'm just going to say this again
that like
I think I require really high standard
of evidence because of the way that I
am. Yeah. You know, I think there's a
historical case for it which I'm very
much invested in because my training
formally is in historiography. I study
ancient biblical manuscripts and their
kind of reliability and fidelity over
the last couple of millennia. So looking
at some of those manuscripts that
actually can trace back to the actual
time frame of Jesus and answering
questions like is what we have now what
the original authors wrote back then. So
I think there's a historical question to
it and I in my own personal
investigation genuinely think that the
evidence, the publicly available
evidence
gets us back to not only the time frame
of Jesus, but to early eyewitness
testimony that proclaims that this first
century Jewish itinerant rabbi who was
walking the dusty streets of first
century made these claims and then there
is sufficient evidence to say that
he predicted his own death and
resurrection and he did it.
How do I know Jesus Christ was real and
then how do I know what's written in
that book is real versus just some guys
thousands of years ago made a book?
Yeah, so that is a question of
historical reliability. So there are a
couple different ways we could go about
it. First we have four biographical
accounts of Jesus' life, which is very
unusual. So we call them the Gospels,
Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
Those aren't actually our earliest
source material for the life of Jesus.
That comes in the person of Paul.
Paul is actually writing before the
Gospel accounts.
And he is
someone who was hostile originally to
the Christian message and he's
persecuting Christians. He comes along
and he has this radical conversion
experience when he's traveling to
Damascus where he says he's he's
literally thrown off a horse, he hears
God's voice and it's Jesus and he says,
Paul, why are you persecuting me? And
then he writes these things about his
experience and and then ultimately goes
and connects with the individuals who
are who he called the disciples who are
like this this close Jesus community and
connects with them. So, he's our
earliest source, but then you have these
gospel accounts, these these
biographies. And the gospels are
interesting because they fit within the
historical framework of ancient
Greco-Roman biography. So, let me give
you an example.
The most well-known person in Jesus' day
was the emperor.
His name was Tiberius.
Tiberius has four biographical accounts
that are written about him. Velleius
Paterculus, Cassius Dio, Suetonius, and
Tacitus. So, these these are the four
guys, okay?
And what's interesting in sort of a
comparative analysis of Jesus and those
people
is that they're all writing around the
same time period. So, the biographies
are coming from the 1st century
for Jesus. They're coming in this time
period where you have an early
eyewitness testimony.
For
the emperor, for the most well-known
person in the ancient world,
all of the sources except for
uh Velleius Paterculus are coming from
the 2nd century.
Velleius Paterculus is coming from the
1st century. He's very close to the
source, but he's a paid propagandist.
So, even though he's the earliest, he's
the least reliable. And for the gospels,
that comes around in the 4th century.
So,
there is a comparison with the source
material for someone like Jesus even
though we really shouldn't have anything
about him
because he's he's kind of a nobody from
nowhere in terms of the Roman Empire and
the grand scheme of things.
But, we have a phenomenal amount of
source information for his life. I mean,
this is one of the things I discovered
when I went through that new atheist
phase was that really
everybody kind of agrees that there was
a guy called Jesus from Nazareth and
that he was a real historical person.
>> Mhm. I guess the part in dispute was
whether things like his resurrection
actually happened or whether he was just
a spiritual leader back then like we
have spiritual leaders today. And I
think one of the one of the things that
I got really stuck on when I was reading
about Jesus in the Bible was there
appears to be quite a significant gap
between his life, his death, and then
the writings that go into the Bible. And
for me in my head I was like, "Well, if
you know
if something happened in my life 50
years ago, I mean I'm only 33, but if
something happened 50 years ago, I would
not be able to recount it. Frankly, I
can't recount what happened last week
accurately. Right.
>> Let alone like decades ago. You've heard
You must have heard this argument
before. Yes. What How do you How do you
square the circle here? So, there are a
few things going on. First, we live in a
hyper-literate culture. We are writing
everything down.
The ancient world was far less of a
literate culture. They were an oral
culture. These stories would have been
passed in large groups at at at at time
frames, especially if we're talking
about the biographical material of Jesus
is actually written in a closer time
frame than the majority of anyone else.
What was that gap? It's It's about 40 to
60 years. So, I really want to I imagine
there's some people listening that have
probably never read the Bible. And I
really want to explain to them like what
this book is in the simplest terms. Can
I I can open your Bible?
>> Yeah, of course. Yeah. So, is there Is
there like chapters in here? Yeah. So,
the Bible is though we now have it in
one book is 66 books written over a
period of about 1,600 years on three
different continents by close to 40
different authors in three different
languages.
So, I've just opened your Bible.
>> Yep. And there's one section that says
the Old Testament. There's another
section section that says the New
Testament. What am I looking at? Like is
this God's words? Is this a bunch of
people's stories that have been compiled
together? What is the Old Testament?
What's the New Testament? What's the
difference? Yeah. So, the Old Testament
is the Hebrew scriptures. So, that's the
scriptures of the Jewish people. Okay.
So, that is uh you know, it starts in
what's referred to as the Torah,
which are the first five books or the
five books of Moses. And then that goes
in a time frame all the way up to the
period of the Persians.
So, that's a certain time frame.
>> Yes. And they've gone and collected
books from that time frame, with
writings from that time frame? Yeah, so
the ancient Jewish people had And
remember, all of these books they would
have circulated as independent writings.
Okay. So, we start to see things like
this happen in the 4th century. Prior to
that, everything's in independent
scrolls. So, there's an understanding
when even you get them all sort of put
in one unit, that would have contained
the scriptures, the word of God, more so
than like this is the word of God. The
reason why
I am unapologetic and very open about my
total naivety is because often in these
conversations,
you end up kind of preaching to the
choir, Sure. if you know what I mean.
And there's a huge amount of people,
especially younger people that went
through that new atheist movement, were
maybe born in the 2000s, that are now 26
years old,
>> Right. but have never read the Bible,
have never even opened one.
>> Yeah.
>> idea what it is. They just think it's
this kind of like book of stories.
>> Yeah. But these the first
you call these books, I was thinking of
them like chapters. Mhm. The first one
in the Old Testament is Genesis.
>> Mhm.
Who wrote Genesis? Was that a guy or was
that God? So, the idea is in
Christianity,
the terminology is what's called verbal
plenary inspiration. So, verbal, it's
spoken. Plenary, it's like written down
and then it inspired. So, there are
human authors to all these books. Okay,
so humans wrote these chapters, but they
were inspired by God. So, yes. So, the
understanding, so in the Bible itself,
Peter says that men spoke as they were
carried along by the Holy Spirit. So,
there is a there's a historical context
to all of these, like the history of
this period of time, of the nation of
Israel as they were being led by
particular rulers. And when does Jesus
show up? Jesus is the New Testament. If
someone's never read the Old Testament,
what is that about? It's just describing
the time?
It's a bunch of different things. So,
it's there's a whole bunch of genres of
literature. So, some of it is history,
some of it is poetry,
some of it is what's called wisdom
literature. And who decided that these
It looks like there's I don't know that
looks like there's about 40 books in the
Old Testament. Mhm. 39 [clears throat]
books that are in the Old Testament. Who
decided that those were going to be part
of the Old Testament? Because I'm sure
that there was lots of other writings at
the time that could have been included.
Yeah. So, by the time that Jesus is
around, there's approximately an
agreement of what is
considered scripture. By who? By the
Jews themselves.
>> So, the Jews decided which 38 books to
put in? Yes. So, you have conversations
by individuals like there's a guy named
Josephus who is writing at the end of
the 1st century. Part of what he argues
is that the Jewish people don't have
kind of an innumerable number of
religious texts like the Greeks do.
They have a specific number and he uses
this terminology that they were laid up
in the temple.
So, the idea is that, you know, these
are the books, they're housed in the
temple, and they're a set number. And he
gives the number of the same number of
letters in the Hebrew alphabet, 22. So,
you usually see this 22 or 23 number,
but they group them differently.
And he gives an argument that
one of the reasons that they're the you
we can find a timeline for what the Jews
consider scripture is he says, "There's
nothing written before Moses and there's
not nothing written after the time of
Artaxerxes, which is the Persian
Empire." So, the book of Esther in the
Bible is is that time period.
So, though there are writings after
that, there's this agreement that
the voice of God in say the prophets
giving you thus saith the Lord
statement, like communicating messages
to the people of Israel
has ceased. But, the Jewish canon,
though there's like a closing of it,
there's a soft closing.
There's an idea that there's going to be
a new covenant. God's make going to make
new pro- promises with his people, and
so there are going to be more writings.
Okay, so my understanding of that is
that
he made the case that God is no longer
communicating with people to write these
books. At least if there was a stop
point at Malachi. So, it's sometimes
referred to as the 400 years of silence
for that reason. From the point of
Jesus' death
>> Mhm. what book from the New Testament is
written last, and how big is that gap?
That's a debate. Okay, what's the
debate? So, the debate So, the the
there's a it's a question if John's
gospel
is written before 70 AD or after 70 AD.
And if it's written after 70 AD, it's
written in the '90s. So, it's written
pretty far afterwards.
>> How many years?
So, Jesus dies in '33. Okay, so about
60. Yeah. Okay. Fine.
Yeah. So, it's at the minimum I think
like 99% of
historians, biblical scholars,
classicists would argue that the 27
books of the New Testament are written
in the 1st century.
And so, in that sense, they're in the
lifetime of the eyewitnesses to a
certain degree. Mhm. And there's
evidence even within some of the gospels
where you have these names thrown out
kind of randomly.
And part of the thinking of that is that
this is like citing your sources. At one
point
when Jesus is carrying the cross to
Golgotha
he kind of stumbles, and they get
another person to carry his cross for a
little bit.
And that person is Joseph of Arimathea.
Well, one of the gospels names one of
Joseph of Arimathea's son by name.
And the thinking is that this is
probably someone who's well-known within
the early Jesus community.
And the purpose of naming that person
randomly
is to say
he's actually well-known, go ask him. I
mean logically there's quite a risk of
Chinese whispers to some degree. As
you're speaking I'm trying to think
about things that I experienced when I
was younger like with my like
grandmother before she passed away and I
was trying to like accurately recount
those memories.
>> Yeah. I was thinking of like going to a
house and then
I remember one day she gave me some
money. But I remember what she gave it
to me for and I can't remember how much
she gave me. I know she put it in a card
and this was only like hmm 20 years ago.
Yeah.
And so if I was to write about that
today
I would be filling in some some gaps
especially
especially this is the other thing that
I always struggled with is like
especially in a world where we didn't
understand science. Now my grandmother
like put it in a card and it was like I
opened it and
the way she did it was often as a
surprise. So in a world where I like
didn't understand physics or science I
might have concluded that my mother my
grandmother did something like magical.
Mhm. You know at a time when we didn't
understand anything about like really
much about the nature of the universe
and planets and the solar system and
physics.
So I is that a risk that some of the
things that have been transmitted via
God into this book in front of me are
prone to Chinese whispers and or just
like a lack of understanding about the
nature of the world like the
resurrection for example. Yeah. So this
is this is in my field referred to as
mythological drift. So how do we factor
in
making sure that mythological drift
doesn't happen. I think there are a
couple things related to what you said.
First off I think I would be careful in
trying to ascribe the ancient world as
being pre-scientific and therefore
largely say ignorant. I mean even when
the angel comes to Mary in the gospel
story and says you're going to be with
child Mary's objection to the angel is a
scientific one. I haven't met the
minimum requirements of how babies are
made, therefore
I can't be pregnant, right? So, she's
not dumb, right? She's not just at face
value accepting that, you know, well, I
believe in angels and so, you know, this
kind of magic thinking happened.
She's still objecting scientifically,
even though she might not have the
terminology to understand
like the complexities of childbirth and
embryology and all of that.
So, I would say, you know, this is what
the writer C.S. Lewis calls
chronological snobbery. He says, you
know, we need to be careful of not to
ascribe the ancient world as being
more ignorant and stupid than than, you
know, just because we are a product of
the enlightenment and we understand
scientific things now. The second thing
is, I think that the Chinese whispers or
the telephone game or whatever you call
it is a good is a good kind of case
study. I think where it falls short is
that if you play the telephone game, if
you play Chinese whispers,
there are rules in order to corrupt the
message. So, you have to whisper, you
can only say it once, you have to do it
one person to one person.
In an oral culture, you would have been
hearing these stories constantly.
So, when some of these stories are told,
they're being told within a lifetime
where there could have been
individuals who say, the story of the
feeding of the 5,000, that's a lot of
people. So, there's a lot of witnesses
to this particular event. So, if you're
writing this down, there's an aspect of
there are people out there who could
verify what is being said at least
orally, not necessarily like literally.
Likewise,
what we have in the gospel accounts,
particularly after Jesus' death, when
the disciples
proclaiming his resurrection, they go
back to Jerusalem, which is the scene of
the crime.
So, they go back to the exact place
where Jesus was crucified and start
telling people he was risen from the
dead. If there is some aspect of say
disingenuousness and making up a story,
don't go back to the place where
everybody could have seen that thing
happen
to that degree, right? So, in one sense,
Chinese whispers is
is a faulty analogy in that it's less
like one person whispering into
another's ear and more like
100 people in a room all saying
communicating the thing verbally and
then getting the other people to repeat
it back to them and then corroborating
with the other individuals of what's
going on. Now, I think there I think
your point in in the story of your your
grandmother and you know the the the
letter and is a good one. You know, how
do we remember things?
Do you remember 9/11?
Yes, I do. Yes, and I was in the the UK
at the time. Could you tell me a little
bit more vividly what what you were
doing on 9/11 compared to your
grandmother and the letter? Yes, I
could, yeah. I remember coming home from
school and like watching it on the
screen and my and my dad having it on
the screen and I was just just looking
at the screen. Yeah, me too. So, whereas
I couldn't tell you much of what else
happened during
an average day in that year, I could
tell you what happened on September
11th, 2001.
And that's because of the nature of what
was going on. And I think when we're
talking about the gospel stories in
particular,
first you have what I genuinely believe
are eyewitness accounts from at least
the source information
coming from a group who would have heard
Jesus be preaching these things multiple
times in multiple different settings.
Like it's it's probably likely myself as
an itinerant, I have given the same talk
on a particular subject quite a few
times. Yeah. And I joke with my wife
that she could give my talk on the
historical reliability of the Bible
herself. You know, if I'm sick, I'll
just send my wife, right? Cuz she's
heard it so many times. I think that's
the case that's going on with the
disciples. There's an aspect of they
would have heard say the Beatitudes.
Yeah. that Jesus
most likely more than once is the case
because that's just the nature of not
just itinerant speaking, but even
traveling rabbis in in the ancient
world.
And then you have this event that is
kind of earth-shattering in terms of
their narrative of who they are. They've
been traveling with this rabbi
for 3 years straight. They've been
hearing his teaching, they've been
seeing miracles, at least that are
recorded in the Gospels.
Pretty phenomenal things.
And then he gets taken and he's murdered
publicly.
And they think it's over.
They think, you know, there are other
Messianic movements in the ancient
world,
most of which you and I aren't hearing
on a regular basis because when those
individuals die, their movement dies
with them. And so that's what they think
is happening, right? So they think,
okay,
we're done.
They're
So the story is they're hiding in this
upper room and they're scared. In fact,
it's the women who take on the
responsibility of like going and
figuring things out, which in terms of a
the time period is actually an
embarrassing fact because of the kind of
cultural dynamics of what's going on.
And so
you have the disciples who think it's
over. What is it that has 11 scared
disciples because one of them, Judas,
goes and he kills himself. 11 scared
disciples hiding in an upper room
thinking that's it, we're done. We might
as well, you know, Peter, James, and
John might as well just go back to being
fishermen
cuz that's all she wrote. To then
having the boldness to go out and
actually proclaim this message
ultimately to
the level of persecution and hardship
that they endure for the rest of their
lives. Well, it's that their rabbi then
shows up alive again.
And so at minimum, I think what we can
say is that this is a pretty drastic
event that takes place in their life.
It's a comparative to a 9/11 event for
them.
And so in terms of like the memory
imprint
that they are experiencing
for the murder of their rabbi, of their
teacher.
And then something
happening where
they then go
for the rest of their lives
the martyrdom stories are a little bit
tricky in terms of their historical
reliability. I think a few of them we
can say did happen. M- a lot of them is
kind of up in the air, but at minimum
they suffered persecution. So the story
in the Bible is that he was
killed uh on the cross, murdered on the
cross, and then he was put into a tomb.
And then
who saw him come out of the tomb?
So nobody physically sees him come out
of the tomb. But the women go to the
tomb in the morning
and on the third day and the tomb is
empty.
And so there are
four accounts, right? And I think it's
interesting also that we have four
accounts that kind of give different
angles on the stories.
They're not It's not as if they got
together and they corroborated and all
gave the same story. The fact is that we
have four accounts that kind of
capitalize on different angles
which the differentiation in detail I
think actually gives credibility to
the
the reliability of it. Cuz if they're
all telling the same thing, you could
argue that they got together and they
colluded. They don't do that. In fact,
they they touch on different aspects of
the story. Are these people saying that
they saw him walk out? Are they saying
that they just saw it empty? What are
the claims being made about his
resurrection from these witnesses? Yeah,
so the tomb is empty. The tomb is empty.
>> And so it's interesting in in one of the
accounts um Mary's at the tomb and she
actually talks to Jesus, but she
confuses him with the gardener. Now I
think it's it's interesting that she
doesn't confute confuse the gardener
with Jesus. She confuses Jesus with the
gardener. Like she thinks that that this
person she's talking to isn't Jesus. She
doesn't recognize him at first. And she
she asks him, you know, "What happened?
Why is the tomb opened? Where did the
body go?" And then there's also an
account of an angel appearing and
saying, "Why are you looking for the
living among the dead? He's not here.
He's risen." And then they go back to
the disciples who are, you know, hiding
in the upper room. Mary says, you know,
"I I I met you the tomb is empty. I met
Jesus. Jesus is not in the the tomb.
He's risen." And
some of them don't even believe her.
They think she's crazy.
Now, we don't have like an eyewitness
account of the tomb being open.
And this is actually an embarrassing
fact in the ancient world.
So, some of those other gospels that I
mentioned earlier that are written later
on, Gospel of Thomas, Judas, Mary,
Peter,
there's one of them, the Gospel of
Peter, which is actually trying to
remedy this fact
that
women are the first eyewitnesses to the
empty tomb.
Which is a which is an embarrassing fact
in the ancient world. If that's not
true, if they made it up, it seems very
unlikely that they would have done that.
Because women are not considered good
eyewitnesses in either Greco-Roman or
unfortunately Jewish society in this
time period.
So, the Gospel of Peter
tries to remedy the situation by having
all of the right people
in the right place at the right time. It
has the Jewish and the Roman officials
camping out in front of the tomb when it
actually happens and then has this
recounted the story of the the literally
the stone moving, Jesus coming out, all
these things. Now, we know it's not
historically reliable. We know that
because of when it was written. We also
know that on the eve of Passover, the
priests would not be camping out in
front of a dead body. It's just
historically um an
But, it is an account of a literary
source later on that is embarrassed by
what we find in here about the
biographical information of the empty
tomb. So, is it just two women that said
they met Jesus in some form after his
death, Mary being one of them, which was
his mother? No. Who's Mary? Mary, so
there are a number of Marys in in the
New Testament. Um this was Mary
Magdalene. Okay. Yeah, who who was like
a close associate
>> Okay, like a friend. Yeah, yeah.
>> Okay, so friend, and then was there is
it just her that says she saw him
There there was a group of them. A group
of them?
>> Yeah, of the women. Okay, so and they
were separate when they saw him. They
weren't They were on their own. They
were together. So, one of the gospel
only mentions Mary, I believe it's the
gospel of John, but like I said before,
it implies that there are more because
she says, "We don't know where they put
the body." Okay.
>> So, though that account only
has her
recounting, it it implies that there are
others, and then the other gospels have
more women that are going to the tomb.
As a percentage, what degree of
certainty do you have that he was
resurrected and that um he was who he
said he was? Cuz I agree with you that
this character clearly existed. Like
Jesus clearly existed. I personally
believe that he was he was killed, Mhm.
probably on [clears throat] a cross.
But, then you get to this point of
resurrection, which you have to then
believe in something supernatural. Yeah.
So, what's the probability you'd assign
to it? I I
>> it was like likely, unlikely, very
likely. They're all likely because I
think that what the gospel authors are
doing is communicating truth,
and I don't ultimately see an
overabundance of reason why they would
write what they wrote
other than
actually recounting a story of what took
place. I grew up in a place called
Plymouth. I don't know if guys born in
Africa. And in my local park, there was
this big poster on the wall about the
white lady. I'll put it up on the
screen. It's like a big legend in our
city. It's this park and everybody says
that they see this white lady in the
park that was killed. And actually,
there's a big board explaining her life.
But it's all just accounts of people
that say they've seen her. You have
things like the Loch Ness Monster in
Scotland as well, where there's been
1,500 sightings of this big monster in
the river. And even up until recent
times, 2025, there was a surge of
sightings of the Loch Ness Monster
called the Black Mass in in in in the
bay.
Um and that started in
565 AD. So, one of the things that I've
always sort of struggled with when
I think about humans saying they saw
something is we still today have
sightings of UFOs and Loch Ness Monsters
and white ladies in parks that become
legend. And actually, with the Loch Ness
Monster, it's pretty interesting that
even today, there are sightings all the
time of this monster that lives in the
river. Now, I think maybe Maybe
you you both agree that there's no
monster in the river.
But there's something going on. There's
something in human nature where
we do have like a proclivity to engage
in
supernatural sightings. And then once
we've heard it once, we then reinforce
that we've seen it, too. And even as
like a young man, I mean, maybe you
believe this, but like
I
believed that there was a woman that
would stand on the landing of my home.
And it would like wake me up and I would
run and
and tell my parents that the lady stood
on the landing again.
There's people watching this that think
there was actually a lady. They're
probably me. I was. But I do you know
what I'm getting at? Is like how do how
can we trust human accounts of these
things when clearly humans have an
ability to make make things up that
aren't real in some situations.
Part of the answer to the question is
one of the evidences for Jesus's
resurrection is the fact that you and I,
Stephen, are still talking about it
almost 2,000 years later. My friend said
this to me. I was saying to you before
about my Christian friend. He was like,
"Why are we still talking about it?
Well, I we can't prove it." Right. It
wasn't it didn't happen. So, we're
always going to talk about it. There's
There's never going to be I mean, unless
something happens. Right. The difference
is that there are these other Messianic
movies movements that happen in the
ancient world. And so, uh like uh Simon
bar Giora. The reason why we're not
talking about Simon bar Giora as a
Messianic figure is because he died and
his movement died with him.
And his disciples didn't go out and then
proclaim his continued message until
like to their own detriment. So, I would
say a few things. I would say liars make
poor martyrs
in that you will die for something you
believe is true,
but
the chances of you dying for something
you know is not true are less likely.
[clears throat]
So, if we're talking about the disciples
and especially
if
what they're getting for this particular
proclamation
is they're being ostracized from their
own communities, pagan gentile
communities, and the Jewish communities.
Cuz remember, there was a persecution on
both sides because it was at a certain
point in time continuing to say that
Jesus was the Messiah and on top of that
that he was God himself
was not very popular within the early
Jewish communities. There's a complexity
to the fact that
people usually lie. You look at cultic
figures, right? Right. Cult leaders
usually do things for
prominence
or money
or sex
or influence. The interesting thing
about the early disciples is they get
none of that.
In fact, they almost get the complete
opposite of that.
In that Jesus says, "You're going to be
persecuted.
You're going to be put in front of trib-
tribunals and you're going to be
interrogated." And that's exactly what
happens. And they know that there is
there's a danger to this because we have
in the book of Acts, which is the book
after the Gospels, we have a recounting
of the first martyr, Stephen. I think of
like someone like Martin Luther King or
Gandhi as being, you know, leaders from
history that appeared to be, from what
I've understood, very selfless. And
actually realized that they were all
going to die. I'll never forget the
speech actually where Martin Luther King
says, "I've been to the mountaintop." He
was a very religious man, very Christian
man, and says, "I've been to the
mountaintop. You guys get there, but I
don't get there with you." Right. And
then, from the information I had, he
died very, very shortly thereafter. And
as he's saying, "I don't get there with
you." He's He's emotional in his face.
You see him crying. The video is was
very con-
persuasive of the Christianity, by the
way. Mhm. Um and then he's pulled off
stage, and then he's shot thereafter.
Feels like a man that knew he wasn't
going to
live much longer, but was willing to put
his cause ahead of
um his own mortality. And um I guess
[clears throat] Jesus was doing the
same. In a certain regard, in terms of
the disciples though, I think like if
they know this isn't true, if they know
that there's this kind of this has been
mythological drift, if things have been
exaggerated, uh why then,
especially experiencing that
persecution, seeing their friends die in
that kind of setting, do they continue
to go on and do it? I think they
definitely believed it was true. Yes. I
think at minimum, whatever's going on,
they like you you look at some of these
uh secular historians, and they look at
the data and they say, "Whatever's going
on, the disciples believe something
happened." Yeah, I think they saw
something. Of course.
>> And so, the I just think that the
explanations
of the alternatives of them actually
happening are insufficient in so far as
how they actually explain the data. Do
you have any doubt?
Oh, of course. Okay. So, you have at
least even 1% doubt. Oh, definitely. And
I think especially when there are times
of things that are far more existential
than historical, when times of like
struggle and pain and suffering, and I
look at the world and I look at how
messy it is, The who die young, people
who are abused, all of these things.
There are moments where I think, how how
could there be a good God? I mean, I'm
not immune to doubt.
I and and the interesting thing that I
find about the Bible is that the Bible
is very open to the God of the Bible
being open to us coming to him with our
doubts.
Now, 1/3 of the book of Psalms, which is
like right in the middle of the Bible,
this kind of poetic literature if you
want to call it that, are sometimes
referred to as the lament or the
complaint Psalms. It's things like Psalm
22, my God, my God, why have you
forsaken me? Why are you so far from me?
I like I cry out by day and I hear no
answer.
And I think what's interesting that I
find with the Bible is it's transparency
in saying, we're going to struggle.
You know, there's this really great
story in the Gospel of John. Well, this
is this is in a couple of the instances
of the Gospels where
John the Baptist, who's like Jesus'
cousin and good friend,
he's been in prison because he's been
speaking out against Herod. He's been
being a little bit too verbal
politically and so he gets taken and
he's in prison and though he's the one
that baptized Jesus and said, you know,
behold the lamb of God who takes away
the sin of the world. When he's in
prison, he doubts. And he sends his
disciples over to Jesus to ask,
are you the Messiah? Are you the one
we're waiting for or should we we we be
waiting for another? Now, in that
interaction, Jesus actually says,
John the Baptist is the greatest of all
men born of women,
which is basically everybody, right? And
yet, in that very same setting, John the
Baptist is doubting
that Jesus is who he says he is because
he's experiencing pain and suffering.
On that point of
you seeing, you know, horrific things
happening in the world and then having
doubts, I think for me, that was one of
the persuasive arguments of the like new
atheist movement that I became a part of
when I was like 18 years old, which was
I think Richard Dawkins had said about,
you know, if God is all loving, Mhm.
then why would he let a 2-year-old kid
in Africa have their eyeball eaten out
from the inside by a parasite? Yeah.
Like if if if I could intervene with
that, because you know, the assertion is
that God is omnipotent, all powerful,
and omniscient, all present.
>> Yeah. If I could intervene with that as
a human, I would stop that. And so, if
God is omnipotent, omnipotent, sorry,
all powerful, and omnipresent, knows
everything, and is everywhere, then why
wouldn't he intervene with the baby
having its eyeball eaten out from the
inside? Yeah. It's It's a good point,
and I think if there is an objection
that is truly
impactful on Christianity uh in the
atheist corner, it is the problem of
evil. And always has been, because it's
far more of an emotional and an
existential question than it is an
intellectual question. Now, part of the
problem with it is that if we're talking
about evil with a capital E, we're
implying that there's a good with a
capital G. And so, I think we do run
into an issue when saying that evil
exists, we're implying that good exists,
and if we're implying that good exists,
we're implying that there's a moral law
to adhere to to call the good good and
the evil evil. And if there's a moral
law, then there has to be a moral law
giver. And that's where we come into
issues with is this subjective
or is this objective? I think the
atheist movement would argue that that
moral good is virtue of what helps me to
survive.
So, like
watching a small child suffer in such a
way,
if I didn't feel anything bad about
that, Yeah. then I wouldn't have the
wiring for survival, because I wouldn't
have the proclivity to defend a
suffering child. If I don't have that,
then I probably don't reproduce, and I
don't pass on my genes, and then I'm
selected out of existence. So, that pain
I feel when I see a child suffering is a
function of my evolutionary mechanics
that make me more likely to survive. And
anyone that didn't have that wouldn't
have survived and wouldn't be here now.
Sure. So, evolution therefore is the
answer. I think that might suffice in
certain instances. However, it's still
sort of smuggling in moral categories
into a biological explanation. So, part
of I mean, you read Richard Dawkins
right you read River and he has that
section where he talks about, you know,
we shouldn't expect to see any rhyme or
reason, good or bad, you know, DNA
neither knows nor cares. DNA just is and
we dance to its music. And there's an
aspect of Dawkins himself in that volume
at least at that time when he wrote it
articulating that at the end of it all
there is no such thing as actually you
can't call that parasite in that that
boy's eye
evil. You can say I don't like it. But
to to import this moral category of evil
is actually to import an idea and this
is actually what Dawkins was criticized
by by individuals like John Gray, the
philosopher who taught at the London
School of Economics. And he says, you
know, you're a really great biologist.
But then you want to impart actual
intrinsic value to people.
And if you're looking at a simple
selfish DNA perspective, you can't
actually ascribe that. Because your DNA,
your selfish DNA exists to carry on its
selfish DNA.
And so, in one sense that child has no
bearing on you. Now, it might have like
a a protective mechanism where you want
to figure out why the child got the
parasite and so you try to avoid that in
order to not get the parasite yourself.
But
science
can't actually give you an explanation
for what the moral implications are in
that instance. Let me give you an
example.
>> I think I understand the point there.
>> Yes. Um it's essentially asserting that
like why does that child matter to me?
Because my DNA should just be trying to
take care of itself.
>> Mhm. Um I guess in biology there's um I
don't always know who my child is, but
also from an evolutionary perspective,
if we were raised in communities and
tribes, we took care of all of our the
children.
>> Sure. In in the surroundings. I would
take care of my brother's children and
he would take care of mine therefore.
Yeah. Yeah. And again that goes back to
the point of survival which means that
I'm more likely to survive if I take
care of like my community. Sort of. You
you read something like uh
The Origin of Species though. Like like
uh Darwin himself
when he's articulating the survival of
the fittest, there is an aspect of
you shouldn't take care of those people
because they're actually bringing the
genetic gene pool down. So, we see even
in like the eugenics movement, pulling a
lot from individuals like Darwin in
order to validate the fact that in order
to carry on your selfish DNA, this idea
of taking care of the marginalized and
those with on the fringes of society and
those who are the the lesser thans is is
not evolutionary advantageous because
survival of the fittest implies that the
fittest should survive. And these are
obviously not the fittest. It's actually
a Judeo-Christian ethic in the
understanding of everybody having equal
value that we should be taking care of
people because they have intrinsic
value, not extrinsic value that allows
us to then even import an idea of taking
care of those who are not necessarily
specifically related to me and mine. And
it comes back to okay, where are we
grounding this objectivity in?
Cuz there have been societies that have
attempted to it in like a might is right
aspect and and you ground the
objectivity of what we say is right in a
society that says this is better for the
most amount of individuals within a
particular community. I think about um
Yuval Noah Yeah, Harari. Yeah.
>> Harari wrote his book Sapiens where he
says that the real defining trait of
our species versus other species was our
ability to collaborate and basically
scratch each other's backs. And that
that meant that we had um
evolutionary advantages because if we
could work together in a big group and
we could believe in stories and we
believe in money and
prison and governments, etc. We could
band together and take on the lion or
band together and take on the elephant
or whatever. And it's actually that in
part that you have like I need to take
care of you and you need to take care of
me and we're going to reciprocate that
altruism uh and increase our survival
chances.
So, again, that might explain why I I
care about that kid. Um
because the species that didn't Uh-huh.
they would never been able to band
together and take on the elephant. Yes.
I think it's largely our modern
perspective living in a society where we
are
uh starting on second base already with
our moral perspectives. Right? We have
inherited all of these moral categories
because of our Judeo-Christian ethic. If
you look at basically every society
prior to this or even societies in the
East, that's not a given. Right? That's
not an assumption. Especially in
societies that have say uh
understandings of karmic cycles.
Whether that's in like Buddhism or
Hinduism, the idea of altruism is
actually can be categorized as an evil
because in the cycle of samsara of
birth, life, death, and rebirth, you are
actually the your lot in this life is
due to your wrongdoing in the last life.
So, in helping someone like that,
you are actually inhibiting them from
being reincarnated better on the other
side. So, an idea like altruism doesn't
exist within that Eastern society. And
if you look in the ancient world, let's
pick on the Babylonians. The
Babylonians, if they were to read
Dawkins' River Out of Eden, would
basically say, "Yeah, exactly." Right?
So, they have this creation story. It's
called the Enuma Elish, and it's this
big battle of the gods, and it's uh it's
an origin story, to an attempt to
explain why everything is here.
But, the conclusion of it is basically,
you are a product of a big battle and a
mistake, right? The one god loses, and
you, everything around you, the Earth,
the sky, it's just the remains of the
gods that lost.
So, meaning, value, purpose, not really
ultimately. You are just a product of
time plus matter plus chance as well.
It's just framed within religious
perspective. Whereas, Dawkins frames it
in a natural materialistic perspective.
So, where do we get
the categories
to even say that we should be taking
care of people in communities outside of
our specific community?
Because in some cultures, they have the
ethic of love thy neighbor, but in
others, it's eat thy neighbor.
And so, the question is, which society
do you want to pick? And you're saying
that that came from Judeo-Christian
values. Yes. I would agree, yeah. I
would agree that. I think I'm trying to
understand if it's innate in us from a
god
what's good and evil, or whether it's,
you know, we we all subscribe to a
culture that was, you know, the
foundation of that was these Christian
values.
And um
yeah, which one is it? Yeah, well, Was I
born with a good and evil, or was
2,000 or 3,000 years ago when Jesus came
to be, and we had these books, did that
just influence them? Yeah. Well, I think
ultimately, there's an aspect of our
conscience that's imprinted on us that
we we understand ethics to some degree
or another.
But, the framework to actually find the
objectivity of that ethic is found in
the revelation of specific revelation in
scripture. Do you believe in evolution?
I don't. You don't believe it's true?
No. I am open to the fact that I don't
think that a belief in evolution
undermines Christianity anyway. However,
I'm and prefacing this by saying I'm not
a scientist. I'm an advocate for
intelligent design.
And I would basically
punt the complex conversations of
evolutionary biology
to individuals who are far more studied
than me like Stephen Meyer and Jonathan
McLatchie and John Lennox Tours and uh
Douglas Axe and those individuals who
have studied it. At the exact same time,
though, it also depends on what you mean
by evolution.
Right? So, like adaptation
genetically is a thing. I guess so I'm
saying do you believe that we evolved
from very simple organisms to become the
human that you see today?
>> No. And the argument for that would be,
you know, I share 98% of the same DNA as
like a chimpanzee and we have these
fossil records which seem to show a
progression over time. Yeah. You don't
believe that's true?
>> No, I don't.
But, at the exact same time, I think,
you know, there are individuals within
the Christian faith, intelligent
people who do and have no problem with
understanding of a theistic evolutionary
model.
However,
I think
in the effort of survival of the
fittest, I still think that you're
starting a few miles down the road in
answering the question of the arrival of
the fittest. How do minds come from
mindless matter?
How does everything come from nothing?
How do How do we answer those
And I think that's why you can use the
evolutionary model as an explanation of
how God has actually
created, right, the biology of the
situation. But, I think the bigger
question is
the cosmological questions. How did this
all get going?
You know, the Big Bang, what was the big
banger?
How did that first ball get rolling?
And then why
can you and I, Stephen, sit here and,
like I said before, have the 3 lbs of
gray matter in my head
kind of
uh ruminate over these very complex
questions. You know, I I think it was on
the Galapagos Islands, I'm probably
going to butcher this, but I'll I'll do
my very best, that they you know, the
sailors went to an island, they left a
bird there, they came back 50 years
later, the the bird's beak had grown to
be very, very long because the prey on
that island that it was eating were in
in holes, so they needed longer beaks.
So, it kind of shows us that if you
leave an animal in an environment, it
will adapt and it's, you know, it will
select out the the short-beaked birds
for the long-beaked birds. And just in
that short period of time, you can see
that it's like, you know, it's becoming
a different
type of animal. And if you
[clears throat] extrapolate that out
over
a long, long period of time, almost an
inconceivable amount of time, you know,
maybe hundreds of millions of years, one
can understand why like me and a
chimpanzee
there are similarities in how we look.
Um and there are 99% similar like 98%
similarities in my DNA and a
chimpanzee's DNA. So, one would argue
that we are we have a common ancestor.
Yeah. It's like very compelling evidence
to me. Like sure. I mean, it's the
transitions going from as the chimpanzee
type thing, right? Cuz we're obviously
not arguing that that we were a
chimpanzee as a chimpanzee exists today.
But that yeah, that hominid, whatever
that hominid was, what is the
transitionary
fossil explanation, whatever, that goes
from the monkey to the human being.
And I don't really think we have an
answer for that in terms of
consciousness questions. Like, why what
makes our ability to reason
and think and contemplate different than
all of the other
species in the animal kingdom.
And how do we go, if we're arguing that,
you know, everything comes from
single-celled organisms,
I guess you could have a
if you want to call it a time of the
gaps explanation, you know, just just
add a lots of millions of years and it
solves this issue. I don't know if I am
completely
satisfied with that answer. If cuz
obviously there's adaptation. But, you
know, if you're looking at whether it's
the dodo bird example or Darwin's
finches, right, where the beaks are
different, um you're still getting
beaked birds.
And we've never seen one species turn
into a completely different species. The
thing that I
fill the gap with is that
it's just a matter of time.
So, you know, with the birds example,
it's like 50 years or something or
decades. Right. But, when we think about
Earth potentially being like 4-5 billion
years old,
>> Yeah. I think it's almost inconceivable
what can happen over such a long period
of time. Like, it's conceivable that if
me and you went to different parts of
planet Earth and lived in two completely
different environments, and then we came
back 5 billion years later,
and there was no medicine and no factors
helping us to survive, that
you know, we would have branched gone in
two different directions completely. And
you, you know, your ancestors who were
living in the jungle might be s-
9 ft, and actually what was
useful for survival where I lived in
some cave was being 2 ft tall. Right.
And then we wouldn't be able to
reproduce, which kind of makes us
different species now. Like that's I
mean that sounds conceivable for me over
four like 4.5 billion years.
Seems conceivable that I did I did
Like we both agree on adaptation. Mhm.
Like small adaptations. But then if you
expand the time horizon, those small
adaptations become massive. Yeah, I mean
ultimately, no matter which way you want
to swing it, I think that adding
millions of years as the explanation is
a little bit too convenient. But
[clears throat] I think at the end of
the day you're still looking at the
complexity in nature that points to a
design of something that is is amazing.
And the the question of okay, how do we
Dawkins is, you know, famous for saying
that that it it has the illusion of
design to it, right? There's not not
actually a design to it. It's just the
illusion of design.
But I think, you know, if we actually
look at when
Darwin was writing, they thought the
smaller you got, the simpler it got.
And now we know that the smaller you
get, in fact, the more complex you get.
As in the more you zoom into the design
like the brain more you zoom into the
brain or Yeah, our understanding of
science has grown exponentially even
from Darwin's day. And there's an aspect
of like Darwinian evolution that is is
has moved on into what we would now call
like neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory.
And you look at individuals like I
mentioned Stephen Meyer before and he
even
has questioned some of these things
about the explanations that are working
as givens for evolutionary theory. I
still don't think it gets us back to,
okay, then why do we have purpose?
I've had so many founders speak to me
and say, why didn't this particular ad
that I ran on this platform work for me?
Maybe the copy wasn't good, the creative
wasn't strong, but usually the problem
is they're not having the right
conversation, because that ad never
reached the right person. And if you're
in B2B marketing, that is much of the
game. And this is where LinkedIn ads
solves that problem for you. Their
targeting is ridiculously specific. You
can target by job title, seniority,
company size, industry, and even
someone's skill set. And their network
includes over a billion professionals.
About 130 million of them are decision
makers. So, when you use LinkedIn ads,
you're putting your brand in front of
the right people. And LinkedIn ads also
drive the highest B2B return on ad spend
across all ad networks in my experience.
If you want to give them a try, head
over to linkedin.com/diary.
And when you spend $250 on your first
LinkedIn ads campaign, you'll get an
extra $250 credit from me for the next
one. That's linkedin.com/diary.
Terms and conditions apply.
Every time I've tried to improve
something in my life, like my
businesses, my health, my relationships,
I've noticed that the biggest shifts
have come from being better informed.
And when it comes to our health, most of
us know very, very little. So, when our
team was approached about partnering
with Function Health, it felt very much
aligned. Their team has developed a way
of giving you a full 360° view of your
health, many of the things that are
going on in your body in the form of
different tests. You do one blood draw
and it gives you access to over 160 lab
results, hormones, heart health,
inflammation, stress, toxins, the whole
picture. I use it and so have many of my
team members. You sign up and you
schedule your tests, and once you're
done, you get a little report like the
one I have here. I can see my in-range
results, my out-of-range results, and
there's a little AI function, too. So,
if I have any questions about my
out-of-range results, I can just go in
there and ask it any question I want.
And these tests are backed by doctors
and thousands of hours of research.
>> It's $365 for a yearly membership. Go to
functionhealth.com/doac
and use the code doac25
for $25 off your membership.
Where do you think we came from? Like
where do you think I came from or my
ancestors came from? Do you think they
were put on earth as humans? Do you
believe in the Adam and Eve story? Do
you think there was some kind of
evolution? And when did you think this
When do you think this happened? So, I
know that the world is at least 35 years
old.
Uh I don't think it's an answer that the
Bible is actually attempting to address
in terms of the age of the earth.
Billions of years old? I don't see any
reason not to because I don't think that
the creation story in Genesis chapter 1
is necessarily
an attempt to reveal the mechanisms of
how God did that exactly. Cuz the sort
of scientific consensus says that it's
roughly 4.5 billion years old.
The earth. Yeah. And microbes and
single-celled organisms are estimated to
have appeared 3.5 to 4 billion years ago
almost as soon as earth cooled enough to
have liquid water. Sure. Yeah, and and
I'm I'm fine with that actually. I don't
I don't think I have to adhere to neo-
neo-Darwinian evolution in order to
actually believe that the world is old.
I think I would adhere to an intelligent
design thesis.
But What does that mean? So, essentially
that the world around us is
intelligently designed not necessarily
in that it it came through processes of
evolution. Once again, I'm not a
scientist, right? I'm a historian. I I
genuinely do believe that there was a
historical Adam and Eve and that those
were the first people. Okay. Now, what
did they look like? I don't know.
I think they they probably lived a long,
long time ago and I don't know if the
breakdown of Genesis chapter 1 and the
like 7 days of creation are actually
attempting to articulate 7 24-hour days.
They could be. Yeah. I just don't think
that's the point. But you do believe
that humans were put here as humans.
>> Mhm. And do you believe that the other
animals were put here in the in some
kind of early form? Yes. And then you
also believe in adaptation. Yes. Of
those [clears throat] species. Fine.
Okay. Fine. And going back to like
talking about trying to explain these
things scientifically,
I always find like we can explore the
answers scientifically, but that's only
going to get us so far, especially when
we're discussing meaning and purpose
questions. So, let me give you a little
bit of a story that a friend of mine,
Glenn Scribner, likes to articulate in
this parable that he tells that he calls
Betty the Botanist. So, you have Betty
the Botanist and she's been looking at a
plant sample in her lab. She's been
spending all weekend looking at this
plant sample. She's been, you know,
investigating it and doing all of these
tests on it all weekend and Jerry the
lab assistant comes in on Monday.
And
Betty looks at Jerry and says, "Jerry,
thank you for the botanic botanical
specimen that you left me on the
weekend. Thank you for this botanical
specimen. I've been doing all of these
tests. I've been looking at the
components of it and the complexity of
the biology and there are
pharmacological implications that I've
extrapolated from its various biological
components and we can use these to cure
diseases. There's so many things. Thank
you so much for the botanical specimen."
And Jerry says,
"Betty,
it was February 14th
on the weekend.
That was a long stem rose.
Do you know what I left for you? Do you
know what the implication of
the botanical specimen,
as you're calling it, was for what I was
trying to communicate to you?
Now, did Betty the Botanist understand
the long stem rose? In one way, she
understood it more than most because she
had done all of the tests and run
through all of the different ways that
she could extrapolate what that thing
was.
But what
Jerry was trying to actually illustrate
was something that went beyond that. It
was a love gift.
He was trying to communicate something
that went beyond the simple biology and
and Betty could very simply say, "Well,
I couldn't get that from the data."
I I couldn't have extrapolated
the implications of it being a love
gift. And in that so far as it being a
parable, we can look at all of the
scientific explanations,
but there's something that goes beyond
the simple data in terms of meaning and
purpose and desire,
identity questions that go
far beyond that, right? Like we can look
I could tell you the different chemical
components that make up the page and the
ink and like the size of the paper and
its transparency and all of that.
I could say,
"You know, Steven, what is this?" And
you could go into all of this
explanation about how paper is made and
the pulp and how we extrapolated and
eventually put it together in the
binding and
and I could say, "Okay, yeah, but
this is a Bible.
This is meant to communicate something
to you.
And what is the explanation for this?
One explanation could be the chemical
and and you know, scientific components
that make up the Bible. Another
explanation could be this is a religious
text that's actually trying to
communicate something to you."
And so I think in the scientific data,
all of that is obviously important,
right?
Like there's this great quote by C.S.
Lewis where he says that men
were scientific because they expected
laws in nature and so they looked for
the legislator.
And you look you read individuals like
Francis Bacon who came up with the the
scientific method and they're inherently
religious, right? They almost articulate
what they're doing in their scientific
endeavor as an act of worship.
Because if the exploration of the
creative world points to a creator, then
that can be an act of understanding who
and why we're here.
In terms of the scientific questions,
I'm very interested in them, especially
as a non-scientist. They fascinate me.
But in terms of the meaning questions,
I think I would err on the side of
caution of attempting to be Betty the
Botanist. And sometimes I read
individuals like Dawkins, and I'm I'm
hearing Betty the Botanist extrapolate
and define the botanical specimen. I
think part of the reason why the new
atheist movement that I again was
captured by
was not sufficient is because, as you
say, it didn't
it didn't fill some kind of gap.
>> Mhm. And and much of the gap, I think,
for a lot of people is, okay, so if if I
believe in the science and all and that
argument and the atheist argument or I
believe in the Bible, I still need a an
answer to like,
yeah, but so what? Like, what's the
point of this? You know, even in the
example of evolution, I get it, but why
am I evolving? Mhm. Why why am I trying
to survive?
>> Yeah. A means to what end? Okay, I'm
trying to have more kids, but then why
are my kids trying to have more kids?
What's the point? Right.
>> just keep hitting this wall of like,
okay, but what's the point? What's the
point? Am I meant to do something? Is it
Is there a mission for me? Right.
>> And I think that question is one that I
think about uh sometimes, which is, no
matter what I believe, like, what is the
point? And I think that's why the Bible
is such
an amazing explanation for that because
in a world that tells you ultimately
that you're a product of time plus
matter plus chance, the Bible looks at
you, Stephen, and says, you're created
with meaning and purpose and intention.
You bear the image of God.
So, there's something that is actually
screaming from your biology
about who you are that goes beyond the
fact that you're not just a physical
specimen sitting in front of me. Right?
You have a mind
and that mind is
maybe your brain. We're not even sure
about that, right? So, [clears throat]
what makes Steven Steven? You're not not
your body.
And that's why, I mean, there's this
inherent conversation within
Christianity about the fact that our
hope is not a spiritual one. The end
result is the resurrection, right? The
reason why Jesus rose from the dead is
scripture calls him the first fruits.
We're all going to be resurrected.
There's going to be a new heaven and a
new earth and that's the promise of
Christianity. So, that's the point.
>> Yes. The point of this life, according
to the Bible, is that I get to go to
this place called heaven. No. So, it's
it's a both and. So, when when Jesus'
disciples ask him how to pray,
he says, you know, he gives them the
Lord's Prayer.
Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed
be thy name, thy kingdom come, thy will
be done on earth as it is in heaven. So,
it's not just about, you know, I'm going
to die and my spirit's going to go to
somewhere else and, you know, that's the
whole goal.
It's to bring heaven here
as well. What we do matters
because you're a human being, you're not
a human doing.
And so, what you do here and who you are
here actually has an implication. To to
who and what? To everything. You So,
we're put here
to be stewards of creation, of each
other,
to be examples of image bearers of God.
Like, your life has intrinsic meaning.
Internal meaning, yeah. Internal
meaning, more than just what you can
contribute.
Right? So, that would be extrinsic. Your
ability to give back to society, your
ability to contribute to the advancement
of
scientific, technological, you know,
fill in the gap. You have value that
goes beyond that, right? This is why we
fight for people
everywhere.
And that's I think why injustice,
something like injustice, bothers us so
much. And why evil bothers us so much.
Do you know the chimpanzee that has like
98% the same DNA as me? Yeah.
Do they have the same intrinsic meaning?
You know, even my dog, I'm like, does my
dog have that same intrinsic meaning?
And is my dog going to go to heaven? I
think scripture tells us what we need to
know, not always what we want to know.
There have been individuals throughout
church history who have articulated
that. I mean, St. Francis of Assisi was
big on animals going to heaven. Uh C.S.
Lewis was big on animals going to
heaven. Um in fact, when he wrote The
Last Battle, you know, the last series
in his Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe
books, uh there are animals in heaven. I
mean, if there's a new earth, I think
there are going to be animals. I don't
know if they're going to be the same
animals that existed on this side, but I
also I have no idea. But I think there's
something different.
Because I think you have a soul. And you
think my dog doesn't have a soul? I
don't know, but I don't think he has the
same kind of
spiritual component that you are endowed
with in the same way.
How do we know?
Like how do we how do I know that? You
know, these chimpanzees, they're pretty
smart. I was watching one touch some a
touchscreen the other day and solving
problems. And I was thinking, is it not
is it not like an element of, I don't
know, human arrogance to think that
these other creatures, like the big the
whales, they're so unbelievably smart,
they don't have a soul? They work
together in packs, they love, they have
kids, they seem to pursue things. Yeah.
I mean, I think that's a testimony to
kind of the general reflection of God's
good creation. At the same time, we
describe when you're just repeating
something, you're we we use adjectives
like aping. Uh we understand that
there's an aspect of like, if you train
the monkey to push the button, he's
going to push the button. If you uh give
the elephant the paintbrush and kind of,
you know,
convince it to paint itself, it's going
to paint itself. But if you if you can
train the elephant to paint the Mona
Lisa, is it really going to understand
what it's painted in the same way that
Michelangelo understands it?
Sure, Da Vinci. Who painted the Mona
Lisa? Now I'm getting myself into
trouble.
Whoever painted the Mona Lisa, Da Vinci,
there's something about the value and
what is being put in there
that is different. So, do you believe
that me and you are born with a
particular mission and meaning on this
planet? Or do you think we have to go
and find that particular meaning or
mission? Hm, that's a great question.
Uh, I think
the chief end of man
is
to know God
and glorify him.
>> [clears throat]
>> In so far as Jesus is asked, "What is
the greatest commandment in the law?"
And Jesus uses two examples. He quotes
from, you know, two different passages
in the Old Testament, and he says, "Love
the Lord your God with all of your
heart, soul, mind, and strength.
And love your neighbor as yourself."
I mean, ultimately, I think we always
want some sort of a grandiose
purpose.
And we want the calling of like Moses.
We want to go out in the bush or we want
to go out in the desert and find a
burning bush and have that calling on
our lives.
I don't think that's wrong, but I think
ultimately, our purpose is to live a
faithful life to who we were created to
be in being image bearers of God and
being faithful in
loving God with everything that we have.
So, that like the Jewish phraseology of
loving God with all of our heart, soul,
mind, and strength, it's kind of a
stand-in for your entire being.
Yeah, with everything you have,
love God with that by what you do, by
what you say, by how you live. Like, do
unto others as you would have them do
unto you, right? That's the golden rule.
But, if you look at other religions,
it's almost always framed in the
negative.
Don't do unto others what you don't want
done to you.
So, there's a difference between not
punching someone in the face
and building someone a hospital.
So, the meaning of our lives is to love
our creator at the most fundamental
level. At the basic level.
And to understand how that expresses in
everyday life. So, Martin Luther, the
German Protestant reformer,
he said the the faithful Christian
um shoemaker
doesn't glorify God by sewing little
crosses into the shoes, but by making
really good quality shoes.
And so,
there's an aspect of God has endowed us,
right? We're created in God's image. We
create as an aspect of an outpouring of
that which we are created to be, and we
we do that well. You know, the proverb
says, "Whatever your hand um finds to
do, do it with all its might."
And the idea is, you know, you have the
capability to do incredible things.
And the reason why you have that
capability is because you bear the image
of a creator, who, like I said before,
lives in a set of living, loving
relationships.
And so, that God actually didn't need to
create you, me, anything.
Right? So, God is not better off or
worse off if we love him or worship him
or believe in him. He He really isn't.
He has existed in a
in love,
in relationship.
And yet, the story of the Bible is that
God chooses to create out of an
outpouring of his love, knowing even
that we are going to rebel against him,
we are going to sin, right? Do wrong
against how he has actually created us
to be, and still desires to have that
relationship. And if we do sin, Mhm. if
I sin in my life, do I go to hell?
You You don't I mean, the answer that is
yes and no, but the Am I going to hell?
Are you going to hell? Steven Bartlett
Is Steven Bartlett going to hell? This
is the clip that they're going to put
online, right? West says Steven Bartlett
is going to hell. I mean, here's the
thing. Everybody is going to hell.
Everybody. Here's how I've said it in
the past, right? The Bible is very
clear. All good people go to heaven.
But Jesus said, "No one is good but God
alone." So, if all good people go to
heaven
>> [clears throat]
>> and no one is good but God alone
only God is in heaven.
So, do you believe that there is a a
hell and a heaven as we sort of
typically understand it? A place that is
great to go to after we die and a place
that is very hot.
Place that is very hot. I mean, there's
a lot of imagery of um like fire and
weeping and gnashing of teeth. I think a
lot of that uh is kind of reflective and
allegorical more than it's like a a
physical tangible thing that is, you
know, most of our perceptions of hell
are largely shaped by
depictions in the Middle Ages of Dante's
Inferno and that kind of thing, right? I
think it's more so that
you will experience the full weight of
the separation from God's goodness. Not
necessarily a separation from God cuz I
think
God's punishment and his wrath are going
to be felt there.
But, if we're talking about like a good
place, bad place
in the very simplest of terms, yes.
But, heaven isn't full of good people.
Heaven is full of people who understand
they are not good enough.
And so, I mentioned that like justice
mercy thing. Justice is fulfilled on
Jesus.
So, because justice is fulfilled, now
mercy, which is not getting what we do
deserve, is able to be given to those
who put their trust in Jesus.
So, if I don't believe in Jesus, I don't
believe in the Bible, but I live a
good life. I'm nice to people,
charitable, try and be kind wherever I
can be. Yeah. And I don't believe in
God. Am I going to hell or heaven as it
relates to the scriptures?
Well, I don't think if you're living
your life
rejecting God, God is not going to force
you into his presence.
So,
I'm not going to go into heaven I'm not
going to go to heaven then.
No.
Where am I going to go?
Well, you would you would go to hell.
So,
So, if I don't believe in the Bible,
Jesus, and God, then I'm going to go to
hell?
Yes, in so far as if
heaven is a place for those who have
submitted their lives to Jesus, who are
living the identity of what they're
created to be, and said, "Your will be
done, God." Yeah. Hell is a place where
God says, "You rejected me.
Your will be done. I'm going to I'm
going to give you what you want."
In that, I'm going to remove my grace
and mercy from you, and you are going to
experience
truly what you desire in
being
separated from me and my goodness and my
grace. And what is that place like
according to the scripture? Give me a
Give me a depiction in my mind of what
hell might be like for me. Yeah, I mean,
it's not a good place. It's not a nice
place. It's a place that no matter
what's going on,
if you are a believer, if you if you
truly understand what this book is
saying, seriously, I think it should
motivate you to want to desire, Stephen
Bartlett, I desire you to have a
personal relationship with your creator.
Because I don't want you to experience
whatever hell is. I I I desire for you
to be in perfect
relationship with your God. Not
necessarily because I want you to get a
get out of hell free card, but because I
actually think that
in living how God created you to be, in
accepting
living out the image that you bear,
you're going to find the meaning and
purpose
that you ultimately have expressed that
you have this innate desire for.
I think it's about I think it's I think
it's according to Gallup it's 18% of
Americans don't believe in a God. Mhm.
Now, to get into heaven, Mhm.
>> [clears throat]
>> as it's described in the Bible,
do I just need to say I believe in God,
or do I have to have some sort of active
commitment and evidence in my life that
I am
living my life in line with God's
you know, teachings? I think ultimately
salvation, right? Salvation implies
you're being saved from something. Mhm.
>> [clears throat]
>> Right? The good news is good news
because the bad news is bad. And the bad
news is very bad. I was looking at what
the Bible says about hell. And in
Revelations it says it's a lake of fire.
In Mark it says it's unquenchable fire.
>> Mhm. In Matthew it says eternal fire
prepared for the devil and his angels.
Yeah.
Uh in Matthew again it says
outer darkness where there will be
weeping and gnashing of teeth.
>> Yes. They will be shut out from the
presence of the Lord, weeping and
gnashing of teeth, and torment, eternal
punishment, the smoke of their torment
rises forever.
This is not a place I want to go. No.
No. And I think I think the urgency of
the Christian message is the bad news is
really bad. And that's what makes the
good news so good.
Jesus
has taken on that hell on your behalf.
And it goes beyond simply a believing.
Right? It's not just about saying the
right words. It's not just a an
incantation.
You are not saved by what you do, right?
You're saved by works, it's just
Jesus's. Jesus lived the life you
couldn't and made the sacrifice you
can't
on your behalf in order to establish
that right relationship with God. So,
that's where grace comes into the
picture. Justice is getting what you do
deserve.
Mercy is not getting what you do
deserve. Grace is getting what you don't
deserve.
So,
in so far as Christ on the cross
fulfills the justice of his holy law,
mercy is enacted [clears throat] and you
don't get that punishment. By putting
your faith and trust in Jesus as your
lord and your savior, as your creator,
you don't get that punishment.
And now, you get grace, which is not
what you're owed, but you are adopted as
a child of the most high.
So,
of the 18% of people that say they don't
believe in a god, they are almost
certainly going to hell according to
scripture. Well, so James, the book of
James in the Bible, who's actually the
the
half-brother of Jesus,
he writes a book and he says,
"You believe that God is one."
He says, "Great.
So do the demons."
So, the point is, like if anybody knows
and believes in God,
it's the demons. It's a Satan. All
right? So, so what's the difference
there? The difference is there is that
there's a relational component of
when we and the in sort of the
Christianese Christian terminology, when
I say Jesus is your lord and your
savior, what I mean is that he has
rescued you, has saved you from the
penalties of sin and death.
But then the lord component is that now
you have submitted your life to him in
obedience and repentance. Now,
repentance is kind of another religious
word that maybe is not always fully
understood. Repentance is the changing
and understanding of the way you live.
You understand
that the things that you used to do
that are wrong
are not the things that are either what
you should do or are going to give you
fulfillment.
And you stop doing those not because God
is a cosmic killjoy and he doesn't want
you to feel the goodness of those
things, but because those things are
actually harmful to you.
They are hurting you
and they are creating a separation of
the relationship between you and God.
There's going to be a very small number
of people that actually live in such a
way that are fully repented and have
accepted the Lord as their savior,
right? There's only rough I think it's
30% of people actually go to church
somewhat frequently and uh
the other sort of 56% seldom or never
go. They're not really really active in
their belief. They probably haven't
repented.
So, it would appear to me that a very
small percentage of people are actually
qualifying for the kingdom of heaven as
it's described in the Bible. The miracle
of this is that your salvation is
received, not achieved. And so, once
again, it's it's not about like brownie
points. It's not about checking off, you
know, oh I read the Bible as many times,
I went to church as many times, I you
know, I didn't lie, I didn't steal, I
didn't cheat, I didn't um
because we still exist in this beautiful
yet broken world and because we live in
a world that is marred by the brokenness
of the fall
of our first parents, Adam and Eve,
making that decision to rebel against
God and because of that, now the the
creation itself has been affected.
It's not about trying to earn my way
into heaven. So,
is it a very small percentage of people
who are actually repenting? Maybe, but
what of those
what of that percentage is attempt who
fully understands?
It's interesting the word that we
translate as repentance is the Greek
word metanoia. It means change your
mind. And so there's an aspect of it's
not just about the doing.
It's an understanding. It's a component
of I don't want to do these things. Even
when I do them
I I don't I don't want to lie anymore.
Like I see the harm that causes and the
brokenness that it creates.
And so even if I'm still
breaking the law of God.
Right? So in the book of James that I
mentioned, uh there's this part where
James says if you break one
rule in the law, you've it's as if
you've broken them all.
And I've sometimes used this
illustration of it's like you're hanging
off a cliff
uh on a linked chain.
Right? If you cut any of those links,
you're going to
fall, right? It's no longer holding you.
That's kind of the the thinking that I
think James is getting at when he writes
that. So you referenced the original sin
which is Adam and Eve taking the apple.
Mhm. Or fruit. Or the fruit, whatever
might be. God made Adam and Eve. He's
omnipotent, omniscient. He when he made
them he knew they were going to take the
apple. Mhm. But he made them anyway.
Mhm.
So that sounds like a setup.
Uh you could read it as a setup. I think
more so what's going on I think what
what's what's the
what strikes me as more amazing is that
God did it anyways and he didn't hit the
restart button.
And then he knew that when he made them
that it would result in this thousands
and thousands of year of years of people
worshipping him. Mhm.
I think you'd think I'm a bad person.
Like if I made something knowing that it
was going to make a mistake and that
mistake would result in people
worshipping me for the next forever.
Sure. You you'd say I did this to get
you to worship me. Sure. And to
basically
make you live in guilt.
Mhm. That I
I mean
>> Like it logically that's like holds, no?
what's wrong with that logically? Well,
I think I think you could read it like
that. Uh I think ultimately then this
might sound like a cop out to some, but
maybe God knows something we don't.
>> Yeah, maybe, yeah. And uh that he has
reasons for allowing evil that maybe we
don't understand and can't comprehend
because he is God.
There's an interesting thing in both the
book of Revelation and in one of the
letters of Peter where it basically says
from uh before the foundation of the
world was laid
the lamb was slain. So, Jesus
was crucified. That the cross, that
whole
bringing back people in unity and
relationship with God via this act of
the only innocent person who ever lived
being murdered on a cross, right? A
great act of evil accomplishing a lot of
good. Once again, not the way I would do
it if I was God, right? There's all
sorts of things that we think, you know,
if I was God, I'd do it like this. Um
thank goodness I'm not God. Uh I would
get a whole lot of things wrong. You
wouldn't want to live in that world.
But, I think what's interesting is that
the cross was not a contingency plan.
The cross was the plan all the way
along.
And so, God is glorified in that act.
And I think part of it is what I was
saying before. If God is
love, if love is the greatest ethic and
the greatest ethic is expressed in
the greatest example, which is
self-sacrifice, then God is actually
communicating the greatest ethic in the
greatest possible way in what we see in
the gospel message of how he
accomplishes
the unification with his people for the
goodness and glory of who he is. And do
I understand all of the complexities and
mysteries that go in conjunction with
that? No.
But, I'm convinced beyond a reasonable
doubt that the historical and the
philosophical case for
the existence of God and then that God
specifically being the God that is
articulated in the Bible is true.
And on that basis
I
am willing to submit my life because of
both the evidence and because I've
actually seen
my own life change radically. So your
your friend, right? You say like you've
seen an actual
experiential change in that person's
life.
>> Oh yeah. Now my So my friend um I talked
about him anonymously on here, but he
then
clipped it, posted on his Instagram, and
said, "Stephen's talking about me."
Okay. And he's he's like doing some
interviews and stuff now. So I feel more
comfortable talking about him more
publicly. But yeah, my friend who was
going through a little bit of a crisis
of meaning in his life, was living in
Dubai in this penthouse apartment,
single, kind of alone, remote working.
Mhm. All these kinds of, you know, very
individualistic lifestyle, successful in
a material sense. All of a sudden turned
to Christianity, flew to America, got
baptized, and is now
Christian. Yeah. And would I say he is
happier than before? 100%. Would I say I
am very glad he became Christian? 100%.
Would I say that I believe his future's
going to be better because he's now
Christian? 100%. That's a lot of 100%.
>> No, but it's true. It's objectively
true. Like I even speak to Will, we've
been friends for decades, and all of us
feel the same way.
>> Right. And we don't even have to agree
with what he believes to think,
actually, he's it's helped him. Well, in
the [clears throat] that, I don't think
that the I think there's an objectivity
to the actual evidence that I evaluate
in terms of the historical reliability
of the Bible and the philosophical
explanations for meaning and purpose and
morality, how we ground those, the
scientific data of a universe that looks
like it's fine-tuned and has
intelligence designed into it. But the
subjectivity of how I understand my life
and have seen it change radically.
And what you what you see in your friend
is not inconsequential. No, it's not.
And it it it testifies to something. It
testifies to a hope
that even
in scripture, in 1 Peter 3,
Peter, writing to the dispersed church
in the ancient world,
has this
in the context of persecution, says,
"But in your hearts revere Christ as
Lord. Always be prepared to give an
answer to everyone who asks you to give
a reason for the hope that you have. But
do so with gentleness and respect,
keeping a clear conscience, so that
those who speak maliciously against your
good behavior in Christ will be ashamed
of their slander."
And there's this implication that always
be prepared to give an answer to
everyone who asks you for an argument
for the existence of God. No, that's not
what he says. He says to give the reason
for the hope that you have.
Your friend is communicating a hope that
you took notice of.
And I think
that is literally the word to give an
answer that we translate as to give an
answer, a defense, or reason in many
English Bible translations, is the Greek
word apologia.
To give an apologetic, to give a
defense.
And scripturally,
scripture does
call us to love the Lord our God with
all of our mind. And I think there's an
aspect of God, if I my friend Tim
Barnett works for actually Stand to
Reason, which is Greg Koukl's
organization. You had Greg Greg in in in
your panel discussion recently. My
friend Tim says, "If you want to know
the mind of God, you better start by
using your own."
And so in that way, I think we can
worship God through that. You know,
there's a component of God
has endowed us with intelligence, and we
can use that to speak to the things that
he has actually
created and the evidence for that.
But at the exact same time,
the hope of the life changed,
of
to use, you know, Jesus' his language in
John 3, being born again.
I think also communicates something that
is genuinely profound. I
agree. And I
I would have said that maybe if he had
converted to pretty much any of the
major religions, he would have
experienced the same transformative
upside.
>> Mhm. When you look at people that do
convert to other religions and outside
of Christianity, they do experience a
greater sense of meaning and community
and all the things that come with it
that gives them that sense of belonging
and maybe calms their anxieties and
their worries and their nihilism to a
point where they can live a bit more of
a content life.
So, is it is that evidence of
Christianity or is that just evidence
that we're all in search of meaning in a
world that's increasingly nihilistic and
individualistic and says that there's
nothing other than as you say like time,
space, matter, etc.
>> No, that's a great point. I don't think
it's arbitrary. I think, you know,
there's an aspect of religiosity that is
always going to be a net positive for
society, no matter what that religion
is, cuz I think it's going to give an
aspect and identity to people. At the
exact same time, I don't think it's just
the subjective
point of view, right? This is why I
think it's very dangerous when I go out,
so I used to work for a a minister
organization that worked on university
campuses.
And we would go and we would talk with
students and I
too many times to count would hear a
student ask another student, "Why do you
believe in Christianity?" And they would
then proceed in articulating how they
became a Christian. Well, that's not the
answer, right? That's not the actually
the question they asked. They asked,
"Why do you believe it's true?" And you
answered with how you kind of got into
this group.
If they had ran into a Buddhist, they
said, "Why do you believe Buddhism is
true?" And you say, you know, well, I
just met these really great people on
campus and they invited me over for, you
know, karma discussions and pizza and
and it's radically changed my life and
I, you know, follow the noble truths and
the the the path of the Buddha and it
it's changed my life.
When you give them that story, now I
don't I don't want people to hear me
saying that giving your testimony is not
a good thing to do.
I just think there's a time and a place
where
it could have been any situation. It
sounds convenient.
You could have run into a Muslim or a
Mormon or a Buddhist or a Hindu and just
stumbled into those conversations.
And that's where I think answering why I
believe it's true
is more than just
that. It's no less than that.
But it's more than that.
Because I believe that the multi-valent
argument for the truthfulness with the
capital T of Christianity
has
historical backing, and a philosophical
backing, and scientific backing, and
psychological backing, and all of those
things. And I bet your friend would say
it, too. Oh, yeah. I bet he would.
>> Yeah. And in one sense, my goal is to
adhere to truth with the capital T even
above my allegiance to Jesus.
Now, I believe Jesus is the truth with
the capital T, so I I don't think that
there's a conflict of interest there.
But
I
I want to follow what's true
because even if it's a convenient lie,
it's still a lie and I don't want to
live my life for a lie.
New Year always has a strange energy to
it because people start talking about
their goals for a start and new habits,
but the reality is that most people
carry the same ideas they had last year
into the new year. I'm guilty of that,
too. And they still don't end up doing
anything with them. And I get why.
Starting something new, especially if
it's a business or a project, is
overwhelming. Before you start, you're
looking for the perfect moment and to be
the perfect version of yourself. When
really, what matters most is taking that
first step. If you had an idea for a
while, a product, a store, something
you've been sitting on, our sponsor
Shopify makes it easy to get started
because you can build your store, sell
on socials, take payments, use AI tools,
and manage everything all in one place.
So, if 2026 is the year you finally back
yourself, go to shopify.co.uk/bartlett
and start selling. And you can sign up
for a $1 per month trial right now, too.
Just go to shopify.co.uk/bartlett.
I promise you, you don't need to have it
all figured out. You just need to start.
This is something that I've made for
you. I realized that the Diary of a CEO
audience are strivers, whether it's in
business or health. We all have big
goals that we want to accomplish. And
one of the things I've learned is that
when you aim at the big, big, big goal,
it can feel incredibly psychologically
uncomfortable, because it's kind of like
being stood at the foot of Mount Everest
and looking upwards. The way to
accomplish your goals is by breaking
them down into tiny, small steps. And we
call this in our team the 1%. And
actually, this philosophy is highly
responsible for much of our success
here. So, what we've done so that you at
home can accomplish any big goal that
you have is we've made these 1% Diaries.
And we released these last year, and
they all sold out. So, I asked my team
over and over again to bring the Diaries
back, but also to introduce some new
colors and to make some minor tweaks to
the Diaries. So, now we have a better
range for you. So, if you have a big
goal in mind and you need a framework
and a process and some motivation, then
I highly recommend you get one of these
Diaries before they all sell out once
again. And you can get yours at the
diary.com.
And if you want the link, the link is in
the description below.
On that point, one of the things that
really convinced me when I was a
when I was going through my little
atheism phase was this this geography
argument, which I'm sure you've heard a
million times. If I'd been born in Saudi
Arabia, I'd probably be a Muslim. If I'd
been born in India, I'd probably be
Hindu. So, it seems like the religion
you believe you depends on where you
were born,
not on necessarily what is true. And
therefore, if we go back to this point
about hell, I remember thinking at like
19 years old, oh my god, like actually
where you're born is determining whether
you go to this fiery eternal suffering
or not. And that's not fair, so this
must all be not true. Yeah. I mean, I
was born in Pakistan.
So, I was born in the majority Muslim
country and I'm not a Muslim. And you
could argue my parents weren't Muslims,
but I know tons of people who were. My
colleague Steve, who is our Alberta
director at Apologetics Canada, he was
born in Korea and went to a school
setting that was Buddhist. But but there
I mean, the the numbers are the numbers,
like you're like 95% I don't know what
the numbers are, but I know it's over
90% likely to be the religion of that
territory if you take a on a religion at
all and just by where you were born. And
that doesn't fit I remember thinking
very clearly at 19 years old, this
doesn't feel fair Sure. as a way to
determine who gets into hell or heaven,
which is like my parents and where they
they conceived me or whatever. Sure. I
mean, in one sense you don't want fair
because fair is you going to hell.
Um and the the gospel message is not
fair, right? So so, the actual gospel
message is not about fairness
because fairness is
I get the just penalty for what I do,
right? And that's where the whole
concept of mercy and grace are so
they're so central to the Christian
message. Is
Buddhism and Hinduism are based on
fairness.
Solely based on fairness, right? The
cycle of samsara of life, death, birth,
and rebirth, the karmic cycles, that's
fair.
Uh in one sense, what God does when he
intervenes in humanity, when he
incarnates, becomes flesh, steps into
humanity, and actually experiences pain
and hurt and suffering and death in a
way that makes the God of the Bible
unique and actually experiential to what
you and I go through when we have those
struggles and doubts.
He then
takes on the punishment that we deserve
and the fairness
is not actually what is then given.
Because the fairness is
Westhoff
getting what he actually deserves for
the weight and the penalty of his cosmic
rebellion
in choosing a life that is is against
and away from God. I'm unclear. Okay. So
if I was if I had Moroccan parents, my
probability of being Muslim is like 99%.
Sure. Um and if I was born in Morocco
that would that would kind of set me up
to go to hell theoretically. Yes,
insofar as you're either you're taking
on your sin Yeah. and that's the
punishment or Christ is taking on your
sin.
And then you are then
covered in
his intercession. Okay. But it's
[clears throat] not about believing or
not believing. Yeah, which you explained
earlier. Yeah.
>> Which is which is useful for me cuz
that that gave me a new understanding
that I didn't have previously. Um the
other thing I think a lot about I had
thought a lot about was prayer. So this
was really compelling to me when I was
younger which was you know, I would I
would hear these stories of horrific
things that had happened in the world.
If you think about what happened in Nazi
Germany and I'd hear that the people
there were all you know very religious
and praying and it didn't seem to change
the odds of their fate. And when you
look at hospital stats of Christians
versus non-Christians generally praying
doesn't seem to be impacting outcome.
Huh. So therefore I concluded as like a
19-year-old that maybe prayer doesn't
work.
And why are people doing it when it
doesn't seem to historically have
worked? What is the
What is your perspective? Does praying
work? If if my child is sick and I start
praying is is that going to help? I mean
it also kind of begs the question of
what we think prayer is.
Is prayer
incantations to placate God? What does
that mean? Like, is God a genie? Right?
So, I say the right prayers and he gives
me what I what I want. Yeah. Um
Now, there are some religious systems
that that is kind of what prayer is. Is
is, you know, that that's all the
agricultural deities of the ancient near
east. Like, you you say the right things
and you give the right sacrifices and
the the the hope is that, you know, the
gods would accept that and then they
then,
you know, in the reciprocal nature of
that, they give you good crops. I think
prayer in Christianity is a give and
take in that it's a relational thing.
It's God desiring
to have communication with you. If you
read the Psalms, a lot of which are
prayers,
uh even, you know, I mentioned the
lament Psalms. Like, it's David or
whoever, the psalmist, coming to God and
saying, "I don't get it. I'm hurting.
I'm broken. I'm alone. I don't feel
you."
There's an aspect of the relational
component of prayer.
Now, prayer is not just that, right?
Prayer is,
you know, asking is is supplications is
is
committing your desires to God because
you believe that God can actually work
in the universe and do things. And
that's kind of what the Bible the Bible
says. It says, "Pour out your hearts to
him. Call him and and come to me and I
will answer you." In Jeremiah.
[clears throat]
And it also says, "Ask and it will be
given to you." In Matthew. Yeah, seek
and you will find. Knock and the door
will be opened unto you. I mean, part of
those is that the the There's a little
bit of a trickiness in quote mining
because the context could mean prayer,
the context could mean, you know, the
the salvific act of God. You know, uh
knock and the door shall be opened unto
you. Like, if you if you're actually
seeking God and you're doing that with
an open heart and an open mind, God is
going to say, you know, "Yes, I'm I'm
entering into your life. I'm doing I'm
revealing myself to you. Now, God can
answer yes, God can answer no, and God
can answer wait.
Those are all answers to prayer. Do you
think God answers prayers? Yes.
And is there a certain type of prayer he
might answer? You know, cuz if I lose my
keys, I'll please you know, help me find
my keys.
I assume he might not answer that one.
But is there a certain type of prayer
you think God answers? I don't think
it's I don't think it's a magical
formula.
>> Okay. I think you know, the thing that
we see within Christianity is that is
that
prayer is
the a relational aspect. Like there are
So, when when the disciples I mentioned
earlier, they asked Jesus, how should we
pray? And he gives the Lord's Prayer. In
some ways, that's less of a
prescription, you know, say these words
in the right way. Because even Jesus
says, you know, don't babble like the
pagans do.
Um but there's an aspect of
Our Father who art in heaven, like a
recognition of who God is.
Holy be your name. Right? Your kingdom
come. Your will be done on earth as it
is in heaven as it is in heaven. Give us
this day our daily bread. Right? There's
a you know,
give us the provision that we need. Give
us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our our trespasses, our
sins, as we forgive those who sin
against us. That's an interesting one.
Cuz we're asking God to forgive us like
we forgive others, so which can be
dangerous sometimes, right? Maybe I
don't want to pray that all the time.
For yours is the kingdom, the power, and
the glory forever and ever. Amen. So, in
some ways, is that God telling us is
that Jesus telling us how to pray
exactly?
I don't think that's not a part of it,
but I also think that you know, there's
an aspect of it. Recognize who God is.
Recognize who you are.
Uh you know, do ask for provision. Do
ask for things that you need and you
even that you want. And
you know, recognize that we want this
reality as earth on earth as it is in
heaven. You know, there's components of
what Jesus is saying in that go beyond
simply like a rote prayer.
In some kind of incantation or
you know, list of you say the the right
things in the right way and you know,
then God is going to that that's what
ancient Greco-Roman paganism was like.
And prayer, even if you aren't
religious, has a
basis in neuroscience that says it's
really good for our well-being.
Neuroscience research shows that prayer
activates brain networks for attention,
emotional regulation, and social
connection while reducing stress. And
when they do brain ECG scans, they find
people are more calm and focused when
they're in states of prayer, and they
have greater resilience over time. Which
is I mean, reason enough to have some
form of active prayer
regardless of that.
I I'm really interested in how you think
about everything that's going on with
technology at the moment.
We're living in a very interesting
times. It's kind of like we're trying to
summon the gods ourselves. We're We're
creating this form of intelligence that
you know, people are developing a
relationship with and are speaking to
every day, and we've made it on silicon
chips and using these things called
GPUs, and it's called artificial
intelligence. Are you concerned
by the direction of travel in this
direction
that we're now seeking guidance and
comfort and
all of these things from
AI instead of this book in front of us?
I [clears throat] think there's aspects
where I have concerns. I mean, my my
colleagues
Andy Saeger and Steve Kim
are are more invested in these questions
I think that than I am. My my
colleague Andy, he did his PhD at
Aberdeen in the question of
philosophical anthropology. What does it
mean to be human? And he he investigated
a lot into the questions of things like
AI, and my colleague Steve is kind of
looking into things that relate to
transhumanism. So, I mean, these are
these are relevant questions to who we
are. I'm not convinced that the
intelligence part of AI outweighs the
artificial.
I don't see AI thinking.
I see there being an aspect of the
coding
that AI will regurgitate, but I don't
I'm not convinced that AI will ever say
become conscious. I think it will fake
the Turing test in that it will
kind of attempt to convince us that it
is cognizant cognizant of its own
existence, but I don't I don't know if
that's actually possible. And I think
there's something about the innateness
of
of consciousness
that we don't really know.
Right? We don't really know what
consciousness is.
There's all sorts of weird explanations
of
why like is your brain
your you you are? Not really, right?
It's not not. We don't really have I
think entirely sufficient answers to
these questions, but at the exact same
time, I think it makes sense that if we
are created in God's image, there's an
aspect of we want to create in our
image. And there's going to be that
outpouring of the creation of something
new and amazing and advancing in our
understanding and knowledge. This is
kind of sets people up for this whole
simulation theory argument where they
say that if you imagine any rate of
improvement on our current reality,
people are [clears throat] already
making virtual reality worlds. If you
you can go on so many different programs
now and type in I want to go to
the top of Mount Everest and there's a
village there and then you can
experience that in three dimensions. You
can put on a headset and go to the top
of Mount Everest and there's this
rendered village there. If you imagine
any rate of improvement, even 1% a year
in this technology,
eventually, whether it's in 500 years or
10,000 years, you get to a point where
it's almost indistinguishable from this
experience that me and you are having
today in the real world. And so the
simulation theory posits that, again,
you just think about how long
technology's been here. It's like 50
years ago we didn't have computers like
this. We didn't even have like the
iPhone or phones. That's just 50 years.
>> Yeah. Imagine billions of years and a
rate of improvement, you get to
something indistinguishable from this.
And it's conceivable that me and with
computers will run simulations. We'll
make things like The Sims and video
games and GTA 6, whatever that's taking
forever.
And with an improvement of technology at
any rate, those worlds will feel real
theoretically to the characters within
them. Mhm.
So simulation theory posits that
actually this is what our lives are.
There was a a civilization at some point
in the cosmic universe that got to that
point of technological sophistication.
They ran a bunch of different
simulations on a computer or whatever
that technology was, and this is one
such world we're living in right now.
Mhm. And that is actually our god. It
could be some four-year-old alien that
had a laptop Right.
10 gazillion years ago. And the Big Bang
was the day that he started the
simulation. Yeah. Almost like it was
intelligently designed, right?
>> Yeah, like actually this is like this is
I
I think there probably is some kind of
god. I just don't know what what it is.
Sure. [laughter] So I don't know whether
it's the one in in the book that you
have in front of me here, whether it's
the one that they believe in the Muslim
religion, or whether it's like a
four-year-old kid on his laptop that was
messing around in a technologically
sophisticated universe 10 billion years
ago. Right. But
I think there's something bigger than I
am. Right. And I think, you know, the
the simulation theory I don't think
really solves the issue because it just
kind of punts the can down the road in
that
it still
avoids the question of
what what is that? How did we get here?
And
what is the ultimate explanation for
everything? So, probabilistically is in
the world around us in what we see with
like our relational characteristics and
everything, is it possible that we live
in a simulation? I think it yes, it is.
I think probabilistically though
with how the description of creation and
the human condition and what we see
within history, I think personally the
God of the Bible is the most reasonable
explanation. Especially when we're
comparing it to other religious
worldviews. I think the simulation
theory is an interesting one or you
know, the string theory, multiple
universes. I just think that those are
almost like we're walking around the
question. We're circling around the
question and it's not actually
answering.
We still need a God. Yeah, and then you
know, even in the example I gave of the
4-year-old messing around in his laptop
10 billion years ago in a
technologically advanced civilization, I
then my brain a few seconds later asked,
well, what was the point of his life?
Yeah.
And who created him?
And I could say the same about God, I
guess. Like the God of the Christian
Bible. Like who why who is this God?
Like who created this God? Did someone
create this God or has this just has he
always been there? Right. I mean,
philosophically it's a category error
because all things that are have a
beginning have a creator. And
philosophically the God of the Bible is
an entity that ontologically didn't have
a beginning. So,
if we're talking about an unmoved mover,
right? In the kind of Aristotelian
categories of of philosophy,
God didn't have a creator because God is
the author of creation. Okay.
It's kind of like asking what does blue
smell like? And God I should think of it
like a
you know, in the Bible in these well,
not in the Bible, but
in depictions of God it's like a a with
a beard. Yeah. No. Or it's like some
like mystical force that's kind of like
a a white light.
>> Right. No, I I think I mean those are
attempts probably inadequately to
express aspects of how we would visually
communicate who God is. I think that
probably misses the mark more than it
actually gets at what, you know, what
and who God is. I don't know if there's
a there's a proper way that could give a
physical
attribution description of God other
than Jesus
who is God incarnate, right? Could you
think of a
a more powerful, a more amazing example
of of a God than one who actually enters
into his creation?
I don't know. My fiance says that God is
love. Yeah. She says that a lot. My
fiance tends to be right as well. Nice.
>> So, I tend to in the first time she says
something that I don't believe, I tend
to assume it's not true for a while.
Yeah. But then it tends to be proven to
be true within a year. So, when she said
to me that God is love, I really thought
deeply about it. I thought maybe she's
right. Maybe love is God. I mean, that's
from the Bible. God is love. The thing
grammatically that's interesting about
that when John writes that in his
epistle is grammatically in the Greek
it's phrased in a way that God is love,
but love is not God.
Right? So, you can't deify the
the what love is.
When I, you know, when you love your
fiance, that isn't God. That's the an
inefficient
description of what we know God to be.
So, God is love, but love is not God.
And in that sense, going back to what I
was saying instead of few times now, you
know,
what what the Bible is saying when it
says God is love is that that is the
ultimate character
of who God is. In that love is this
highest value.
It is that which we,
you know, hold as the example ethic of
what we want. We want to be loved.
Right? To be loved
and not known
is
very insufficient.
And to be known, but not loved
is what we all fear.
But I think what we find in the Bible is
a God who both loves and knows us.
And I think that's where the God who is
love, who creates us and calls us to
love him with all of our soul, all of
our mind, all of our strength,
that properly kind of fulfills what I
think we mean when we say God is love.
There is a a deep crisis of meaning in
the world, especially in, you know, the
Western world. Three in five American
adults between 18 and 25 years old said
that their life lacked meaning and
purpose with 50% of the same group
saying that poor mental health was
linked to not knowing what to do with my
life. Hm.
>> [clears throat]
>> And a lack of purpose is significantly
associated with many of the mental
health illnesses like depression and
anxiety. And as of April 2025, the
overall prevalence of depression in US
teenagers and adults has increased by
60%
over the last decade according to the
CDC. And tragically, globally more than
almost a million people die due to
suicide every year. And it's the third
leading cause of death among 15 to
29-year-olds according to the World
Health Organization.
What are we getting wrong?
I think we're looking for our purpose
and our meaning in things that are
ultimately not going to
give the value that those things
actually require.
So, it's not a matter of
if we worship, it's a matter of what we
worship.
And worship, if worship is,
you you giving our all to something.
I think
there's a lot of things within society
that are going to tell us
that our identity is going to be
fulfilled in money
or it's going to be fulfilled in
relationships or accolades or all of
these aspects are ultimately going to
fall short in giving us actual purpose
and meaning. And if they're not grounded
in actually giving us value.
>> Right, your friend is a as far as I
understand is a good example of that,
right? You know, we can achieve all of
these things. You hear athletes and
actors and
famous people talk about all the wealth,
all the like celebrity status they could
possibly desire and could be in
completely empty.
Be completely
fulfilled-less.
And I think
that's because
we're we're chasing after
things that aren't going to give us what
we actually need. Right, they're
facsimiles
and cheap reproductions of what actually
can give give us meaning and purpose.
And that's because we are created to be
in relationship with our God.
And that is where we will find our true
identity. That's what's going to give us
the motivation to actually get up in the
morning, like your friend you saying,
you know, you couldn't get up in the
morning.
He finds not just
a motivational value
in the Christian faith. He finds
actually and purpose in the Christian
faith.
That
getting up in the morning has a purpose
that goes beyond the here and the now.
And that can affect all of the people
around him.
And now he can
pursue
his entrepreneurial activities or his
relationships or even his finances for
the glory of God and then that gives it
an ontological meaning that goes beyond
the simple
basics of kind of
what secular materialism has to offer.
Young men in particular are struggling
in their own unique ways. And is is that
in part in your view because they are
worshipping the wrong role models in
life? I think it could be. I think
men often find we find our identity in
the things that we do.
Right? Well, we we hear about this in
that
unfortunately, we've bought the lie that
we are the sum of our actions. This is
why when people lose their jobs, right?
When they get let go of their careers,
they have identity crises because if we
believe that we are the sum of our
actions, we can put a lot of stock in
something that is ultimately going to
lead us
like empty.
Um same thing with relationships, right?
Watch any rom-com. What is it almost
always about?
Lonely guy, lonely girl, they meet each
other, they fall in love.
At the end everything works out and now
now their identity is fulfilled. Well, I
mean
all you have to do is to get married to
know that that's not going to fulfill
every desire and need you have,
right? I love my wife. I love my
marriage. It's one of the best things
that I've ever done.
But if I put all of my eggs in that
basket,
it it's it could very well and almost
certainly will lead me
astray.
Especially if that falls apart,
especially when there are times of
hardship and struggle.
So, I think
you are more than the sum of your
actions.
Because you have value that goes beyond
that and it's actually living out that
value that can give you the meaning and
the purpose you're finding. But men in
particular, we find value in what we do.
I think women, although I don't want to
speak, you know, too broadly, I think
speaking in generalities,
women find a lot of identity in
relational values,
in the relationships that they have with
their friends or their significant
others. Men often find
value in like what they're able to
contribute to
physically.
And so
especially in a world where
you know, economic crisis is a thing or
work complications with with things like
technology removing a lot of
occupations, I I think that can be a
gen- genuine hardship. Yeah, I was just
looking at the some research on PubMed
and it says exactly that. It says in a
recent qualitative analysis in the
United States of suicide notes, majority
male sample, the authors identified
themes that differed by gender, such as
men more often referring to financial
hardship, etc.
Which can imply feelings of failure and
worthlessness tied to traditional roles.
In contrast, women's notes were more
about lowered self-worth and
interpersonal relationships. Mhm. So, if
that does hold and and we're implying
there that
sometimes it's to do with a feeling of
worthlessness for men. [clears throat]
Are you saying that
Christianity can provide something that
is an antidote [clears throat] to that
feeling? I think not only can it provide
an antidote, it can provide the
antidote. What would you say to anyone
that's listening right now that feels a
little bit lost in their life?
I would say that you have purpose and
you have meaning
more than what society
tells you
is going to give you that meaning and
purpose.
And that there's a God who loves you and
he loves you so much that he stepped out
of eternity and into humanity.
And he lived the perfect life that you
couldn't in order to
establish
and create the union of the relationship
with God that you're actually seeking.
And what would you tell them step one
would be to go in that direction?
Well, I would say, you know, push into
something like
read the Bible.
I'd say open the Gospel of Matthew. Open
the Gospel of John.
And and start reading and find out who
this Jesus guy is.
You know, investigate that
question. Why that is significant, why
that matters. Because the person and
character of Jesus goes beyond simply
an historical character. I think Jesus
was a genuine historical character. He's
no less than that, but he's also so much
more than that. And in discovering who
he is in relation to who you are, that's
going to change your life.
Are you noticing that people are asking
you
certain questions about Christianity or
religion
or any of the adjacent subjects more now
than they were 10 years ago? Like are
there certain themes or topics that are
more front of mind for people these
days? Yeah, I think we've we've gone
through a shift where when I kind of
started in this endeavor of what I'm
doing now, this kind of crescendoed in
the last year and a bit. Um when I
started out, I think people were asking
a lot more is God real?
And is this true? And I think now people
are asking is God good?
And I think it's because it's part and
parcel of this meaning crisis thing. I
also think that there have been some
major moral issues. I mean, the whole
Epstein thing right now, I think is a
testament to that. We are seeing
examples of true evil.
And I think that bothers people. And in
a world where we can
rationalize subjectivizing evil,
we understand that is heinous.
And if that is evil with a capital E,
where's the the good with a capital G?
You know, C.S. Lewis, I've quoted a few
times, he said uh in his um The Problem
of Pain and Suffering in that book that
he wrote that uh one of his objections
to God was that there was
uh there was so much evil and chaos in
this world.
He said, "But what was I comparing that
to? A man does not call a line crooked
unless he knows what a straight line
looks like.
Right? The reason you understand that
there's rot is because you understand
what something that's healthy is.
And so there's an objective
standard
that needs to be weighed
by these things. And I think more than
ever
we're seeing things that really speak to
the justice questions in terms of the
meaning questions.
And that
has really interested me as someone who
is a I'm a historian, right? So I'm
interested in the questions about I do
things like read Greek and Coptic most
of the time, right? But I've been
challenged to think more about
the philosophical questions because I
think we live in an age where
I'm really encouraged by
people looking at injustice. There's a
lump in our throat. And I think there's
a lump in our throat because Jesus put
it there. I think um AI [clears throat]
is going to have a big impact on your
work. Yeah? And in ways that might not
be super obvious. I think one of the
ways is that if all these CEOs are true
when they say that AI is going to cause
massive job displacement. And even the
CEOs that are building the technology
have sat here and told me that there's
going to be massive job display
displacement. There's going to be a
crisis of meaning. People get huge
amount of work from the things that they
do in their lives and they're not going
to be able to do those things in the
same way necessarily. And about 60% of
Americans say they're they're worried
that AI will take away the thing that
gives them their meaning.
Well, I think we're just at the
footsteps of the mean crisis of meaning
in this regard. Yeah? And that's going
to mean that a lot of people, you know,
are going to struggle a lot. And that
concerns me. I mean, I think that's what
I'm more worried about with AI. I'm not
worried about AI taking over the world.
I I'm not worried about, you know, um AI
[clears throat] replacing us or
something like that. Uh
uh if I'm worried about AI, it's that.
It's the the pain and suffering that it
can cause for people who have bought
into the lie
that
the sum of their identity is in what
they can contribute and do,
and how the Christian worldview speaks
into that. How can I think Christianly
about a society where there could very
well be
mass identity crises because of
unemployment. Or because, you know, the
Years ago we were telling truck drivers
learn to code. Well, now coders are
being replaced by AI systems, right? AI
can code better than the coders. So,
Spotify said yesterday they none of
their engineers have written a line of
code since December. And I thought, wow,
hell, like that's Yeah. And my
car drives itself here in in America.
I sat here with the other day with the
CEO of Uber, and he said to me they have
9 million drivers' careers, and within
X number of years,
they will have none. Mhm. He said the
unique thing is the the speed of the the
change is going to cause the problems.
Because we had the Industrial
Revolution, we had time to, you know,
transfer to other lines of employment,
etc. But the speed in which there's
going to be a displacement is is going
to cause the issues.
And I wonder what's going to happen. I
mean, a lot of people are, you know,
they're going to be in search of
meaning, and I guess that will that will
will push some people towards
Christianity and other religions, but
not everybody. Cuz you said, you know,
as you say,
when our identities are pulled away from
us in such a way,
some people turn to the bottle. Right.
>> Or you know, causes mental health
situations, so mhm.
I mean, humanity has a very unique knack
to pivot
and figure things out. Now, is there
going to be,
you know, a new period in between when
that job crisis happens? Maybe.
But I
I think
I think humanity
will figure things out. I just I just
don't know if that will be before all of
you know, it hits the fan. What was the
first domino that fell for you that made
you go on this this journey of
becoming an Is it the term Christian
apologist? Yeah. Becoming What does that
even mean, Christian apologist? So, I
mentioned 1 Peter 3:15, right? But in
your hearts revere Christ as Lord.
Always be prepared to give an answer.
So, that is that apologia. So, we take
the Greek apologia and we stick an
English suffix on the end and we have
this field of study, this discipline,
apologetics. What does that mean? You're
You're explaining the Bible.
>> Giving reasons. Yeah, giving answers.
So, apologetics is as complicated as
arguments philosophically and
scientifically for the existence of God
and the historical reliability of the
Bible and as simple as
if someone asked me why Jesus, that's an
apologetic question insofar as it's
giving an answer.
I was looking at some of these photos of
you as a young man. I wondered how much
the situation in these photos had an
impact on who you came to be and what
you came to believe. I'll put these
photos on the screen for anybody. Yeah.
But um this is a
a young boy in a wheelchair Yep. and in
a hospital bed that looks to be
paralyzed.
>> Yep.
Yeah, when I was 11 years old I was
diagnosed with a rare neurological
condition that left me paralyzed from
the waist down.
So, you were At 10 you were fine, you
were normal. [clears throat] Yep. And at
11 suddenly you were paralyzed from the
waist down. Yes, so I had the flu and my
body's immune system instead of
attacking the flu attacked the nerve
endings at the base of my spinal cord.
So, the myelin sheath and caused
inflammation cutting off the
communication from my brain to my legs.
And a lot of people that get that
disease never walk again. It's
complicated. Uh so, the So, it's called
acute transverse myelitis. Although,
I've been told recently that there's a
change in the name of the diagnosis.
But,
essentially,
transverse myelitis is not all that
rare, but acute, that acute in in terms
of the like quickness of it. I had
fallen asleep, a nap, for probably no
more than 30 minutes, and when I woke
up, I was paralyzed. So, it was the the
quickness of the actual damage that was
done to my spinal cord that was
the catalyst for in the diagnosis saying
that the chances of me walking again
were were very low. But within a month,
you were walking again. Yeah, 1 month to
the day. So, in fact, the anniversary,
23-year anniversary, was recently cuz it
was in February 8th. Um I woke up on a
Saturday morning, got out of bed, and
walked over to my wheelchair.
Did this change your perspective on
God, Christianity, religion?
It did in some ways. I mean, I don't I
don't know how it couldn't. Uh it
definitely, to have medical
professionals tell me,
"You're probably going to be a
paraplegic for the rest of your life.
Like this is what you need to kind of
accept and and get used to." To the
exact same medical professionals, you
know, the um pediatric neurologists
saying, "We don't know why you're
walking."
That had to have an impact on me.
In that I think I I truly believe I was
healed in that it was the doctors who
used the word miracle.
Because they said that they they
couldn't medically explain why there was
no more damage on my spinal cord, why I
was walking with
like
not even any like atrophy or anything.
However,
I still needed to figure some of the
more intellectual questions out of my
head when I was a teenager.
So, it wasn't just that this happened
and explained a lot.
Because I was open to the possibility of
this being a fluke,
of there being
a completely randomness to this. Mhm.
And so, when I was a teenager, I
investigated a lot,
you know,
to the best of my ability as a
17-year-old, in trying to answer some of
the more meaning questions about I know
what my parents raised me to believe.
But if I believe it simply because they
told me to, it's not the worst
reason, but it's also not the best
reason. So, that's is the first time
that I
uh read the Quran cover to cover. I was
looking into things like the Book of
Mormon and the Bhagavad Gita. I was just
curious. That's when, you know, reading
Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel
Dennett.
Not in any type of crisis
faith crisis way, but I was I was
investigating.
So, you believe in the supernatural?
Mhm.
Do you believe that we can speak to the
dead? No.
You don't believe that? No. So, when
people
>> Well, I should I should preface that. It
depends what you mean by speaking to the
dead. I think it's I think it's
possible. We have examples of it in the
Bible.
Um
Saul gets a medium to call up the spirit
of Samuel. So, do you believe mediums
are telling the truth when they say that
they're contacting people in the
afterlife? I think that there's a
possibility of engaging the supernatural
world, which is dangerous.
And I think there's a very fuzzy line
between mediums who are con artists
and people who are act actually engaged
in something that is dabbling in the
supernatural.
I say this in part because I I've I've
heard people say that, you know, their
partner has passed away and then they've
seen signs.
Their partner has left them signs.
>> Mhm.
Do Do you believe in this kind of thing?
I don't think so. Not in those ways. I I
think when people are dead, they're
dead.
Um but I think there are aspects of the
supernatural world and a world that's
going on behind the scenes that's
articulated within scripture that
have an impact on this world in a way
that
if people can be distracted and misled
to think that they are contacting dead
relatives, then that is otherwise going
to
uh prevent them from pursuing what they
should be as image bearers of God. So,
you think it's demonic in some some
capacity?
>> I think it can be.
I don't think it's always. I think in
emotionally
vulnerable states, we are willing to
adhere to all sorts of things. Mhm.
>> [clears throat]
>> And there's a um there's a sensitivity
that I want to communicate around that.
Mhm. Because I think people, especially
in the
in the periods of the deaths of loved
ones, often want to
look for validation in their passed away
loved ones leaving something or
communicating or And also that we want
to believe when we lose people we love
that they are somewhere better, that
they are in a good place. And this is
one of the the things that I struggled
with earlier when we were talking about
hell, which is such a small percentage
of people are making it to hell by
whatever measure of acceptance one
believes, then that would mean that like
my grandmother, who wasn't necessarily
a devout religious person or a Christian
or she hadn't repented, is currently in
hell. And that's a hard
thought to take that she is
in such a awful place now. Yeah.
>> And this all this this would obviously
make people not want to experience that
dissonance and therefore reject religion
and say, "Well, no, my
If I accept the Bible, then I have to
accept my grandmother's currently
burning in hell. Right.
And so I'm going to reject the Bible.
It's much easier than accepting that my
grandmother's suffering right now."
Right. I mean, ultimately that's a
um
I
I wouldn't do it that way, therefore
it's not true. Sorry, what do you mean?
Well, I don't think that God should send
my grandmother to hell. Yeah. Therefore,
I'm going to conclude that it's not true
based on that type of Now, at the end of
the day,
does God communicate with people in ways
that go beyond
my understanding? I've talked to enough
Muslims in the Muslim world who have had
dreams about Jesus
to know that something goes on. Like, I
don't understand sometimes what what
happens on the deathbed between an
individual and their maker.
So, it's not my place to say that they
are burning in hell or whatever, you
know, descriptive language you want to
use, cuz I it's it's between them and
God.
At the exact same time, apart from the
saving work of Christ, I'm going to
hell.
So, and I I genuinely believe that is
that apart from the inbreaking of God
into my life, in part and parcel by
things like this,
but also by like showing me and allowing
me to investigate these things and
wrestle through questions and putting
people in places in my life that have
formed me and shaped me and allowed me
to look at the evidence and have
conversations and be honest and
transparent and
those are the things that have led me
down a road to say, you know, I'm
convinced. I'm convinced that this is
true
experientially, that it is
intellectually
robust and that it is experientially
profound
for me and for
so many other people, your friend
included.
What's the most important thing
that we haven't talked about that we
should have talked about, Wesley? For
the people that are listening. Well,
now, I would assume they're very curious
people. Some of them are religious, some
of them aren't. What is the most
important thing that we should close on
in your view?
Part of my academic study is that I do
what's called papyrology and
paleography. So, I make facsimiles of
manuscripts, ancient manuscripts, um
particularly biblical manuscripts. So,
this is a biblical manuscript, right?
P46.
It's a late second or third century
page from a collection of Paul's
epistles.
So, Paul from the Bible.
>> Paul from the Bible. He wrote this.
Well, so he wrote that and then a scribe
in the 2nd century copied it down. So,
this is I made this. So, this is genuine
Egyptian papyrus. I'm only writing on
one side so you can see kind of how the
papyrus is put together. And then I got
you a I got you a nice Bible. Oh.
But, I have put a bookmark in the page
where that passage is. Why Why did you
pick that particular passage? Well, why
don't you open it up and read it? So,
it's it's on the little inscription note
that I have there. Romans 12. So, you
can see on the bottom there there's
there's the title.
>> Oh, yeah. 12 11 12.
So, it says, "Rejoice in hope. Be
patient in tribulation. Be constant in
prayer. Contribute to the needs of the
saints and seek to show hospitality.
Bless those who persecute you. Bless and
do not curse them. Rejoice with those
who rejoice. Weep with those who weep.
Live in harmony with one another. Do not
be
haughty,
but associate with the lowly.
Never be wise in your own sight. Repay
no one evil for evil,
but give thought to do what is honorable
in the sight of all. If possible, so far
as it depends on you, live peaceably
with all. Beloved, never avenge
yourselves,
but leave it to the wrath of God, for it
is written,
"Vengeance is mine. I will repay," says
the Lord. "To the contrary, if your
enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is
thirsty, give him something to drink.
For by so doing, you will heap burning
coals on his head. Do not be overcome by
evil,
but overcome evil with good."
So, hopefully that's good passage to
Beautiful. remember, think about. And
then there's the box for it. Thank you
so much. This is so beautiful.
Wesley, we have a closing tradition on
this podcast where the last guest leaves
a question for the next, not knowing who
they're leaving it for.
And the question left for you is, what
is one risk that you should be taking in
your life but aren't currently?
Where I am in my life, I feel like so
many things have happened so quickly
that
there's like an aspect of
unpredictability and I I'm just a little
bit My wife and I were talking last
night and it was like we need to embrace
what's happening right now, but from a
year from now, if it's all gone, that's
totally okay. Mhm. And and and we're
fine with that, whether that's, you
know, financially or with social media
or or opportunity or And maybe the risk
is pushing into that and think and and
saying like you know, maybe there's an
aspect of that. Yes, I think it's wise
to keep that in calibration
and understand that if this goes away
tomorrow, I'm content
because this is beyond what I have
I'm in a room sitting with Steven
Bartlett. I'm in a room sat with you.
So, there's an there's an aspect of that
which is is completely mind-blowing
to me, especially Wes Hauf from a year
ago.
But
maybe not selling myself short and
thinking that, you know,
these opportunities are
opportunities to
invest in others in ways that people
have invested in me over this last year.
What do you mean by that? You mean With
some of the things that I've I've been
very
uh graciously able to experience and in
giving other people opportunity to
maybe
push into trying to make
an impact in their space. Oh, okay. And
encouraging them. Pulling people up the
ladder. Yeah.
>> You've been able to climb. Yeah. Paying
it forward, too. Paying it downward, I
guess. Yeah.
This is so, so cool. Well, I'm I'm very
thankful for you
willing to have me on, so thank you for
>> No, thank you. You're such a great
communicator, and um
you're [snorts] so finely balanced in in
your ability to deeply understand
everything you're talking about from a
historical perspective, to be in the
pursuit of truth, as you kind of said,
irrespective of where that one might
lead somebody. But then you have the
gift of Yeah.
The gift of communication. Incredibly
engaging person, good intentions, good
man. So, I was very, very, you know,
very, very glad we had this
conversation, and very much looking
forward to it for a very long time. So,
I'm glad you said yes. I was asking my
team for maybe I don't know.
Maybe 9 months
>> Wow. to get in contact with you.
>> Well, I apologize cuz I had no a few
times.
>> No, it's okay. It's okay. But I'm I'm
really, really appreciative of it,
Wesley, and I hope to have this
conversation again sometime soon. Yeah,
that'd be great. Thank you. YouTube have
this new crazy algorithm where they know
exactly what video you would like to
watch next based on AI and all of your
viewing behavior. And the algorithm says
that this video is the perfect video for
you. It's different for everybody
looking right now. Check this video out,
and I bet you you might love it.