Podcast appearances and mentions of John Cobb

In this session, we are joined by historical theologian, Dr. Paul Capetz. Dr. Capetz, a minister in the United Methodist Church and former theology professor at various Protestant seminaries, discusses liberal Christology and its limitations. While identifying as a liberal theologian who seeks to reconcile Protestant heritage with Enlightenment thinking, Capetz argues that traditional liberal Christology is fundamentally flawed. He explains that liberal theologians like Friedrich Schleiermacher attempted to reconstruct the historical Jesus using modern historical analysis, but this approach faces insurmountable challenges. Following Rudolf Bultmann, whom Capetz considers the greatest New Testament scholar of the 20th century, he contends that a biography of Jesus cannot be written due to limited reliable historical sources. More importantly, Capetz argues that Christology shouldn't be based on speculations about Jesus's relationship with God, but rather on the apostles' witness to Jesus as the decisive revelation of God's love. Despite his fascination with the historical Jesus question, Capetz believes that the liberal approach of grounding Christology in historical reconstruction is both historically impossible and theologically misguided. You can WATCH the conversation on YouTube Join the class & watch Paul's lecture-> The Many Faces of Christ Today!⁠ Paul E. Capetz is professor of historical theology emeritus at United Theological Seminary of the Twin Cities in Minnesota, and is currently minister at Christ Church by the Sea in Newport Beach, California. He is the author of God: A Brief History and co-editor of James Gustafson's Moral Discernment in the Christian Life. This episode centers on his recent book,  Recovering Protestantism's Original Insight. Previous Episodes w/ Paul Capetz Protestantism's Radical Insight from Luther to Bultmann Recovering Protestantism's Original Insight Existentialist Philosophy, Politics, & Theology Calvin's 500th Birthday The Big Theological Throw Down with John Cobb & Paul Capetz ONLINE CLASS ANNOUNCEMENT: The Many Faces of Christ Today The question Jesus asked his disciples still resonates today: "Who do you say that I am?" Join our transformative 5-week online learning community as we explore a rich tapestry of contemporary Christologies. Experience how diverse theological voices create a compelling vision of Jesus Christ for today's world. Expand your spiritual horizons. Challenge your assumptions. Enrich your faith. As always, the class is donation-based (including 0), so head over to ⁠ManyFacesOfChrist.com⁠ for more details and to sign up! _____________________ ⁠Hang with 40+ Scholars & Podcasts and 600 people at Theology Beer Camp 2025 (Oct. 16-18) in St. Paul, MN. ⁠ This podcast is a ⁠Homebrewed Christianity⁠ production. Follow ⁠the Homebrewed Christianity⁠, ⁠Theology Nerd Throwdown⁠, & ⁠The Rise of Bonhoeffer⁠ podcasts for more theological goodness for your earbuds. Join over 80,000 other people by joining our⁠ Substack - Process This!⁠ Get instant access to over 45 classes at ⁠www.TheologyClass.com⁠ ⁠Follow the podcast, drop a review⁠, send ⁠feedback/questions⁠ or become a ⁠member of the HBC Community⁠. ⁠Theology Beer Camp | St. Paul, MN | October 16-18, 2025⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Former land speed record holder Richard Noble returned to Brooklands to tell us about his new project, an attempt on the water speed record. Inspired by the exploits of John Cobb and his designer Reid Railton, the Thrust team has set out to break the current WSR of 317.596mph, which was set by Australian Ken Warby back in 1978. That the record has stood for so long indicates both the danger and the difficulty involved in mounting a challenge. Since that record was set, two challengers have died in the process. The Thrust WSH (water speed hydrofoil) team is therefore proceeding with maximum research and risk mitigation efforts. To produce a truly innovative design the team has access to advanced technologies and resources not available to earlier challengers.

We just lost John Cobb months before his 100th birthday. In this episode, Philip Clayton joins me for a conversation to celebrate his life and thought. My relationship with John started as the author of a book that changed my life (God & the World). Then, I got to take a summer school class with him in Claremont before Divinity School. When I moved to LA for my PhD he invited me and my family to lunch. Over the years in SoCal we had many meals and conversations together. We have recorded over 30 hours of conversation and taught two classes together. Beyond being a creative, brilliant, and ground-breaking scholar, John was a deeply passionate and compassionate disciple of Jesus. When friends ask about his picture with me, I say "That's John freaking Cobb, and he's my Gandalf." The last time we got to hang he introduced me as his friend (and said this in front of a bunch of people). I recently edited a book of John Cobb's best theological writing from across his career, including some excellent introductory chapters for people new to Process theology. Check it out. You can WATCH the conversation on YouTube Dr. John B. Cobb, Jr. taught theology at the Claremont School of Theology from 1958 to 1990. In 2014 he became the first theologian elected to the prestigious American Academy of Arts and Sciences for his interdisciplinary work in ecology, economics, and biology. Previous Episodes with John Cobb Why Stay Christian? John Cobb turns 97 Secularizing Christianity JC on JC: a conversation with John Cobb and Tom Oord on Jesus Why Whitehead? John Cobb goes to #TheologyBeerCamp LIVE from Vancouver with Sallie McFague and John Cobb How Modern Metaphysics Killed God Have Yourself a John Cobb Advent!  Christology and Process Theology Why Metaphysics Matters Prayer & Process with John Cobb Theology for the People: Keller, Cobb and God Lexington Theological Seminary is the sponsor for this Episode. Lexington Theological Seminary is a pioneer in online theological education. Both the Doctoral and Masters programs are designed with the flexibility and contextual focus needed for the working student. You can learn more by heading here. Here are a few episodes with a couple of their Profs Leah Schade & Wilson Dickinson: Faith During an Ecological Collapse Leah Schade: Preaching in a time of Crisis from Corona to Climate Wilson Dickinson: Faith After a Neo-liberal Compliant Church _____________________ Join my Substack - Process This! Join our class - TRUTH IN TOUGH TIMES: Global Voices of Liberation Spend a week with Tripp & Andrew Root in Bonhoeffer's House in Berlin this June as part of the Rise of Bonhoeffer Travel Learning Experience. INFO & DETAILS HERE Get access to over 45 of our online classes at TheologyClass.com Follow the podcast, drop a review, send feedback/questions or become a member of the HBC Community. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, Tripp sits down with returning guest Paul Capetz, a historical theologian and Methodist minister, to discuss his new compelling book on the Reformation's relationship to scripture. They delve into the evolution and the different trajectories of scriptural interpretation from Martin Luther and John Calvin, through modern theologians like Karl Barth and Rudolf Bultmann. Capetz shares personal anecdotes about his journey in the church and discusses the critical need for Protestantism to reorient itself around the gospel, while making space for modern questions and criticisms. This conversation navigates through historical theology, scripture's authority, and the vital challenge of reclaiming an authentically Protestant understanding of faith in today's context. WATCH the conversation on YouTube Paul E. Capetz is professor of historical theology emeritus at United Theological Seminary of the Twin Cities in Minnesota, and is currently minister at Christ Church by the Sea in Newport Beach, California. He is the author of God: A Brief History and co-editor of James Gustafson's Moral Discernment in the Christian Life. This episode centers on his recent book,  Recovering Protestantism's Original Insight. Previous Episodes w/ Paul Capetz Recovering Protestantism's Original Insight Existentialist Philosophy, Politics, & Theology Calvin's 500th Birthday The Big Theological Throw Down with John Cobb & Paul Capetz 01:19 Discussing the New Book 03:26 Personal Journey and Early Influences 06:40 Challenges with Biblical Interpretation 19:44 Luther vs. Calvin on Scripture 29:21 Modern Protestantism and Its Contradictions 37:29 Historical Critical Methods and Modernity 39:05 Liberal Protestantism and the Reformation Heritage 40:18 Barth and Bultmann: Diverging Paths 47:24 Existential Interpretation and Demythologizing 51:27 Modernity, Faith, and the Existential Question 58:44 Challenges of Contemporary Christianity 01:04:38 The Future of Liberal Protestantism 01:15:47 Concluding Thoughts and Reflections _____________________ Join my Substack - Process This! Join our upcoming class - THE RISE OF BONHOEFFER, for a guided tour of Bonhoeffer's life and thought. Go with me to Berlin to spend a week in Bonhoeffer's House! Follow the podcast, drop a review, send feedback/questions or become a member of the HBC Community. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Dr. John B. Cobb, Jr. The Economics of Nuclear War Not since the early 1980s have we collectively worried about nuclear war. Today the war in Ukraine rages on and the US foreign policy has not excluded the potential of nuclear weapons against both Russia and China. . Meanwhile, the oceans are heating up, species are dying out at record rates, and the economies of the world are in jeopardy. . Are we at the dawn of a nuclear, or, for that matter, environmental holocaust? Is there any good news on the horizon? What can we, as business leaders, do to make the world safer for us all? . We will endeavor to answer those questions in surprising ways as we sit down with the author of more than 50 books; an American theologian, philosopher, and a leader in the environmental movement. . is the preeminent scholar in process philosophy and process theology. Dr. Cobb's transdisciplinary approach integrates insights from many different study areas and brings different specialized disciplines into fruitful communication. He has influenced various disciplines, including theology, ecology, economics, biology, and social ethics. . In 1971, he wrote the first single-author book on environmental ethics, Is It Too Late? A Theology of Ecology, which argued for the relevance of religious thought in approaching the ecological crisis.[9]  . Dr. Cobb is the co-founder and current co-director of the Center for Process Studies in Claremont, California. In 2014 Cobb was elected to the prestigious American Academy of Arts and Sciences. He recently founded the Living Earth Movement and is writing his newest book, Is International Cooperation Possible? . Website: https://LivingEarthMovement.eco Twitter: https://twitter.com/LivingEarthMvmt . Part 2) China & US: Environmental Collaboration .

Dr. John B. Cobb, Jr. The Economics of Nuclear War Not since the early 1980s have we collectively worried about nuclear war. Today the war in Ukraine rages on and the US foreign policy has not excluded the potential of nuclear weapons against both Russia and China. . Meanwhile, the oceans are heating up, species are dying out at record rates, and the economies of the world are in jeopardy. . Are we at the dawn of a nuclear, or, for that matter, environmental holocaust? Is there any good news on the horizon? What can we, as business leaders, do to make the world safer for us all? . We will endeavor to answer those questions in surprising ways as we sit down with the author of more than 50 books; an American theologian, philosopher, and a leader in the environmental movement. . is the preeminent scholar in process philosophy and process theology. Dr. Cobb's transdisciplinary approach integrates insights from many different study areas and brings different specialized disciplines into fruitful communication. He has influenced various disciplines, including theology, ecology, economics, biology, and social ethics. . In 1971, he wrote the first single-author book on environmental ethics, Is It Too Late? A Theology of Ecology, which argued for the relevance of religious thought in approaching the ecological crisis.[9]  . Dr. Cobb is the co-founder and current co-director of the Center for Process Studies in Claremont, California. In 2014 Cobb was elected to the prestigious American Academy of Arts and Sciences. He recently founded the Living Earth Movement and is writing his newest book, Is International Cooperation Possible? . Website: https://LivingEarthMovement.eco Twitter: https://twitter.com/LivingEarthMvmt . Part 1) Free Thinking as Modern Heresy

John Cobb may be best known for his bike saddles, but his experience and innovation go much deeper. John may be the first person to take a bike to the wind tunnel, and is likely the only person to crank up the tunnel to 70mph...with a rider in it. Enjoy this great episode with a cycling innovator

This time on Real Estate in the 608 we speak to John Cobb with Saint Vincent dePaul in Madison. John gives us the behind the scenes look how St Vinnies operates, and supports the community. John joins In The 608 hosts Ben Anton, Asher Masino, and Adam Elliott where we also cover how St Vinnies might be a great answer to some of your home investments during the move in and move out. Get advice on home fixes during the pandemic with the "Top Of The Hour Tip". Go in depth with advice for buyers and sellers with the "Market Update”' from the Lauer Realty Group. Get the bigger picture of the economy as it relates to the national real estate market with Phil Plourd and Phil's Phone-in that looks beyond the 608." Episode 5.11 - November 2023.

When you shop for clothing, do you consider the sustainability of your choices or the brands you wear? Do you love thrifting or do you buy the newest trends? Have you ever considered how clothing donations are handled by thrift stores? Join hosts Rose Adler-Rephan and Gigi Diekelman as they address all these questions and more with John Cobb, the associate director of retail operations at the St. Vincent de Paul's store here in Madison, Wisconsin.

Payton Hoegh is the founder of All Wanderers, a spiritual community in Southern California, and the Spiritual Communities Director at the Center for Spirituality in Nature. Payton and Tony discuss going from the Southern Baptist Convention to the Episcopal Church, the surprising nature in Southern California, connecting with God most profoundly on a trail in the woods, hope and freedom, guarding against spiritual abuse, appreciating John Cobb, being rooted in relational thinking, and having a sense of responsibility for creation. You can connect with Payton here: http://allwanderers.org/ and here: https://www.centerforspiritualityinnature.org/.https://reverendhunter.com/

Payton Hoegh is the founder of All Wanderers, a spiritual community in Southern California, and the Spiritual Communities Director at the Center for Spirituality in Nature. Payton and Tony discuss going from the Southern Baptist Convention to the Episcopal Church, the surprising nature in Southern California, connecting with God most profoundly on a trail in the woods, hope and freedom, guarding against spiritual abuse, appreciating John Cobb, being rooted in relational thinking, and having a sense of responsibility for creation. You can connect with Payton here: http://allwanderers.org/ and here: https://www.centerforspiritualityinnature.org/.https://reverendhunter.com/

Bob and Mike once again dance the spiral in our review of Book of the Wyrm 2nd Edition!CreditsAuthors: Brian Campbell (Black Spiral Dancers), Sam Inabinet (Cosmology), Deena McKinney (Pentex), Jim Moore (Monsters)Additional Material: Justin Achilli, Ethan SkempDeveloper: Ethan SkempEditor: Aileen E. MilesArt Director: Aileen E. MilesLayout & Typesetting: Pauline BenneyArt: Andrew Bates, Ron Brown, John Cobb, Guy Davis, Steve Ellis, Jeff Holt, Brian LeBlanc, Vince Locke, Steve Prescott, Ron Spencer, James Stowe, Joshua Gabriel TimbrookCover Art: Ron SpencerCover Design: Pauline BenneyIntro and Outro music - Berserkir by Danheim, used with permission.Support the show

Jan Swift Dr. Malcolm Stubbs, an orthopedic surgeon who specializes in sports medicine, joins Discover Lafayette to discuss the latest technique to restore mobility to patients with degenerative hip issues. In particular, we discuss the ROSA (Robotic Surgical Assistant) robotic hip surgery procedure that Lafayette Surgical Specialty Hospital has recently added. Dr. Stubbs graduated from LSU and LSU School of Medicine where he served as Chief Resident in orthopedic surgery. After completing a fellowship at the Mississippi Sports Medicine and Orthopaedic Center, he served as a staff orthopedic surgeon in the U. S. Air Force. Today, he practices at the Lafayette Bone and Joint Clinic and performs arthroscopic surgery of the shoulder, elbow, hip, and knee, shoulder reconstruction and replacement, and hip and knee replacement surgery at the physician-owned Lafayette Surgical Specialty Hospital. When Dr. Stubbs graduated from medical school in 1993, arthroscopic surgery on the knee was rather commonplace; he says that “The move to minimally invasive surgeries was kicked off by the early pioneers of arthroscopic surgery of the knee. Thereafter, arthroscopic procedures advanced to repair the shoulder, and today, surgical practices have evolved to include this minimally invasive surgery on the hip, elbow, and almost every part of the body. By the late 1990s and early 2000s, surgeons and engineers worked together to develop robotic surgery, which has only become commonplace in the last decade. A robotic device is an additional tool to enhance the procedure for hip and knee replacement as the robot and robotic arms help guide the surgeon in making accurate and precise cuts to the bone while performing replacement surgery. The surgeon is still performing the surgery, but with the help of the robot, the procedure is conducted with more precision, flexibility, and control than is possible with conventional techniques. Robotic procedures have been shown to be highly effective in avoiding misalignment and getting a tight fit based on the individual’s anatomy. While the procedure is still relatively new, the expected outcome is that robotic procedures will improve the longevity of prostheses and lead to better outcomes for patients. Already, studies are showing a reduction in patient pain and reduced length of hospital stays. Most people are leery about having hip replacement surgery and before it occurs, all other alternatives such as weight loss, physical therapy, medicine, and exercises such as yoga have typically been tried to no avail. In the past, the most common approach used to perform total hip replacement was a posterior hip replacement, where the surgeon would make the incision at the back of the hip close to the buttocks. With the newer direct anterior approach (front of the hip) developed in the past few years, patients’ abductor muscles that operate around the hip joint are better protected from the damage caused by cutting, and patients are able to get up and walk quicker with less pain when these muscles aren’t violated. With ROSA (robotic surgical assisted) hip procedure surgery using a direct anterior approach, Dr. Malcolm Stubbs says it “makes a better approach even better! Patients say, ‘Doc, I wish I had had this surgery sooner.” Hip replacement surgeries are occurring in more and more younger patients in their 50s and some in their 40s, and Dr. Stubbs isn’t sure if this is a result of an increase in arthritic conditions or the improved prostheses which make for better surgical outcomes. Whatever the case may be, this ROSA hip minimally-invasive surgical procedure has been shown to reduce patient pain and length of hospital stays. Dr. Stubbs’ clinic, the Lafayette Bone and Joint Clinic, is affiliated with Lafayette Surgical Specialty Hospital, a physician-owned hospital. Dr. Stubbs is one of 34 physician owners. He emphasized that other physicians who want to utilize this specialty hospital don’t have to be an owner to have privileges to operate there and patients can request this facility for their surgical procedures. Typical procedures at the hospital involve the spine, orthopedics, and ENT issues. Lafayette Surgical Specialty Hospital is owned by 34 local physicians and has a 98% or higher patient satisfaction rating. It was founded by the late Dr. John Cobb and his colleagues as a way to better direct patient care from start to finish with its own team of medical professionals. Dr. Malcolm Stubbs is one of the physician owners and he says, “The team effort really focuses on patient care. We want our patients to feel like they are at home when they are in our hospital. It takes away anxiety and stress that could compromise their outcome. If we can alleviate that stress, patient outcomes are better.” We thank Dr. Malcolm Stubbs for taking time to visit with us and share this newest minimally-invasive surgical technique to bring back mobility in those with compromised hip conditions. ROSA is also available for knee replacements and Dr. Stubbs hopes that one day soon it will also be available for shoulder surgery. For more information, visit https://lafayettesurgical.com. https://www.listennotes.com/e/7609e19a90b04864bf2ea8bae55f8266/

In this episode, Gil Jenkins speaks with internationally renowned economist, author, and activist John Perkins. John Perkins was formerly chief economist at a major consulting firm, where he advised the World Bank, United Nations, Fortune 500 corporations, and the U.S. and other governments—though much of this was a part of his previous work as an economic hit man he later denounced and became a whistleblower on, as he detailed in his New York Times Bestselling memoir, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. John talks about his earlier life as an economic hitman — including his profound awakening around the evils of this work and his journey to becoming a crusader for transforming our failing Death Economy that destroys its own resources and nature itself into a flourishing Life Economy that renews itself. In the conversation, he shares a simple exercise in the form of five key questions we can all ask ourselves to shift our perceptions and move toward this Life Economy as he describes it.John also discusses his involvement with the Living Earth Movement—a collection of leaders in theology, business, science, activism, and academia passionate about combating climate change and preserving life as we know it. The Living Earth Movement was started around a righteous call for the U.S. and China to work together on climate. John's next book, out in February 2023, focuses on the U.S.-China relationship. John and Gil also discussed Russia's war on Ukraine and how that has dramatically changed geopolitical dynamics, focusing on energy and climate.Links:John Perkins WebsiteJohn Perkins on FacebookJohn Perkins on TwitterThe Living Earth Movement WebsiteDr. John Cobb's (of the Living Earth Movement) Letter to Presidents Biden and Xi (October 2021)Episode recorded:  July 22, 2022Email your feedback to Chad, Gil, and Hilary at climatepositive@hannonarmstrong.com or tweet them to @ClimatePosiPod.

We just finished the Christianity in Process class with John Cobb and had a bunch of lingering questions. So I called in my friend and super nerd, Tom Oord, for a little Process Theology QnA. These questions were all submitted by class members, but they ended up inspiring a conversation worth sharing. Plus, Tom and I have… Read more about Thomas Jay Oord: Process Theology QnA

We just finished the Christianity in Process class with John Cobb and had a bunch of lingering questions. So I called in my friend and super nerd, Tom Oord, for a little Process Theology QnA. These questions were all submitted by class members, but they ended up inspiring a conversation worth sharing. Plus, Tom and I have… Read more about Thomas Jay Oord: Process Theology QnA

John Cobb is the Vice President at Ligonier ministries. He started looking into Web3, Blockchain and the Metaverse simply as a way to understand what they are and how they could impact ministries going forward. What he found is that there are three main buckets he thinks ministries should be considering. The three categories are community, content and censorship.  Community When he first began he discovered NFTs since he has an interest in art and photography but found that it goes beyond the art, NFTs can also be used to build community and show membership in a specific community. When building a community one thing that is important is owning the community so that it is not fully dependent on a platform that you don't control. Many people think of this in terms of collecting email addresses or other contact information so you can still reach them if the platform goes away. Blockchain and decentralization take this one step further by allowing the platform for communication to be secure and resilient.  Content When it comes to content there is the possibility of censorship and deplatforming coming in America, but there are many places around the world where censorship is already in place, and there is a real risk for those who spread the Gospel in those areas. Blockchain in particular could provide a secure way to distribute content digitally. Censorship This topic dovetails nicely with the other categories. Making the world virtual (as in Web3), decentralized and secure (via blockchain and NFTs) enables you to build security and resilience within your systems. This is also a way to future proof your digital ministry. This is a high level overview of the types of things you should be thinking about for your ministry. John takes some time to answer specific questions and dive into details, so if you have questions you'll want to listen to the full episode. 

Click here for video version: https://youtu.be/GCDjJ04drWE Dr. John Cobb of the Cobb Institute, renowned author, professor, and theologian, joins Henri to discuss the ecological disaster our Earth is headed towards […]

Dr. John Cobb of the Cobb Institute, renowned author, professor, and theologian, joins Henri to discuss the ecological disaster our Earth is headed  and how cooperation between the United States and China could change that. The Cobb Institute John B. Cobb, Jr. taught theology at the Claremont School of Theology from 1958 to 1990. In retirement he lives at Pilgrim Place in Claremont. In 1973, with David Griffin, he established the Center for Process Studies. Throughout his career he has contributed to Whitehead scholarship and promoted process programs and organizations. In recent years he has given special attention to supporting work toward the goal of China to become an ecological civilization. He led the effort to found the Claremont Institute for Process Studies in early 2019, and the organization was renamed in his honor one year later. Main website: https://www.fortressonahill.com Let me guess.  You're enjoying the show so much, you'd like to leave us a review?!  https://lovethepodcast.com/fortressonahill Email us at fortressonahill@protonmail.com Check out our online store on Spreadshirt.com.  T-shirts, cell phone covers, mugs, etc.: https://bit.ly/3qD63MW Not a contributor on Patreon? You're missing out on amazing bonus content! Sign up to be one of our patrons today! - https://www.patreon.com/fortressonahill A special thanks to our Patreon honorary producers - Fahim Shirazee, James O'Barr, Adam Bellows, Eric Phillips, Paul Appell, Julie Dupris, Thomas Benson, Janet Hanson, Tristan Oliver, Daniel Fleming, Michael Caron, Zach H, Ren Jacob, Howard Reynolds, Why I am Antiwar Podcast, Korgoth, Rick Coffey and the Statist Quo Podcast.  You all are the engine that helps us power the podcast.  Thank you so much!!! Not up for something recurring like Patreon, but want to give a couple bucks?!  Visit https://paypal.me/fortressonahill to contribute!! Fortress On A Hill is hosted, written, and produced by Chris 'Henri' Henrikson, Danny Sjursen, Keagan Miller, and Jovanni Reyes. https://bit.ly/3yeBaB9 Intro / outro music "Fortress on a hill" written and performed by Clifton Hicks.  Click here for Clifton's Patreon page: https://bit.ly/3h7Ni0Z Cover and website art designed by Brian K. Wyatt Jr. of B-EZ Graphix Multimedia Marketing Agency in Tallehassee, FL: https://bit.ly/2U8qMfn Note: The views expressed in this podcast are those of the hosts alone, expressed in an unofficial capacity, and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the U.S. government.

Hi, Mage fans! And/or Changeling fans! On this week's episode, we're having a conversation with Terry Robinson, host of Mage: the Podcast, to talk about crossover between Mage and Changeling. If you aren't well versed in Mage: the Ascension, don't worry—we'll give you some of the key terms and concepts to get you going with incorporating mages into your Changeling game. Not only that, but we hash out every crossover issue you could possibly want to deal with! (Well, okay, that was an outright lie, because we could do an entire separate podcast just on those issues.) (Maybe someday...) In any case, have a listen, and as always, feel free to hop in our Discord (link at the bottom of this page) to discuss your thoughts and ask your questions. wibbly-wobbly themey-wemeys Probably the most important thing to talk about with any game crossover situation are the themes and moods of the games and how they align. We brought this up with Terry, and discussed three that do, and three that don't: Imagination and hope are incredibly powerful. From the Changeling perspective, this is pretty self-evident and central to the game; their power stat of Glamour that reflects (in part) this theme. With Mage, it's a little more subtle. The paradigms with which the willworkers construct their magic rely on imagination—which in theory can make mages powerful Dreamers, with the right outlook—and they build (some of) their hopes upon the strength of that paradigm and their ability to manifest its power. For mages whose way of magic is danger of going extinct, hope takes on an extra veneer of urgency.Culture is valuable. The ideas of groups of mortals have literally shaped changelings into what they are, in terms of kiths. Culture has also given structure to the magic used by mages, a structure which they must follow (at least, at first). Both groups are invested in preserving their originating cultures, although the need to combine those traditions with growth and modernity presents an interesting element of tension in each game.Everything is temporary. Terry frames this in relation to the desire to keep alive the connections to the past that give both changelings and mages strength. On top of that, mages are mortal, and although changelings reincarnate, Banality often means their time as self-aware fae is limited. But how the character reacts to these facts can also provide compelling story material. Both splats may strive for immortality and struggle against the way of things, creating all kinds of interesting drama (and possibly hurting a lot of people along the way).Mortals and isolationism. In theory, both Mage and Changeling are centered on their protagonists' interactions with mortals. In practice, tables often run both games without mortals making a single appearance. We'd wager that Changeling players are guilty of this more often: many groups do Dreaming-centric games with Glamour drawn from chimera or wherever rather than interacting with Dreamers. With Mage, "Hogwarts games" entirely set in a mages-only space are rarer, and to some extent have to be, because...The shifting of destiny. Mage and Changeling start at opposite ends of a spectrum in terms of how they affect the ultimate fates of mortals. A mage wants their way of handling reality to be the correct one for everyone (because they know it's correct for them). They start with the goal of changing civilization and work their way down. Changelings, on the other hand, cultivate individual artists; it's more the philosophy that pushing a pebble in the stream might eventually change the course of the mighty river. Neither one usually ends up altering all of human destiny that much, but it's important to realize that they're coming from very different places.Balance. Changeling has this theme baked into the Glamour/Banality mechanics, and it drives the entirety of the game. Mage... does not really have this. You can add Resonance and Quiet and everything, but fundamentally, there's very little (e.g, a morality stat) stopping mages from quickly going down Megalomaniac Road. ... terry's art corner Terry mentions at one point a lovely anecdote about getting into Mage by reading the 2nd edition of the "Big Purple" and a sharp memory of some John Cobb art. For the viewing pleasure of you, the audience, here's what we believe to be the art in question that stuck in Terry's mind: And now perhaps it will stick in yours. Whatever this might say about Terry's aesthetic sensibilities, we leave to others to decide! ^~^/ ... demesne and Dreaming There's a Background introduced in Mage 20th Anniversary Edition called Demesne (pronounced like "da MAIN") which has... something to do with dreams. It's a "semi-permanent Dream Realm," according to that corebook, which doesn't really give much in the way of hard mechanics for interactions between a changeling and a mage who has such self-control over their subconscious. Some suggestions from Terry: Demesne can be a "resistance stat" to some fae shenanigans while the mage is enchanted (or otherwise perceiving the chimerical realm). Potentially this could be a kind of supplement or alternative pool for countering fae magic, and especially any kind of Oneiromancy.Demesne can "slightly tug" at that magic, altering the form of cantrips to things the mage can deal with more easily. In a way, they literally lucid dream at the changeling, using their own strength of subconscious as a shield/weapon. This is just a nudge though—perhaps the mage rolls Demesne and can change one aspect of the magic for each success.Importantly, Demesne does not help with Seekings to raise a mage's Arete, which would be quite overpowered (and not in keeping with the themes of the game). Extending this, one could say that Demesne has no impact on a mage's ability to provide Glamour; a well-developed dream life doesn't necessarily make a mage more creative or freewheeling. Statistics are not available, but it's unlikely many mages take the Background in the first place, in part because of its limited use. But in a direct crossover game, Storytellers and players may want to come up with some ways like these that Demesne can be used to facilitate interaction. Perhaps the Demesne can function as a safe island for the changelings off the Silver Path when they enter the Dreaming, and in turn they can hang out with the mage without needing to enchant them (or even physically being present). Perhaps a mage can use Demesne as an ability like Crafts or Technology to create chimerical objects for the changelings (like the "guns; lots of guns" scene in The Matrix, except... dream-guns), which they can take out of the realm for a period of time. Or from an antagonist point of view, a Nephandus might use their Demesne as a nocnitsa breeding ground, or a Technocrat's vision of ultimate conformity allows them to manifest powers akin to an Autumn Person's (assuming they don't have these already). The Background may not have been intended as a built-in connection, but... might as well use it? (And no, in this episode, we are not handling the question of "where is the Dreaming relative to the Umbra?" That will be its own thing at some point, when we each have several hours to kill and the substances of our choosing.) ... mishearings and malapropisms Just because, here are a few little verbal swishes that occurred during recording: Terry used the phrase "campaign of tactical frivolity," which needs to be the plot of like half of all Changeling games from now on.Terry also describes Changeling as being like "a cookie dissolving on the tongue": wonderful and great, but we don't get to take it with us.

I am so pumped to have Catherine Keller back on the podcast and helping to kick-off our new HBC class – Christianity in Process (which starts this week). This conversation is peak zest! In this conversation we discuss How Catherine Keller found Process theology via John Cobb’s Christ in a Pluralistic Age the problem of evil… Read more about Catherine Keller: Theology in Process

Mickey's guest for the first half of the program is the theologian and philosopher John Cobb; their topic is the Living Earth Movement. Cobb explains the need for humanity to change its behavior so as to live in harmony with all other life on the planet. Addressing U.S. politics, Cobb stresses the need for cooperation with China, rather than confrontation. In the second half-hour, we hear a rebroadcast of a summer 2021 Project Censored Zoom event featuring poet and author Lisa Wells; she spoke about her new book Believers: Making A Life At The End Of The World, for which she interviewed people around the world who were working to make positive changes in their local environments, undeterred by the specter of catastrophic climate change. Notes: John Cobb is an eminent theologian, philosopher and environmentalist. He taught at the Claremont Colleges in California, has authored over 50 books, and is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Lisa Wells is a poet and author based in Portland, Oregon. Her conversation with Mickey Huff took place as a Zoom event in the summer of 2021, sponsored by KPFA-FM (Berkeley, CA) and Project Censored. Music-break info: 1) "Let's Work Together" by Canned Heat 2) "Who's Going To Save Us From Ourselves" by Styx 3) "Something In The Air" by Thunderclap Newman Web sites mentioned in this week's program: www.livingearthmovement.eco www.claremontecoforum.org

Why Stay Christian? A growing number of people are asking this question. My friend Brian McLaren has a new book coming out exploring it. Today we get to hear John Cobb’s response. At 97 years old, John has a lot of wisdom to share. This episode is an invitation to an upcoming online class, Christianity in… Read more about John Cobb: Why Stay Christian?

John Cobb Jr. on Breaking it Down with Frank MacKay - The Living Earth Movement by Frank MacKay

John Cobb, the greatest living theologian, returns to the podcast for a birthday pod. What an honor, treat, and thrill! I hope you all enjoy this one half as much as I did :) Dr. John B. Cobb, Jr. taught theology at the Claremont School of Theology from 1958 to 1990. In 2014 he became the first theologian elected to the prestigious American Academy of Arts and Sciences for his interdisciplinary work in ecology, economics, and biology. Books by Cobb that come up in the episode Salvation: Jesus's Mission and Ours Christ in a Pluralistic Age Process Theology Organic Marxism: An Alternative to Capitalism and Ecological Catastrophe A Christian Natural Theology, Second Edition: Based on the Thought of Alfred North Whitehead God and the World Jesus Abba: The God Who Has Not Failed Romans Is It Too Late?: A Theology of Ecology Theological Reminiscences Spiritual Bankruptcy: A Prophetic Call to Action Sustaining the Common Good: A Christian Perspective on the Global Economy For The Common Good: Redirecting the Economy toward Community, the Environment, and a Sustainable Future   Previous Visits from John Cobb John Cobb: Secularizing Christianity John Cobb: Christology and Process Theology JC on JC: a conversation with John Cobb and Tom Oord on Jesus #BarrelAged A SPECIAL INVITATION from John Cobb: Why Whitehead? John Cobb goes to #TheologyBeerCamp Tag-Team Preaching with John Cobb @TheLoft_LA LIVE from Vancouver with Sallie McFague and John Cobb How Modern Metaphysics Killed God with John Cobb #FANiac Have Yourself a John Cobb Advent! #FANiac #FANiac Alert… Why Metaphysics Matters with John Cobb Fully Human, Fully Divine, & All Process! Christology with John Cobb Prayer & Process with John Cobb Theology for the People: Keller, Cobb and God   Follow the podcast, drop a review, send feedback/questions or become a member of the HBC Community. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Episode 143 – Truth and Proof – Part 3 – Objections to Knowing Truth Welcome to Anchored by Truth brought to you by Crystal Sea Books. In John 14:6, Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life.” The goal of Anchored by Truth is to encourage everyone to grow in the Christian faith by anchoring themselves to the secure truth found in the inspired, inerrant, and infallible word of God. Script: The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. Romans, Chapter 1, verses 18 through 20 ******** VK: Hello! I’m Victoria K. Welcome to Anchored by Truth brought to you by Crystal Sea Books. We’re excited to be with you as we continue with our recently started series on Anchored by Truth that we’re calling “Truth and Proof.” As we mentioned in our first couple of episodes this series was inspired by a teaching series that Dr. Gregg Alexander did for his Sunday school class a few years ago. And I’m pleased to announce that today we are joined by Dr. Alexander to help us push deeper into why Christians can be so confident that the Christian faith has a firm basis in reason and evidence. Dr. Alexander was a practicing physician for more than xx years but more importantly he has taught an adult Sunday school class for more than 25 years. Dr. Alexander, would you like to introduce yourself to the Anchored by Truth audience? Gregg: It’s a pleasure to be with you today. I really admire the fact that Anchored by Truth has devoted itself to supporting and demonstrating the inspiration and infallibility of scripture. I am also grateful that you decided to do this series on “Truth and Proof.” As you mentioned several years ago I wanted to help my Sunday school students begin to understand that Christianity is a faith that is not only supported by logic and reason but also that logic and reason properly applied can help lead people into a deeper relationship with Jesus. VK: We agree. In our first couple of episodes we’ve also mentioned that the primary reason we think apologetics is an important area of study for Christians is because apologetics can be used to support evangelism. And this particularly true in today’s culture when it seems as though we’ve lost some of the common touchpoints about truth and faith that used to be accepted without question. Gregg: I think that’s true. Years ago, if you said to someone in our nation that such-and-such a principle was important because it was in the Bible, no one thought anything about your statement. But today, if you encounter a non-believer and fall back on the authority of the Bible the other person is likely to say, “well, I don’t believe in the Bible and I don’t accept its authority.” So, then the believer is faced with the question of where do you go from there? Questions like that are why studying apologetics can be very useful for people like us, and be for the eternal benefit of others. If you know why the Bible is authoritative for all persons – not just for believers – and if the other person is a sincere seeker who will listen to you, then there is a chance that that person may be saved – and that is the purpose of apologetics, evangelism, and a big part of the Christian life. Christianity is a faith that is “other-directed.” 1st Chronicles 28:9 says, “for the Lord searches every heart and understands every motive behind the thoughts. If you seek him, he will be found by you . . .” In my series I set out to prove the truth of that verse. VK: So, in this series on Anchored by Truth we began in the same place as your Sunday school series - with the building blocks of apologetics. We started with the things that everyone can understand regardless of what they already know, or think they know, about religion in general, and Christianity in particular. And last time we spent a lot of our time talking about truth. After all, we want people to understand that the Bible is true and accurate in matters pertaining to fact and history. But emphasizing that the Bible is true would be meaningless if truth didn’t exist in the first place. Gregg: That’s a very important point for people to understand. Too often today you hear people say something like “you have your truth and that’s fine for you but that’s not my truth.” When people say that, they have committed the sin or equivocation. They have used the word “truth” as an improper substitute for the word “opinion” or “preference.” Real truth is always absolute. It is not subject to whims, opinions, or individual or group preferences. You wouldn’t think that would be a controversial concept but today is often is. One of the most important services the church can provide society today is the simple reminder that truth exists, is knowable, and absolute. People who reject this basic concept not only create peril for language and communication. They are in grave peril for their souls. The Bible clearly teaches the correspondence view of truth. The ninth commandment is, “you shall not give false testimony about your neighbor” (Exodus 2:16), i.e., tell it like it is. Deuteronomy 18:21-22 – “You may say to yourselves, ‘How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the Lord?’ 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the Lord does not take place or come true, that is a message the Lord has not spoken.” I know you covered some of this last time. VK: We did. So, today we want to continue from where we left off last time. As you’ve mentioned today there are objections to the existence of absolute truth. I know you covered those in your Sunday school class. Why don’t we get into some of what you covered? Gregg: Well, one frequent objection to the existence of absolute truth is that we can have only probabilities, not certainties. In other words, someone might contend that we can never attain the degree of certainty in our minds that we can be sure anything is true. The response to this objection can be found in that there are certain truths that cannot be reasonably denied. For instance, neither I nor anyone else can deny that I exist. If someone tried to deny that I exist the immediate question would be “what’s the point of making the denial?” Similarly, you cannot reasonably deny that there are no square circles or four-sided triangles. Those things are true formally by definition. Furthermore, something can be absolutely true even if there is not enough evidence to prove it. Evidence, or the lack of it, doesn’t change a fact. VK: We addressed some similar points in our “Lord of Logic” series which is available through most major podcasting apps. But I think this is a good reminder that the concepts we are discussing now are fundamental to all correct thinking and logic. What are some other objections people use to object to the existence of truth? Gregg: Another frequent objection to the existence of absolute truth is that comparisons show that truth is relative, i.e., comparisons change depending on what things are being compared. The response to this objection is relative comparisons are absolutely true insofar as they are accurate. In other words the moment you try to state the results of the comparison you are now stating a conclusion you believe to be true, not merely comparatively true. A third objection people make about truth is that we “grow in truth.” The idea here is that truth is not absolute but rather always partial and incomplete. They will often say something like “science proves that the truth is always changing.” VK: And I will bet that you have an answer to this third objection as well. Gregg: Well, the response is that our understanding of truth will certainly change but not the truth itself. We learn more from science daily and not just science but from many other intellectual disciplines. But it is not the truth that is changing but our improving awareness of the truths that always existed. We discover truth with science, but we don’t change it. We change from error to truth. When Sir Isaac Newton first stated certain truths about the nature of gravity nothing about gravity changed. Gravity didn’t start behaving differently just because Newton presented a better description of its behavior and relevance within the physical universe. Newton helped us understand the truth about gravity’s effects better the truth about gravity didn’t change in any way. So, again this objection fails as a meaningful critique of the existence of absolute truth. VK: I’ve heard some people say that the conception that absolute truths exist is unnecessarily constricting. I guess they might say that absolute truth is too narrow an intellectual premise to be, well, true. Gregg: Like the responses to the first three objections, the response to this objection is straightforward when you think about it. Let’s look at a simple example. What is the correct answer to the math question of 2 + 2? 2 + 2 equals 4 for all people all the time. It always has. It always will. That’s about as “narrow” as it gets, but it’s also true. And the same thing is true for all statements of fact whether they are physical, historical, mathematical, etc. True statements are not just narrow. They’re unique. George Washington was the first president of the United States and no matter how many presidents follow him he will always be the first – the one and only first. And our embrace of the narrowness of truth is not only important. It is also essential to a livable world. The builder who adds 2 + 2 and gets 3 and then proceeds to put a beam in a building that’s too short will very quickly get a reminder of the consequences of ignoring the absolute nature of truth. VK: What would you say then to people who claim that absolute truth claims are too dogmatic to be acceptable to most people? Today’s society seems to embrace “tolerance” above just about everything else. Gregg: The first thing we should do is define what it means to be dogmatic. A common definition of dogmatic might be “characterized by or given to the expression of opinions very strongly or positively held as if they were facts.” So, I would say “yes, absolute truth claims are dogmatic, because a true claim is a fact. So, we should treat it as a fact. An objective fact is going to be a fact regardless of subjective feeling about the fact. I want to distinguish, however, between the truth claim, the fact itself, and the truth claimer – the person holding on to the truth. The truth claim itself is “dogmatic” because it is a fact but that doesn’t mean “truth claimers” must be unpleasant in doggedly proclaiming the truth. We can and should be humble and respectful when we hold in a determined way to the truth. Still, the truth is truth even if expressed in the wrong manner; error is error even if expressed humbly. VK: I think that’s a great distinction. We Christians are called to proclaim the truth with love and concern for others. It’s sometimes said that Christians must be “winsome” as we engage the world. Winsome is an old word that’s hardly ever used anymore. It means charming, cheerful, pleasant, and even joy-creating. So, it’s possible for us to be determined and persistent – dogmatic if you will – in our proclamation of the truth while not having to be unpleasant as we go about it. So, what else do the Anchored by Truth listeners need to know about objections that are raised against the existence of absolute truth? Gregg: I taught my Sunday school class that in addition to specific objections about the existence of absolute truth, there are also various views and philosophies that deny the absoluteness of truth. VK: Can you give us an example of what you’re thinking about? Gregg: A particularly common philosophy or attitude in our day and age that denies the absoluteness of truth is skepticism. Skepticism claims that we should suspend judgment on everything, that we should doubt all truth claims. Anyone who listens to news or so called “educational” programming will quickly realize that skepticism about historic, orthodox Christianity and traditional values and views abounds, though there is certainly plenty of dogmatism on anything that challenges those values. That observation aside, skeptics will assert philosophically that reason demands that we simply must doubt any and all truth claims. VK: But of course you don’t agree with this claim and neither should any thinking Christian? Gregg: No, of course not. Skepticism is self-refuting. If we are to doubt every truth claim we must doubt skepticism. Skepticism says we must doubt all truth claims but then tries to exempt itself from its own standard. So, the skeptic wants to claim that skepticism is the only knowable truth yet provides no reasoned basis for supporting its exemption from the standard it establishes. VK: That does seem to be a real problem. What other philosophies deny the absoluteness of truth? Gregg: Agnosticism is another philosophy that denies that absolute truth exists. There are two forms of agnosticism. The strong form of agnosticism affirms that all truth is unknowable. The soft form of agnosticism says that at least we can’t know reality even if we can know appearances. I would respond to agnosticism in this way. The “father of modern agnosticism” is Immanuel Kant. All of philosophy was shaken by his success in convincing many others that we can’t know the truth about reality. His philosophy is fascinating, but it is self-defeating. Kant claims as a truth that we cannot know absolute truth. If he is correct in his belief then he – and we – can’t even know the truth of his own statement; and if he is wrong we have no reason to even care about his philosophy. VK: That was a point that we made many times in our “Lord of Logic” series. The statement “There is no such thing as absolute truth” is self-refuting. Just as you observed about skepticism it fails the very standard it tries to establish. Gregg: A good rule for Christians to master is: “every negative presupposes a positive.” Let me restate that to make sure our audience gets a chance to absorb it. “Every negative presupposes a positive.” You can’t doubt something, the negative, without there first being the thing you’re doubting, the positive. One obvious example of this is that someone who says, “there is no truth,” presupposes the truth of his own statement. Another very common philosophy that makes a jumbled mess out of truth and the absolute character of truth is pluralism. Of course, pluralism is rampant all around us today. VK: I think that most people would say that’s a good thing. At least the word “pluralism” sounds like something we ought to support – just about like tolerance. Gregg: There’s an old saying that “it’s good to keep an open mind but don’t let your mind be so open that your brains fall out.” That’s what happens with pluralism. Pluralism affirms all so-called “truths” – even opposites. This is typical of many Eastern religions as well as many prevailing cultural and politically trendy views. But it is inescapable that the opposite of true is false. The pluralist view often degenerates to the position that whatever is sincerely believed is said to be true, but sincerity is not a test for truth. As Norman Geisler says, “A member of the Flat Earth Society may be sincere, but he is sincerely wrong.” VK: Pluralism is one of those tricky words. It has a tendency to shift shapes depending on whose using it. Plural simply means “multiple” or “having more than one.” So, in many areas of life, like ice cream flavors, plural choices are a good thing. The problem arises when you add the “ism” to the plural. Accepted literally, “pluralism” means that someone could claim to hold onto views that are directly contradictory. That turns thinking and communication into a meaningless hash of ideas from which neither truth or sense would ever emerge. What’s next? Gregg: Relativism denies absolute truth. The philosopher Alfred North Whitehead held the view that reality has no unchanging forms. This was the opposite of Plato. Whitehead also said that all truth is in the process of changing and is never found because that to which a truth claim is made is always changing, i.e., the essence of reality is change. Whitehead’s philosophy is the source of Process Theology – which is very common in some liberal seminary thinking, and championed by theologians like John Cobb. VK: And like pluralism, relativism is all around us today not only in religious discussions but also in political and cultural ones. Gregg: And it is equally hazardous to your mental health and fitness in all of its manifestations. Like the other critiques which we have been making, relativism either affirms that relativism is absolutely true – in which case it is self-defeating – or else its claim is just another relative statement for which there is no reason to believe it or accept it. As you said relativism reduces attempts to think clearly and form a coherent worldview into an impossible hash of irreconcilable claims and concepts. Well, a final philosophy that rejects the absolute nature of truth that we should discuss is post-modernism. Post-modernism avoids all truth claims and makes no truth claims. This is a radical extreme of relativism and pluralism. The idea of post-modernism – which is seen in literature, philosophy, and even architecture – is seen in the atheist Jacques Derrida, the father of “deconstructionism,” i.e., meaning anything expressed by one person can be, and should be, deconstructed by the hearer and reconstructed to meet his needs. Therefore, language is understood in the context of the hearer, not the speaker, and there is no objective meaning. VK: Yikes. The dangers of stripping the objective meaning from words – or saying that words only mean what the hearer says they mean – pretty much does away with responsible conversation. Anything anyone says can be misconstrued or misinterpreted if the hearer simply wants to. That will certainly have a chilling effect on people being able to have meaningful dialogues on any subjects other than trivial ones. Gregg: That’s absolutely correct. With Derrida simple conversations can have disastrous implications for any and all speakers. Moreover, any meaningful philosophy comes to an end, for his philosophy self-destructs as it deconstructs. Post-modernism fails because it either makes a truth claim – which would be contradictory and self-defeating – or it makes no truth claim, and is not, therefore, in the game of truth. By its own keywords – “whatever,” “so what” – it mocks truth and falls apart. Ideas have consequences, and we use language to express ideas. Communication and conversation are essential to learning and growth so when only one side controls the conversation progress and learning stop. Listen to these words: “Let me control the textbooks, and I will control the state . . . when an opponent declares ‘I will not come over to your side,’ I will calmly say, ‘What are you? You will pass on. Your descendents, however, stand in the new camp.’” Who made that statement? Answer: Adolph Hitler. The rise of post-modernism is a truly ominous turn in the spread of truth including Biblical and gospel truth. VK: That’s unbelievably sad and unbelievably dangerous. If, as you said, post-modernism constricts or stops the spread of truth ultimately it stops the spread of knowledge. Yet, the spread of knowledge, scientific and otherwise, is what produced a modern world where we enjoy so many benefits of the advancements in technology and science. Gregg: I told my Sunday school class to give some thought for a few minutes to the times of the Old Testament - to go back to some of the things in recorded history that most people agree on. Secular history tells us that there were civilizations in Egypt and Babylon and China and Canaan and the Mediterranean area we call Greece around the timeframe of 2500-2200 BC. Abraham was born around 2000 BC. The Exodus was around 1500-1450 BC; the Law given to Moses was probably around 1450 BC; David becomes king around 1000 BC; the last book of the OT, Malachi, around 400 BC. And then God was “quiet” for 400 years. In the time frame of the Old Testament there were the Empires of Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, and Persia. In the 400 “quiet years,” i.e., the “Intertestamental Years,” there emerged the Empires of Greece and Rome. Obviously, a lot was going on in the world. The Parthenon was built in 442 BC; the Great Wall of China was built between 263-233 BC. My point is this: people knew how to think in those days. There was nothing backward about their intellectual capacity. They didn’t have the technology that we do but they built impressive empires and structures. And a large part of the reason we have the technology that we do is because we “stand on the shoulders of giants” who have come before us. They people of those times knew that truth existed and despite a lack of the technology that we have today they still had accomplishments that cause us to marvel today. VK: That’s a great point. Despite our technological sophistication our generation doesn’t have a monopoly on the ability to reason and make accurate observations about the created order. We may be able to send messages around the world in an instant whereas it took the ancients days or weeks. But that doesn’t mean the content of our messages necessarily makes more sense. Transmitting nonsense or error more quickly doesn’t mean error becomes truth or nonsense makes sense. We have improved technological abilities today but that does not mean we have improved reasoning skills. Nor, sadly does it mean that people have become more virtuous or godly. Thankfully, there are many, many people being saved around the world every day but those believers are not more saved than those that Jesus preached to. And the lost today are going to be just as lost. That’s the primary reason we do these Anchored by Truth episodes. We want to save as many as people as possible and they only way to do that is to point them to the real “Anchor of Truth.” Gregg: Of course those of us who do present the gospel are well aware that we can never be the reason anyone is saved – that’s God’s job. But we can introduce one of the parties – the unbelieving one – to the other One. Jesus said, “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him” (John 6:44); and He said, “But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself” (John 12:32). That’s the good news. The sobering news is what was included in the scripture you used in the opening. Certainly, some of the most sobering verses in the entire Bible are what Paul said in Romans 1:20 – “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.” That part about unbelievers having no excuse should motivate us to increase our efforts in evangelism and motivate those who haven’t accepted Christ as their Savior to think very carefully about that choice. VK: Well, sounds like a great time to pray. Today let’s listen to a prayer for restoration of the worship of the one true God to our communities and nation since it is only through that restoration that our unsaved friends and neighbors have the hope for salvation. ---- PRAYER FOR RESTORATION OF THE WORSHIP OF THE ONE TRUE GOD VK: We’d like to remind our audience that a lot of our radio episodes are linked together in series of topics so if they missed any episodes or if they just want to hear one again, all of these episodes are available on your favorite podcast app. To find them just search on “Anchored by Truth by Crystal Sea Books.” If you’d like to hear more, try out crystalseabooks.com where “We’re not famous but our Boss is!” (Bible Quotes from the New International Version) Romans, Chapter 1, verses 18 through 20

Dr. Oord shares John Cobb's idea that God has not hands and feet but our hands and feet.

Kenny Brack talks about his role as Chief Test Driver for McLaren, Martin Warner gives an insight into the Shere Hill Climb and Steve Holter gives us a view of the daredevil record breaker John Cobb. ‘Corridors of Power', our gameshow of opinionated nonsense,  this month looks at the greatest drivers NEVER to have won Le Mans.

Dr. John Cobb Jr. turned 96. John has led a remarkably long and good life. Born in Kobe, Japan and growing up in Hiroshima he moved back to the US (Georgia) in 1944 before the bombing of Hiroshima. John's love for Asian culture continues in his important work on advancing the ideas of an ecological civilization in Asia and in his home in Pomona, California. John is considered one of the world's foremost process theologians. Highly respected in China, Japan and South Korea for his wisdom and counsel on the notion of an ecological civilization, he was an inspiration to Mayor Park Won-soon of Seoul, South Korea. Both John and I were guests of Mayor Park in September 2019 where we explored the prospects of South Korea adopting the concept of an ecological civilization and my well-being economic governance ideas. It's so important to have elders like John in one's life. I cherish his wise counsel and his encouragement. He has been my mentor and encouraged me for many years to keep pursuing the truth about economics, money and well-being. John was the inspiration behind the Genuine Progress Indicator and the Index for Sustainable Economic Welfare which was developed along with ecologist Dr. Herman Daly, published in their seminal book on sustainability called For the Common Good (1987). Both John and Herman have inspired my own pursuit of an alternative economics based on well-being and happiness. I first met John (and his son Cliff Cobb) in 1999 while working on the US Genuine Progress Indicator with the US economic think-tank Redefining Progress. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/mark-anielski/message

John Cobb, legendary inventor and JCOB's CTO, provides technical insights on bike saddles and short cranksets.

Process theology in the current crisis.

It is getting near the most epic of the HBC online classes. As part of the celebration - and the emails I got saying MORE PODCASTS BECAUSE I AM SELF-DISTANCING - I combined two of my favorite previous visits into this episode. First you hear John Cobb give a theo-philosophical sermon on the materializing trajectory of Christianity. Then liberal Reformed Theologian, Paul Capetz, joins me for the conversation in which we discuss the trinity, Religious Pluralism, The importance of the Incarnation, Discuss fall of the Mainline Churches, Liberalism? Progressive?, and the Mission of the Church.  Enjoy this episode? Then checkout this book. Don't forget to check out Cobb's recent visit to answer the question “Why Whitehead?” John Cobb taught theology at the Claremont School of Theology from 1958 to 1990. In 2014 he became the first theologian elected to the prestigious American Academy of Arts and Sciences for his interdisciplinary work in ecology, economics, and biology. He has published over 30 books including the first full length text in eco-philosophy. In 1973, with David Griffin, he established the Center for Process Studies. In retirement he lives at Pilgrim Place in Claremont, California. Throughout his career he has contributed to Whitehead scholarship and promoted process-relational programs and organizations. Most recently, he helped found the Claremont Institute for Process Studies, and has been heavily involved in supporting work toward the goal of China becoming an ecological civilization. Follow the podcast, drop a review, send feedback/questions or become a member of the HBC Community. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is a super special conversation between two preeminent scholars and dear friends. Two friends of the podcast gathered in Claremont a few years back as part of the Emergent Village Theological Conversation on Process Theology and this gem of a conversation happened! John Cobb and Tom Oord discuss Jesus and a number of other goodies. This barrel aged edition of the podcast is here so I can share episodes from the last 12 years no longer available in the podcast feed for your nerdy listening pleasure.  Also if you enjoy the conversation then you should totally come join the upcoming reading group with John Cobb on Alfred North Whitehead's Process and Reality. In this series of lectures John Cobb will provide an introduction to one of the most compelling and challenging philosophical texts of the Twentieth Century. Process and Reality is a notoriously difficult text, but the goal of this course is to enable students to not only skim the surface but probe its deeper dimensions. With his decades of experience as a scholar and teacher of Whitehead, Cobb will elucidate the major themes and illuminate the major concepts in a way that is accessible to anyone. Follow the podcast, drop a review, send feedback/questions or become a member of the HBC Community. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

I am beyond excited about the upcoming class with our guest in this episode - John Cobb. This is the very first interview I ever recorded with Cobb and in it we discuss a process account of the incarnation, Kin-dom of God, and other Christological goodies. You will likely notice how my accent has changed in the last 12 years of podcasting and moves from North Carolina to Los Angeles and then to Edinburgh. Don't forget to check out Cobb's recent visit to answer the question "Why Whitehead?" John Cobb taught theology at the Claremont School of Theology from 1958 to 1990. In 2014 he became the first theologian elected to the prestigious American Academy of Arts and Sciences for his interdisciplinary work in ecology, economics, and biology. He has published over 30 books including the first full length text in eco-philosophy. In 1973, with David Griffin, he established the Center for Process Studies. In retirement he lives at Pilgrim Place in Claremont, California. Throughout his career he has contributed to Whitehead scholarship and promoted process-relational programs and organizations. Most recently, he helped found the Claremont Institute for Process Studies, and has been heavily involved in supporting work toward the goal of China becoming an ecological civilization. Follow the podcast, drop a review, send feedback/questions or become a member of the HBC Community. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Dr. John B. Cobb Jr. is the greatest living interpreter of Alfred North Whitehead and he is here to tell you Why Whitehead! In this special episode you will heard a powerful invitation from JC himself to join our upcoming online extravaganza - Probing PROCESS & REALITY. This 6 week online pop-up learning community is going to be zesty. You can find out more about it and register HERE or listen to the new podcast. Cobb taught theology at the Claremont School of Theology from 1958 to 1990. In 2014 he became the first theologian elected to the prestigious American Academy of Arts and Sciences for his interdisciplinary work in ecology, economics, and biology. He has published over 30 books including the first full length text in eco-philosophy. In 1973, with David Griffin, he established the Center for Process Studies. In retirement he lives at Pilgrim Place in Claremont, California. Throughout his career he has contributed to Whitehead scholarship and promoted process-relational programs and organizations. Most recently, he helped found the Claremont Institute for Process Studies, and has been heavily involved in supporting work toward the goal of China becoming an ecological civilization. Follow the podcast, drop a review, send feedback/questions or become a member of the HBC Community. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Get ready for a mind expanding and assumption challenging episode with the one and only Rupert Sheldrake. When a guest comes to the podcast on recommendation from John Cobb you have to get pumped. Prior to the interview I read two of Sheldrakes books that I would definitely recommend to you. In this wide-ranging conversation we end discussing the dogmatism of scientific materialists, the nature of consciousness, parapsychology, pets, psychedelics, ritual, pilgrimage, neo-darwinism, the changing shape of religion, epigenetic, creativity in evolution, Bergson, Whitehead, and why Rupert loves the doctrine of the Trinity. Rupert Sheldrake, PhD, is a biologist and author best known for his hypothesis of morphic resonance. At Cambridge University he worked in developmental biology as a Fellow of Clare College. He was Principal Plant Physiologist at the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics and From 2005 to 2010 was Director of the Perrott-Warrick project, Cambridge. Rupert Sheldrake was not only kind enough to join the podcast, but is coming back for a live session with all the members of the Cosmic Campfire Online Book Group. If you want to join the fun and ask Rupert your own questions then head on over and sign up! If you want to hear more from Sheldrake here's a few places to go. Clearly you want to watch his BANNED TED TALK. Check out his books Science and Spiritual Practices: Transformative Experiences and Their Effects on Our Bodies, Brains, and Health and Science Set Free: 10 Paths to New Discovery. Both are available in physical, digital, and audio versions. Sheldrake also has a very informative and resource rich website. There you can find links to all the different podcasts that he has released. For a fun introduction to Rupert's work check out his visit to Russell Brand's podcast and his conversation with Joe Rogan. Follow the podcast, drop a review, send feedback/questions or become a member of the HBC Community. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Larry Norman is the Father of Christian Rock, integral to the Jesus People movement, an American Kierkegaard with a guitar, and the perfect figure to wrestle with the tangled shape of evangelicalism. Plus Larry Norman remains one of the most influential figures in my own faith journey. First, I encountered him through my Dad's records, discovering a unique prophetic voice set against the country and church's neglect of the poor, lust for war, and desire for more. Then I came to know Larry talking to him after his shows. I saw him 17 times before he passed. He learned my name, remembered my story, encouraged my intellectual quest, gave me song writing tips, and let me sing a verse of The Rock that Doesn't Roll with his band at a show in Florence, South Carolina (that was on my bucket list). PS I deleted 1200 words of love about Larry... the point being, what's the chance I would actually LOVE a book about him? It is rare that I love a book, the topic, and the guest this much! Not only that, this book isn't even by John Cobb, about process theology, or involve a visit from Catherine Keller. There is no exaggeration needed when I say that Gregory Thornbury wrote a fascinating, stimulating, and intoxicating biography of one of my heroes - Larry Norman. His newest book, Why Should the Devil have all the Good Music: Larry Norman and the Perils of Christian Rock, is so good I have read it twice. The first time I couldn't slow down to savor the book, because I wanted to know all the details about Larry I didn't know and the second time I only read a chapter a day and was sad when it ended. I hope you enjoy this conversation with Gregory 1/4th as much as me. Then you will want to get yourself the book and check out some old school Jesus rock for yourself. I even posted a cover of his tune The Great American Novel almost 8 years ago on YouTube. The New Yorker has a great piece up featuring Gregory titled The Unlikely Endurance of Christian Rock that the interested should definitely check out. Gregory Alan Thornbury has been a college professor, dean, and president of The King's College in New York City. A popular writer and speaker on philosophy, religion, and contemporary culture, he currently serves at the New York Academy of Art. Once you decide to be wise and purchase Why Should the Devil have all the Good Music: Larry Norman and the Perils of Christian Rock you can head over the book's webpage for resources, info, and whatever extra praise you need to put you over the line! Follow the podcast, drop a review, send feedback/questions or become a member of the HBC Community. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The number of people with doubts, questions, and experiences that send them out from the religious tradition of their birth is growing. For many religion is left behind completely, opting for an untraditioned spirituality, and others find the idea of God, Ultimate Reality, or any other substitute for the transcendent as intellectually incompatible with our scientific age. In Philip Clayton and Andrew Davis' new book you get to hear a collection of personal narratives from some of the most brilliant contemporary thinkers about their return to God. In How I Found God in Everyone and Everywhere you will see a variety of starting points, twists, turns, and conundrums, but a broad network of conclusions that testify to an emerging picture of a deeper spiritual realit In this conversation I get to talk to my dear friend and mentor, Philip Clayton, and one of his lucky current students and scholar, Andrew Davis. We tackle a host of topics from mysticism, panentheism, the viability of theism, the relationship between historic religious traditions and philosophical affirmation of the divine, and some other exciting goodies. The book itself includes chapters from Deepak Chopra, Richard Rohr, Matthew Fox, Rubert Sheldrake, Cynthia Bourgault, Ilia Delio, John Cobb, Loriliai Biernacki, Marjorie Suchocki, and Rabbi Bradley Shavit Artson. This episode is sponsored by the brand new book Keep Christianity Weird by Michael Frost. Check it out and get ready for Michael's visit to the podcast. Follow the podcast, drop a review, send feedback/questions or become a member of the HBC Community. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Your theological imagination is about to get overloaded with zestiness. To celebrate #TheologyBeerCamp Summer Edition in Denver (August 18-19) and Oklahoma City (August 25-26) we are looking back on some of the highlights of the first Theology Beer Camp in LA this past January. Can there be any greater highlight than John Cobb speaking at Beer Camp?! Here was the format for the final day of Theology Beer Camp: John Cobb gave a lecture, followed by getting interviewed, round robin style, with a host of different podcasts. In between each podcast interview, Tripp gave commentary on what Cobb said, claiming he was saying all the things John Cobb thought, but was too nice to say. You be the judge. Follow the podcast, drop a review, send feedback/questions or become a member of the HBC Community. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the final Theology Beer Camp special, John Cobb talks education and process theology. Then Nathan Gilmour talks with John Cobb. Then Tripp Fuller talks about Nathan Gilmour. Then Nathan Gilmour talks back.

This is a very special episode of The Theology Nerd podcast: Epiphanation It's always Epiphany when the Homebrewed Community gets together. What is Epiphanation? It is when we get together with the Homebrewed Community on Epiphany, discuss questions or topics that they have, live for 3 hours, while imbibing delicious craft beverages. To take part in the next Epiphanation and other Homebrewed events and courses, head on over to homebrewedcommunity.com to become a member. In this Epiphanation, we Epiphanate on: music, the arts, and the role the church plays in those John Cobb and Herman Daly's understanding of process, the environment, and economics. the relationship between biblical studies and systematic theology Follow the podcast, drop a review, send feedback/questions or become a member of the HBC Community. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

ADVENTURE IV. THE BOSCOMBE VALLEY MYSTERY  We were seated at breakfast one morning, my wife and I, when the maid brought in a telegram. It was from Sherlock Holmes and ran in this way: “Have you a couple of days to spare? Have just been wired for from the west of England in connection with Boscombe Valley tragedy. Shall be glad if you will come with me. Air and scenery perfect. Leave Paddington by the 11:15.” “What do you say, dear?” said my wife, looking across at me. “Will you go?” “I really don't know what to say. I have a fairly long list at present.” “Oh, Anstruther would do your work for you. You have been looking a little pale lately. I think that the change would do you good, and you are always so interested in Mr. Sherlock Holmes' cases.” “I should be ungrateful if I were not, seeing what I gained through one of them,” I answered. “But if I am to go, I must pack at once, for I have only half an hour.” My experience of camp life in Afghanistan had at least had the effect of making me a prompt and ready traveller. My wants were few and simple, so that in less than the time stated I was in a cab with my valise, rattling away to Paddington Station. Sherlock Holmes was pacing up and down the platform, his tall, gaunt figure made even gaunter and taller by his long grey travelling-cloak and close-fitting cloth cap. “It is really very good of you to come, Watson,” said he. “It makes a considerable difference to me, having someone with me on whom I can thoroughly rely. Local aid is always either worthless or else biassed. If you will keep the two corner seats I shall get the tickets.” We had the carriage to ourselves save for an immense litter of papers which Holmes had brought with him. Among these he rummaged and read, with intervals of note-taking and of meditation, until we were past Reading. Then he suddenly rolled them all into a gigantic ball and tossed them up onto the rack. “Have you heard anything of the case?” he asked. “Not a word. I have not seen a paper for some days.” “The London press has not had very full accounts. I have just been looking through all the recent papers in order to master the particulars. It seems, from what I gather, to be one of those simple cases which are so extremely difficult.” “That sounds a little paradoxical.” “But it is profoundly true. Singularity is almost invariably a clue. The more featureless and commonplace a crime is, the more difficult it is to bring it home. In this case, however, they have established a very serious case against the son of the murdered man.” “It is a murder, then?” “Well, it is conjectured to be so. I shall take nothing for granted until I have the opportunity of looking personally into it. I will explain the state of things to you, as far as I have been able to understand it, in a very few words. “Boscombe Valley is a country district not very far from Ross, in Herefordshire. The largest landed proprietor in that part is a Mr. John Turner, who made his money in Australia and returned some years ago to the old country. One of the farms which he held, that of Hatherley, was let to Mr. Charles McCarthy, who was also an ex-Australian. The men had known each other in the colonies, so that it was not unnatural that when they came to settle down they should do so as near each other as possible. Turner was apparently the richer man, so McCarthy became his tenant but still remained, it seems, upon terms of perfect equality, as they were frequently together. McCarthy had one son, a lad of eighteen, and Turner had an only daughter of the same age, but neither of them had wives living. They appear to have avoided the society of the neighbouring English families and to have led retired lives, though both the McCarthys were fond of sport and were frequently seen at the race-meetings of the neighbourhood. McCarthy kept two servants—a man and a girl. Turner had a considerable household, some half-dozen at the least. That is as much as I have been able to gather about the families. Now for the facts. “On June 3rd, that is, on Monday last, McCarthy left his house at Hatherley about three in the afternoon and walked down to the Boscombe Pool, which is a small lake formed by the spreading out of the stream which runs down the Boscombe Valley. He had been out with his serving-man in the morning at Ross, and he had told the man that he must hurry, as he had an appointment of importance to keep at three. From that appointment he never came back alive. “From Hatherley Farmhouse to the Boscombe Pool is a quarter of a mile, and two people saw him as he passed over this ground. One was an old woman, whose name is not mentioned, and the other was William Crowder, a game-keeper in the employ of Mr. Turner. Both these witnesses depose that Mr. McCarthy was walking alone. The game-keeper adds that within a few minutes of his seeing Mr. McCarthy pass he had seen his son, Mr. James McCarthy, going the same way with a gun under his arm. To the best of his belief, the father was actually in sight at the time, and the son was following him. He thought no more of the matter until he heard in the evening of the tragedy that had occurred. “The two McCarthys were seen after the time when William Crowder, the game-keeper, lost sight of them. The Boscombe Pool is thickly wooded round, with just a fringe of grass and of reeds round the edge. A girl of fourteen, Patience Moran, who is the daughter of the lodge-keeper of the Boscombe Valley estate, was in one of the woods picking flowers. She states that while she was there she saw, at the border of the wood and close by the lake, Mr. McCarthy and his son, and that they appeared to be having a violent quarrel. She heard Mr. McCarthy the elder using very strong language to his son, and she saw the latter raise up his hand as if to strike his father. She was so frightened by their violence that she ran away and told her mother when she reached home that she had left the two McCarthys quarrelling near Boscombe Pool, and that she was afraid that they were going to fight. She had hardly said the words when young Mr. McCarthy came running up to the lodge to say that he had found his father dead in the wood, and to ask for the help of the lodge-keeper. He was much excited, without either his gun or his hat, and his right hand and sleeve were observed to be stained with fresh blood. On following him they found the dead body stretched out upon the grass beside the pool. The head had been beaten in by repeated blows of some heavy and blunt weapon. The injuries were such as might very well have been inflicted by the butt-end of his son's gun, which was found lying on the grass within a few paces of the body. Under these circumstances the young man was instantly arrested, and a verdict of ‘wilful murder' having been returned at the inquest on Tuesday, he was on Wednesday brought before the magistrates at Ross, who have referred the case to the next Assizes. Those are the main facts of the case as they came out before the coroner and the police-court.” “I could hardly imagine a more damning case,” I remarked. “If ever circumstantial evidence pointed to a criminal it does so here.” “Circumstantial evidence is a very tricky thing,” answered Holmes thoughtfully. “It may seem to point very straight to one thing, but if you shift your own point of view a little, you may find it pointing in an equally uncompromising manner to something entirely different. It must be confessed, however, that the case looks exceedingly grave against the young man, and it is very possible that he is indeed the culprit. There are several people in the neighbourhood, however, and among them Miss Turner, the daughter of the neighbouring landowner, who believe in his innocence, and who have retained Lestrade, whom you may recollect in connection with the Study in Scarlet, to work out the case in his interest. Lestrade, being rather puzzled, has referred the case to me, and hence it is that two middle-aged gentlemen are flying westward at fifty miles an hour instead of quietly digesting their breakfasts at home.” “I am afraid,” said I, “that the facts are so obvious that you will find little credit to be gained out of this case.” “There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact,” he answered, laughing. “Besides, we may chance to hit upon some other obvious facts which may have been by no means obvious to Mr. Lestrade. You know me too well to think that I am boasting when I say that I shall either confirm or destroy his theory by means which he is quite incapable of employing, or even of understanding. To take the first example to hand, I very clearly perceive that in your bedroom the window is upon the right-hand side, and yet I question whether Mr. Lestrade would have noted even so self-evident a thing as that.” “How on earth—” “My dear fellow, I know you well. I know the military neatness which characterises you. You shave every morning, and in this season you shave by the sunlight; but since your shaving is less and less complete as we get farther back on the left side, until it becomes positively slovenly as we get round the angle of the jaw, it is surely very clear that that side is less illuminated than the other. I could not imagine a man of your habits looking at himself in an equal light and being satisfied with such a result. I only quote this as a trivial example of observation and inference. Therein lies my m�tier, and it is just possible that it may be of some service in the investigation which lies before us. There are one or two minor points which were brought out in the inquest, and which are worth considering.” “What are they?” “It appears that his arrest did not take place at once, but after the return to Hatherley Farm. On the inspector of constabulary informing him that he was a prisoner, he remarked that he was not surprised to hear it, and that it was no more than his deserts. This observation of his had the natural effect of removing any traces of doubt which might have remained in the minds of the coroner's jury.” “It was a confession,” I ejaculated. “No, for it was followed by a protestation of innocence.” “Coming on the top of such a damning series of events, it was at least a most suspicious remark.” “On the contrary,” said Holmes, “it is the brightest rift which I can at present see in the clouds. However innocent he might be, he could not be such an absolute imbecile as not to see that the circumstances were very black against him. Had he appeared surprised at his own arrest, or feigned indignation at it, I should have looked upon it as highly suspicious, because such surprise or anger would not be natural under the circumstances, and yet might appear to be the best policy to a scheming man. His frank acceptance of the situation marks him as either an innocent man, or else as a man of considerable self-restraint and firmness. As to his remark about his deserts, it was also not unnatural if you consider that he stood beside the dead body of his father, and that there is no doubt that he had that very day so far forgotten his filial duty as to bandy words with him, and even, according to the little girl whose evidence is so important, to raise his hand as if to strike him. The self-reproach and contrition which are displayed in his remark appear to me to be the signs of a healthy mind rather than of a guilty one.” I shook my head. “Many men have been hanged on far slighter evidence,” I remarked. “So they have. And many men have been wrongfully hanged.” “What is the young man's own account of the matter?” “It is, I am afraid, not very encouraging to his supporters, though there are one or two points in it which are suggestive. You will find it here, and may read it for yourself.” He picked out from his bundle a copy of the local Herefordshire paper, and having turned down the sheet he pointed out the paragraph in which the unfortunate young man had given his own statement of what had occurred. I settled myself down in the corner of the carriage and read it very carefully. It ran in this way: “Mr. James McCarthy, the only son of the deceased, was then called and gave evidence as follows: ‘I had been away from home for three days at Bristol, and had only just returned upon the morning of last Monday, the 3rd. My father was absent from home at the time of my arrival, and I was informed by the maid that he had driven over to Ross with John Cobb, the groom. Shortly after my return I heard the wheels of his trap in the yard, and, looking out of my window, I saw him get out and walk rapidly out of the yard, though I was not aware in which direction he was going. I then took my gun and strolled out in the direction of the Boscombe Pool, with the intention of visiting the rabbit warren which is upon the other side. On my way I saw William Crowder, the game-keeper, as he had stated in his evidence; but he is mistaken in thinking that I was following my father. I had no idea that he was in front of me. When about a hundred yards from the pool I heard a cry of “Cooee!” which was a usual signal between my father and myself. I then hurried forward, and found him standing by the pool. He appeared to be much surprised at seeing me and asked me rather roughly what I was doing there. A conversation ensued which led to high words and almost to blows, for my father was a man of a very violent temper. Seeing that his passion was becoming ungovernable, I left him and returned towards Hatherley Farm. I had not gone more than 150 yards, however, when I heard a hideous outcry behind me, which caused me to run back again. I found my father expiring upon the ground, with his head terribly injured. I dropped my gun and held him in my arms, but he almost instantly expired. I knelt beside him for some minutes, and then made my way to Mr. Turner's lodge-keeper, his house being the nearest, to ask for assistance. I saw no one near my father when I returned, and I have no idea how he came by his injuries. He was not a popular man, being somewhat cold and forbidding in his manners, but he had, as far as I know, no active enemies. I know nothing further of the matter.' “The Coroner: Did your father make any statement to you before he died? “Witness: He mumbled a few words, but I could only catch some allusion to a rat. “The Coroner: What did you understand by that? “Witness: It conveyed no meaning to me. I thought that he was delirious. “The Coroner: What was the point upon which you and your father had this final quarrel? “Witness: I should prefer not to answer. “The Coroner: I am afraid that I must press it. “Witness: It is really impossible for me to tell you. I can assure you that it has nothing to do with the sad tragedy which followed. “The Coroner: That is for the court to decide. I need not point out to you that your refusal to answer will prejudice your case considerably in any future proceedings which may arise. “Witness: I must still refuse. “The Coroner: I understand that the cry of ‘Cooee' was a common signal between you and your father? “Witness: It was. “The Coroner: How was it, then, that he uttered it before he saw you, and before he even knew that you had returned from Bristol? “Witness (with considerable confusion): I do not know. “A Juryman: Did you see nothing which aroused your suspicions when you returned on hearing the cry and found your father fatally injured? “Witness: Nothing definite. “The Coroner: What do you mean? “Witness: I was so disturbed and excited as I rushed out into the open, that I could think of nothing except of my father. Yet I have a vague impression that as I ran forward something lay upon the ground to the left of me. It seemed to me to be something grey in colour, a coat of some sort, or a plaid perhaps. When I rose from my father I looked round for it, but it was gone. “ ‘Do you mean that it disappeared before you went for help?' “ ‘Yes, it was gone.' “ ‘You cannot say what it was?' “ ‘No, I had a feeling something was there.' “ ‘How far from the body?' “ ‘A dozen yards or so.' “ ‘And how far from the edge of the wood?' “ ‘About the same.' “ ‘Then if it was removed it was while you were within a dozen yards of it?' “ ‘Yes, but with my back towards it.' “This concluded the examination of the witness.” “I see,” said I as I glanced down the column, “that the coroner in his concluding remarks was rather severe upon young McCarthy. He calls attention, and with reason, to the discrepancy about his father having signalled to him before seeing him, also to his refusal to give details of his conversation with his father, and his singular account of his father's dying words. They are all, as he remarks, very much against the son.” Holmes laughed softly to himself and stretched himself out upon the cushioned seat. “Both you and the coroner have been at some pains,” said he, “to single out the very strongest points in the young man's favour. Don't you see that you alternately give him credit for having too much imagination and too little? Too little, if he could not invent a cause of quarrel which would give him the sympathy of the jury; too much, if he evolved from his own inner consciousness anything so outr� as a dying reference to a rat, and the incident of the vanishing cloth. No, sir, I shall approach this case from the point of view that what this young man says is true, and we shall see whither that hypothesis will lead us. And now here is my pocket Petrarch, and not another word shall I say of this case until we are on the scene of action. We lunch at Swindon, and I see that we shall be there in twenty minutes.” It was nearly four o'clock when we at last, after passing through the beautiful Stroud Valley, and over the broad gleaming Severn, found ourselves at the pretty little country-town of Ross. A lean, ferret-like man, furtive and sly-looking, was waiting for us upon the platform. In spite of the light brown dustcoat and leather-leggings which he wore in deference to his rustic surroundings, I had no difficulty in recognising Lestrade, of Scotland Yard. With him we drove to the Hereford Arms where a room had already been engaged for us. “I have ordered a carriage,” said Lestrade as we sat over a cup of tea. “I knew your energetic nature, and that you would not be happy until you had been on the scene of the crime.” “It was very nice and complimentary of you,” Holmes answered. “It is entirely a question of barometric pressure.” Lestrade looked startled. “I do not quite follow,” he said. “How is the glass? Twenty-nine, I see. No wind, and not a cloud in the sky. I have a caseful of cigarettes here which need smoking, and the sofa is very much superior to the usual country hotel abomination. I do not think that it is probable that I shall use the carriage to-night.” Lestrade laughed indulgently. “You have, no doubt, already formed your conclusions from the newspapers,” he said. “The case is as plain as a pikestaff, and the more one goes into it the plainer it becomes. Still, of course, one can't refuse a lady, and such a very positive one, too. She has heard of you, and would have your opinion, though I repeatedly told her that there was nothing which you could do which I had not already done. Why, bless my soul! here is her carriage at the door.” He had hardly spoken before there rushed into the room one of the most lovely young women that I have ever seen in my life. Her violet eyes shining, her lips parted, a pink flush upon her cheeks, all thought of her natural reserve lost in her overpowering excitement and concern. “Oh, Mr. Sherlock Holmes!” she cried, glancing from one to the other of us, and finally, with a woman's quick intuition, fastening upon my companion, “I am so glad that you have come. I have driven down to tell you so. I know that James didn't do it. I know it, and I want you to start upon your work knowing it, too. Never let yourself doubt upon that point. We have known each other since we were little children, and I know his faults as no one else does; but he is too tender-hearted to hurt a fly. Such a charge is absurd to anyone who really knows him.” “I hope we may clear him, Miss Turner,” said Sherlock Holmes. “You may rely upon my doing all that I can.” “But you have read the evidence. You have formed some conclusion? Do you not see some loophole, some flaw? Do you not yourself think that he is innocent?” “I think that it is very probable.” “There, now!” she cried, throwing back her head and looking defiantly at Lestrade. “You hear! He gives me hopes.” Lestrade shrugged his shoulders. “I am afraid that my colleague has been a little quick in forming his conclusions,” he said. “But he is right. Oh! I know that he is right. James never did it. And about his quarrel with his father, I am sure that the reason why he would not speak about it to the coroner was because I was concerned in it.” “In what way?” asked Holmes. “It is no time for me to hide anything. James and his father had many disagreements about me. Mr. McCarthy was very anxious that there should be a marriage between us. James and I have always loved each other as brother and sister; but of course he is young and has seen very little of life yet, and—and—well, he naturally did not wish to do anything like that yet. So there were quarrels, and this, I am sure, was one of them.” “And your father?” asked Holmes. “Was he in favour of such a union?” “No, he was averse to it also. No one but Mr. McCarthy was in favour of it.” A quick blush passed over her fresh young face as Holmes shot one of his keen, questioning glances at her. “Thank you for this information,” said he. “May I see your father if I call to-morrow?” “I am afraid the doctor won't allow it.” “The doctor?” “Yes, have you not heard? Poor father has never been strong for years back, but this has broken him down completely. He has taken to his bed, and Dr. Willows says that he is a wreck and that his nervous system is shattered. Mr. McCarthy was the only man alive who had known dad in the old days in Victoria.” “Ha! In Victoria! That is important.” “Yes, at the mines.” “Quite so; at the gold-mines, where, as I understand, Mr. Turner made his money.” “Yes, certainly.” “Thank you, Miss Turner. You have been of material assistance to me.” “You will tell me if you have any news to-morrow. No doubt you will go to the prison to see James. Oh, if you do, Mr. Holmes, do tell him that I know him to be innocent.” “I will, Miss Turner.” “I must go home now, for dad is very ill, and he misses me so if I leave him. Good-bye, and God help you in your undertaking.” She hurried from the room as impulsively as she had entered, and we heard the wheels of her carriage rattle off down the street. “I am ashamed of you, Holmes,” said Lestrade with dignity after a few minutes' silence. “Why should you raise up hopes which you are bound to disappoint? I am not over-tender of heart, but I call it cruel.” “I think that I see my way to clearing James McCarthy,” said Holmes. “Have you an order to see him in prison?” “Yes, but only for you and me.” “Then I shall reconsider my resolution about going out. We have still time to take a train to Hereford and see him to-night?” “Ample.” “Then let us do so. Watson, I fear that you will find it very slow, but I shall only be away a couple of hours.” I walked down to the station with them, and then wandered through the streets of the little town, finally returning to the hotel, where I lay upon the sofa and tried to interest myself in a yellow-backed novel. The puny plot of the story was so thin, however, when compared to the deep mystery through which we were groping, and I found my attention wander so continually from the action to the fact, that I at last flung it across the room and gave myself up entirely to a consideration of the events of the day. Supposing that this unhappy young man's story were absolutely true, then what hellish thing, what absolutely unforeseen and extraordinary calamity could have occurred between the time when he parted from his father, and the moment when, drawn back by his screams, he rushed into the glade? It was something terrible and deadly. What could it be? Might not the nature of the injuries reveal something to my medical instincts? I rang the bell and called for the weekly county paper, which contained a verbatim account of the inquest. In the surgeon's deposition it was stated that the posterior third of the left parietal bone and the left half of the occipital bone had been shattered by a heavy blow from a blunt weapon. I marked the spot upon my own head. Clearly such a blow must have been struck from behind. That was to some extent in favour of the accused, as when seen quarrelling he was face to face with his father. Still, it did not go for very much, for the older man might have turned his back before the blow fell. Still, it might be worth while to call Holmes' attention to it. Then there was the peculiar dying reference to a rat. What could that mean? It could not be delirium. A man dying from a sudden blow does not commonly become delirious. No, it was more likely to be an attempt to explain how he met his fate. But what could it indicate? I cudgelled my brains to find some possible explanation. And then the incident of the grey cloth seen by young McCarthy. If that were true the murderer must have dropped some part of his dress, presumably his overcoat, in his flight, and must have had the hardihood to return and to carry it away at the instant when the son was kneeling with his back turned not a dozen paces off. What a tissue of mysteries and improbabilities the whole thing was! I did not wonder at Lestrade's opinion, and yet I had so much faith in Sherlock Holmes' insight that I could not lose hope as long as every fresh fact seemed to strengthen his conviction of young McCarthy's innocence. It was late before Sherlock Holmes returned. He came back alone, for Lestrade was staying in lodgings in the town. “The glass still keeps very high,” he remarked as he sat down. “It is of importance that it should not rain before we are able to go over the ground. On the other hand, a man should be at his very best and keenest for such nice work as that, and I did not wish to do it when fagged by a long journey. I have seen young McCarthy.” “And what did you learn from him?” “Nothing.” “Could he throw no light?” “None at all. I was inclined to think at one time that he knew who had done it and was screening him or her, but I am convinced now that he is as puzzled as everyone else. He is not a very quick-witted youth, though comely to look at and, I should think, sound at heart.” “I cannot admire his taste,” I remarked, “if it is indeed a fact that he was averse to a marriage with so charming a young lady as this Miss Turner.” “Ah, thereby hangs a rather painful tale. This fellow is madly, insanely, in love with her, but some two years ago, when he was only a lad, and before he really knew her, for she had been away five years at a boarding-school, what does the idiot do but get into the clutches of a barmaid in Bristol and marry her at a registry office? No one knows a word of the matter, but you can imagine how maddening it must be to him to be upbraided for not doing what he would give his very eyes to do, but what he knows to be absolutely impossible. It was sheer frenzy of this sort which made him throw his hands up into the air when his father, at their last interview, was goading him on to propose to Miss Turner. On the other hand, he had no means of supporting himself, and his father, who was by all accounts a very hard man, would have thrown him over utterly had he known the truth. It was with his barmaid wife that he had spent the last three days in Bristol, and his father did not know where he was. Mark that point. It is of importance. Good has come out of evil, however, for the barmaid, finding from the papers that he is in serious trouble and likely to be hanged, has thrown him over utterly and has written to him to say that she has a husband already in the Bermuda Dockyard, so that there is really no tie between them. I think that that bit of news has consoled young McCarthy for all that he has suffered.” “But if he is innocent, who has done it?” “Ah! who? I would call your attention very particularly to two points. One is that the murdered man had an appointment with someone at the pool, and that the someone could not have been his son, for his son was away, and he did not know when he would return. The second is that the murdered man was heard to cry ‘Cooee!' before he knew that his son had returned. Those are the crucial points upon which the case depends. And now let us talk about George Meredith, if you please, and we shall leave all minor matters until to-morrow.” There was no rain, as Holmes had foretold, and the morning broke bright and cloudless. At nine o'clock Lestrade called for us with the carriage, and we set off for Hatherley Farm and the Boscombe Pool. “There is serious news this morning,” Lestrade observed. “It is said that Mr. Turner, of the Hall, is so ill that his life is despaired of.” “An elderly man, I presume?” said Holmes. “About sixty; but his constitution has been shattered by his life abroad, and he has been in failing health for some time. This business has had a very bad effect upon him. He was an old friend of McCarthy's, and, I may add, a great benefactor to him, for I have learned that he gave him Hatherley Farm rent free.” “Indeed! That is interesting,” said Holmes. “Oh, yes! In a hundred other ways he has helped him. Everybody about here speaks of his kindness to him.” “Really! Does it not strike you as a little singular that this McCarthy, who appears to have had little of his own, and to have been under such obligations to Turner, should still talk of marrying his son to Turner's daughter, who is, presumably, heiress to the estate, and that in such a very cocksure manner, as if it were merely a case of a proposal and all else would follow? It is the more strange, since we know that Turner himself was averse to the idea. The daughter told us as much. Do you not deduce something from that?” “We have got to the deductions and the inferences,” said Lestrade, winking at me. “I find it hard enough to tackle facts, Holmes, without flying away after theories and fancies.” “You are right,” said Holmes demurely; “you do find it very hard to tackle the facts.” “Anyhow, I have grasped one fact which you seem to find it difficult to get hold of,” replied Lestrade with some warmth. “And that is—” “That McCarthy senior met his death from McCarthy junior and that all theories to the contrary are the merest moonshine.” “Well, moonshine is a brighter thing than fog,” said Holmes, laughing. “But I am very much mistaken if this is not Hatherley Farm upon the left.” “Yes, that is it.” It was a widespread, comfortable-looking building, two-storied, slate-roofed, with great yellow blotches of lichen upon the grey walls. The drawn blinds and the smokeless chimneys, however, gave it a stricken look, as though the weight of this horror still lay heavy upon it. We called at the door, when the maid, at Holmes' request, showed us the boots which her master wore at the time of his death, and also a pair of the son's, though not the pair which he had then had. Having measured these very carefully from seven or eight different points, Holmes desired to be led to the court-yard, from which we all followed the winding track which led to Boscombe Pool. Sherlock Holmes was transformed when he was hot upon such a scent as this. Men who had only known the quiet thinker and logician of Baker Street would have failed to recognise him. His face flushed and darkened. His brows were drawn into two hard black lines, while his eyes shone out from beneath them with a steely glitter. His face was bent downward, his shoulders bowed, his lips compressed, and the veins stood out like whipcord in his long, sinewy neck. His nostrils seemed to dilate with a purely animal lust for the chase, and his mind was so absolutely concentrated upon the matter before him that a question or remark fell unheeded upon his ears, or, at the most, only provoked a quick, impatient snarl in reply. Swiftly and silently he made his way along the track which ran through the meadows, and so by way of the woods to the Boscombe Pool. It was damp, marshy ground, as is all that district, and there were marks of many feet, both upon the path and amid the short grass which bounded it on either side. Sometimes Holmes would hurry on, sometimes stop dead, and once he made quite a little detour into the meadow. Lestrade and I walked behind him, the detective indifferent and contemptuous, while I watched my friend with the interest which sprang from the conviction that every one of his actions was directed towards a definite end. The Boscombe Pool, which is a little reed-girt sheet of water some fifty yards across, is situated at the boundary between the Hatherley Farm and the private park of the wealthy Mr. Turner. Above the woods which lined it upon the farther side we could see the red, jutting pinnacles which marked the site of the rich landowner's dwelling. On the Hatherley side of the pool the woods grew very thick, and there was a narrow belt of sodden grass twenty paces across between the edge of the trees and the reeds which lined the lake. Lestrade showed us the exact spot at which the body had been found, and, indeed, so moist was the ground, that I could plainly see the traces which had been left by the fall of the stricken man. To Holmes, as I could see by his eager face and peering eyes, very many other things were to be read upon the trampled grass. He ran round, like a dog who is picking up a scent, and then turned upon my companion. “What did you go into the pool for?” he asked. “I fished about with a rake. I thought there might be some weapon or other trace. But how on earth—” “Oh, tut, tut! I have no time! That left foot of yours with its inward twist is all over the place. A mole could trace it, and there it vanishes among the reeds. Oh, how simple it would all have been had I been here before they came like a herd of buffalo and wallowed all over it. Here is where the party with the lodge-keeper came, and they have covered all tracks for six or eight feet round the body. But here are three separate tracks of the same feet.” He drew out a lens and lay down upon his waterproof to have a better view, talking all the time rather to himself than to us. “These are young McCarthy's feet. Twice he was walking, and once he ran swiftly, so that the soles are deeply marked and the heels hardly visible. That bears out his story. He ran when he saw his father on the ground. Then here are the father's feet as he paced up and down. What is this, then? It is the butt-end of the gun as the son stood listening. And this? Ha, ha! What have we here? Tiptoes! tiptoes! Square, too, quite unusual boots! They come, they go, they come again—of course that was for the cloak. Now where did they come from?” He ran up and down, sometimes losing, sometimes finding the track until we were well within the edge of the wood and under the shadow of a great beech, the largest tree in the neighbourhood. Holmes traced his way to the farther side of this and lay down once more upon his face with a little cry of satisfaction. For a long time he remained there, turning over the leaves and dried sticks, gathering up what seemed to me to be dust into an envelope and examining with his lens not only the ground but even the bark of the tree as far as he could reach. A jagged stone was lying among the moss, and this also he carefully examined and retained. Then he followed a pathway through the wood until he came to the highroad, where all traces were lost. “It has been a case of considerable interest,” he remarked, returning to his natural manner. “I fancy that this grey house on the right must be the lodge. I think that I will go in and have a word with Moran, and perhaps write a little note. Having done that, we may drive back to our luncheon. You may walk to the cab, and I shall be with you presently.” It was about ten minutes before we regained our cab and drove back into Ross, Holmes still carrying with him the stone which he had picked up in the wood. “This may interest you, Lestrade,” he remarked, holding it out. “The murder was done with it.” “I see no marks.” “There are none.” “How do you know, then?” “The grass was growing under it. It had only lain there a few days. There was no sign of a place whence it had been taken. It corresponds with the injuries. There is no sign of any other weapon.” “And the murderer?” “Is a tall man, left-handed, limps with the right leg, wears thick-soled shooting-boots and a grey cloak, smokes Indian cigars, uses a cigar-holder, and carries a blunt pen-knife in his pocket. There are several other indications, but these may be enough to aid us in our search.” Lestrade laughed. “I am afraid that I am still a sceptic,” he said. “Theories are all very well, but we have to deal with a hard-headed British jury.” “Nous verrons,” answered Holmes calmly. “You work your own method, and I shall work mine. I shall be busy this afternoon, and shall probably return to London by the evening train.” “And leave your case unfinished?” “No, finished.” “But the mystery?” “It is solved.” “Who was the criminal, then?” “The gentleman I describe.” “But who is he?” “Surely it would not be difficult to find out. This is not such a populous neighbourhood.” Lestrade shrugged his shoulders. “I am a practical man,” he said, “and I really cannot undertake to go about the country looking for a left-handed gentleman with a game leg. I should become the laughing-stock of Scotland Yard.” “All right,” said Holmes quietly. “I have given you the chance. Here are your lodgings. Good-bye. I shall drop you a line before I leave.” Having left Lestrade at his rooms, we drove to our hotel, where we found lunch upon the table. Holmes was silent and buried in thought with a pained expression upon his face, as one who finds himself in a perplexing position. “Look here, Watson,” he said when the cloth was cleared “just sit down in this chair and let me preach to you for a little. I don't know quite what to do, and I should value your advice. Light a cigar and let me expound.” “Pray do so.” “Well, now, in considering this case there are two points about young McCarthy's narrative which struck us both instantly, although they impressed me in his favour and you against him. One was the fact that his father should, according to his account, cry ‘Cooee!' before seeing him. The other was his singular dying reference to a rat. He mumbled several words, you understand, but that was all that caught the son's ear. Now from this double point our research must commence, and we will begin it by presuming that what the lad says is absolutely true.” “What of this ‘Cooee!' then?” “Well, obviously it could not have been meant for the son. The son, as far as he knew, was in Bristol. It was mere chance that he was within earshot. The ‘Cooee!' was meant to attract the attention of whoever it was that he had the appointment with. But ‘Cooee' is a distinctly Australian cry, and one which is used between Australians. There is a strong presumption that the person whom McCarthy expected to meet him at Boscombe Pool was someone who had been in Australia.” “What of the rat, then?” Sherlock Holmes took a folded paper from his pocket and flattened it out on the table. “This is a map of the Colony of Victoria,” he said. “I wired to Bristol for it last night.” He put his hand over part of the map. “What do you read?” “ARAT,” I read. “And now?” He raised his hand. “BALLARAT.” “Quite so. That was the word the man uttered, and of which his son only caught the last two syllables. He was trying to utter the name of his murderer. So and so, of Ballarat.” “It is wonderful!” I exclaimed. “It is obvious. And now, you see, I had narrowed the field down considerably. The possession of a grey garment was a third point which, granting the son's statement to be correct, was a certainty. We have come now out of mere vagueness to the definite conception of an Australian from Ballarat with a grey cloak.” “Certainly.” “And one who was at home in the district, for the pool can only be approached by the farm or by the estate, where strangers could hardly wander.” “Quite so.” “Then comes our expedition of to-day. By an examination of the ground I gained the trifling details which I gave to that imbecile Lestrade, as to the personality of the criminal.” “But how did you gain them?” “You know my method. It is founded upon the observation of trifles.” “His height I know that you might roughly judge from the length of his stride. His boots, too, might be told from their traces.” “Yes, they were peculiar boots.” “But his lameness?” “The impression of his right foot was always less distinct than his left. He put less weight upon it. Why? Because he limped—he was lame.” “But his left-handedness.” “You were yourself struck by the nature of the injury as recorded by the surgeon at the inquest. The blow was struck from immediately behind, and yet was upon the left side. Now, how can that be unless it were by a left-handed man? He had stood behind that tree during the interview between the father and son. He had even smoked there. I found the ash of a cigar, which my special knowledge of tobacco ashes enables me to pronounce as an Indian cigar. I have, as you know, devoted some attention to this, and written a little monograph on the ashes of 140 different varieties of pipe, cigar, and cigarette tobacco. Having found the ash, I then looked round and discovered the stump among the moss where he had tossed it. It was an Indian cigar, of the variety which are rolled in Rotterdam.” “And the cigar-holder?” “I could see that the end had not been in his mouth. Therefore he used a holder. The tip had been cut off, not bitten off, but the cut was not a clean one, so I deduced a blunt pen-knife.” “Holmes,” I said, “you have drawn a net round this man from which he cannot escape, and you have saved an innocent human life as truly as if you had cut the cord which was hanging him. I see the direction in which all this points. The culprit is—” “Mr. John Turner,” cried the hotel waiter, opening the door of our sitting-room, and ushering in a visitor. The man who entered was a strange and impressive figure. His slow, limping step and bowed shoulders gave the appearance of decrepitude, and yet his hard, deep-lined, craggy features, and his enormous limbs showed that he was possessed of unusual strength of body and of character. His tangled beard, grizzled hair, and outstanding, drooping eyebrows combined to give an air of dignity and power to his appearance, but his face was of an ashen white, while his lips and the corners of his nostrils were tinged with a shade of blue. It was clear to me at a glance that he was in the grip of some deadly and chronic disease. “Pray sit down on the sofa,” said Holmes gently. “You had my note?” “Yes, the lodge-keeper brought it up. You said that you wished to see me here to avoid scandal.” “I thought people would talk if I went to the Hall.” “And why did you wish to see me?” He looked across at my companion with despair in his weary eyes, as though his question was already answered. “Yes,” said Holmes, answering the look rather than the words. “It is so. I know all about McCarthy.” The old man sank his face in his hands. “God help me!” he cried. “But I would not have let the young man come to harm. I give you my word that I would have spoken out if it went against him at the Assizes.” “I am glad to hear you say so,” said Holmes gravely. “I would have spoken now had it not been for my dear girl. It would break her heart—it will break her heart when she hears that I am arrested.” “It may not come to that,” said Holmes. “What?” “I am no official agent. I understand that it was your daughter who required my presence here, and I am acting in her interests. Young McCarthy must be got off, however.” “I am a dying man,” said old Turner. “I have had diabetes for years. My doctor says it is a question whether I shall live a month. Yet I would rather die under my own roof than in a gaol.” Holmes rose and sat down at the table with his pen in his hand and a bundle of paper before him. “Just tell us the truth,” he said. “I shall jot down the facts. You will sign it, and Watson here can witness it. Then I could produce your confession at the last extremity to save young McCarthy. I promise you that I shall not use it unless it is absolutely needed.” “It's as well,” said the old man; “it's a question whether I shall live to the Assizes, so it matters little to me, but I should wish to spare Alice the shock. And now I will make the thing clear to you; it has been a long time in the acting, but will not take me long to tell. “You didn't know this dead man, McCarthy. He was a devil incarnate. I tell you that. God keep you out of the clutches of such a man as he. His grip has been upon me these twenty years, and he has blasted my life. I'll tell you first how I came to be in his power. “It was in the early '60's at the diggings. I was a young chap then, hot-blooded and reckless, ready to turn my hand at anything; I got among bad companions, took to drink, had no luck with my claim, took to the bush, and in a word became what you would call over here a highway robber. There were six of us, and we had a wild, free life of it, sticking up a station from time to time, or stopping the wagons on the road to the diggings. Black Jack of Ballarat was the name I went under, and our party is still remembered in the colony as the Ballarat Gang. “One day a gold convoy came down from Ballarat to Melbourne, and we lay in wait for it and attacked it. There were six troopers and six of us, so it was a close thing, but we emptied four of their saddles at the first volley. Three of our boys were killed, however, before we got the swag. I put my pistol to the head of the wagon-driver, who was this very man McCarthy. I wish to the Lord that I had shot him then, but I spared him, though I saw his wicked little eyes fixed on my face, as though to remember every feature. We got away with the gold, became wealthy men, and made our way over to England without being suspected. There I parted from my old pals and determined to settle down to a quiet and respectable life. I bought this estate, which chanced to be in the market, and I set myself to do a little good with my money, to make up for the way in which I had earned it. I married, too, and though my wife died young she left me my dear little Alice. Even when she was just a baby her wee hand seemed to lead me down the right path as nothing else had ever done. In a word, I turned over a new leaf and did my best to make up for the past. All was going well when McCarthy laid his grip upon me. “I had gone up to town about an investment, and I met him in Regent Street with hardly a coat to his back or a boot to his foot. “ ‘Here we are, Jack,' says he, touching me on the arm; ‘we'll be as good as a family to you. There's two of us, me and my son, and you can have the keeping of us. If you don't—it's a fine, law-abiding country is England, and there's always a policeman within hail.' “Well, down they came to the west country, there was no shaking them off, and there they have lived rent free on my best land ever since. There was no rest for me, no peace, no forgetfulness; turn where I would, there was his cunning, grinning face at my elbow. It grew worse as Alice grew up, for he soon saw I was more afraid of her knowing my past than of the police. Whatever he wanted he must have, and whatever it was I gave him without question, land, money, houses, until at last he asked a thing which I could not give. He asked for Alice. “His son, you see, had grown up, and so had my girl, and as I was known to be in weak health, it seemed a fine stroke to him that his lad should step into the whole property. But there I was firm. I would not have his cursed stock mixed with mine; not that I had any dislike to the lad, but his blood was in him, and that was enough. I stood firm. McCarthy threatened. I braved him to do his worst. We were to meet at the pool midway between our houses to talk it over. “When I went down there I found him talking with his son, so I smoked a cigar and waited behind a tree until he should be alone. But as I listened to his talk all that was black and bitter in me seemed to come uppermost. He was urging his son to marry my daughter with as little regard for what she might think as if she were a slut from off the streets. It drove me mad to think that I and all that I held most dear should be in the power of such a man as this. Could I not snap the bond? I was already a dying and a desperate man. Though clear of mind and fairly strong of limb, I knew that my own fate was sealed. But my memory and my girl! Both could be saved if I could but silence that foul tongue. I did it, Mr. Holmes. I would do it again. Deeply as I have sinned, I have led a life of martyrdom to atone for it. But that my girl should be entangled in the same meshes which held me was more than I could suffer. I struck him down with no more compunction than if he had been some foul and venomous beast. His cry brought back his son; but I had gained the cover of the wood, though I was forced to go back to fetch the cloak which I had dropped in my flight. That is the true story, gentlemen, of all that occurred.” “Well, it is not for me to judge you,” said Holmes as the old man signed the statement which had been drawn out. “I pray that we may never be exposed to such a temptation.” “I pray not, sir. And what do you intend to do?” “In view of your health, nothing. You are yourself aware that you will soon have to answer for your deed at a higher court than the Assizes. I will keep your confession, and if McCarthy is condemned I shall be forced to use it. If not, it shall never be seen by mortal eye; and your secret, whether you be alive or dead, shall be safe with us.” “Farewell, then,” said the old man solemnly. “Your own deathbeds, when they come, will be the easier for the thought of the peace which you have given to mine.” Tottering and shaking in all his giant frame, he stumbled slowly from the room. “God help us!” said Holmes after a long silence. “Why does fate play such tricks with poor, helpless worms? I never hear of such a case as this that I do not think of Baxter's words, and say, ‘There, but for the grace of God, goes Sherlock Holmes.' ” James McCarthy was acquitted at the Assizes on the strength of a number of objections which had been drawn out by Holmes and submitted to the defending counsel. Old Turner lived for seven months after our interview, but he is now dead; and there is every prospect that the son and daughter may come to live happily together in ignorance of the black cloud which rests upon their past.  

This episode is like rolling a theological Yahtzee. Tripp is joined by co-host Trevor Malkinson and two titans of theology - Sallie McFague and John Cobb. What you are about to hear is so zesty, so drenched in wisdom, you might just wreck you car or walk into a pole. To kick things off, John Cobb gives us some process hot takes on: retrieving Paul for progressive Christians science doesn't really hate God the problem of evil God's power and inter-religious relationality Then, Sallie joins the group to share and reflect on a section from her book. To conclude, Trevor asks Sallie, John, and Tripp about where the find hope in a process worldview. The Centre for (r)Evolutionary Theology was the sponsor for this event (here's the centre's twitter) and Canadian Memorial Church and the Centre for Peace was the host for the evening. Here's Tripp's sermon from the weekend.  Books mentioned: Super, Natural Christians and For the Common Good Follow the podcast, drop a review, send feedback/questions or become a member of the HBC Community. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What if the death of God at the end of Modernity was stitched in the metaphysical assumptions from the outset? What if these assumptions can and should be challenged on scientific and philosophical grounds? What if these assumptions have been internalized, not just in the academy, but in the church? This are a few of the questions we talk about in the first have of this podcast. Then we end up covering the incarnation, prayer, divine action, the history of Israel, and the evolution of God among other things. John Cobb is the global leader of process theology and one of the greatest theological minds of the last fifty years. He is professor of theology emeritus at Claremont School of Theology in Claremont, California, and the cofounder of the Center for Process Studies. Tripp is in charge of his fan club - the #FANiacs. Cobb has published over 30 books so check them out. Thanks to our sponsors: Phillips Theological Seminary  & Drew Theological School Follow the podcast, drop a review, send feedback/questions or become a member of the HBC Community. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is the second half of the  live podcast from the American Academy of Religion 2014. The evening was sponsored by Fortress Press, was supplied with delicious beer by Monkish Brewing Co & featured Catherine Keller, John Cobb and Jack Caputo.Check out part 1 HERE In part 2 you will hear Jack Caputo reflect on Catherine's book 'Cloud of the Impossible'.  He also wants to be clear: he is not a death of God theologian. John Cobb and Catherine Keller then give him some pushback and it gets a little feisty. Follow the podcast, drop a review, send feedback/questions or become a member of the HBC Community.   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Tripp sits down with Tony Jones to chat about the new series with Fortress Press: 'Theology for the People".  They chat about everything from the publishing industry to the emergent church - from theological education to the death of God. If you have not heard part 1 of the AAR live event featuring Catherine Keller and John Cobb, make sure to subscribe to the HBC stream on iTunes or Stitcher. Enjoy listening to two friends chat about some current and future issue that have grabbed their attention.  Follow the podcast, drop a review, send feedback/questions or become a member of the HBC Community. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is the first half of the  live podcast from the American Academy of Religion 2014. The evening was sponsored by Fortress Press, was supplied with delicious beer by Monkish Brewing Co & featured Catherine Keller, John Cobb and Jack Caputo. In part one you will hear Keller discuss her new book Cloud of the Impossible (which everyone should have on their Christmas list). Then you get a fascinating conversation between Keller and Cobb about Process theology, the future of theological education and then they answer that most pressing question 'who is God?' Follow the podcast, drop a review, send feedback/questions or become a member of the HBC Community. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

John Cobb is the world's foremost Process theologian & Tripp's personal hero.  He has been on the podcast a number of times but this time we are going to talk about Jesus, the season of Advent, & a Process understanding of the Incarnation.  We hope you enjoy it & go subscribe to the new Barrel Aged podcast stream so you get the next Advent podcast.  Here's the feedburner feed. Want to read some of Cobb's Christology? Then go check out Christ in a Pluralistic Age. With over 5 years of interviews under out belt – having gone from just friends listening to 50k – realizing that there are a ton of people who can't get the best interviews from the past – let us introduce you to Homebrewed Christianity Barrel Aged podcast. I will be re-releasing the best interviews from the early days, super-short new intros, and hopefully doctored audio. In order to keep getting these podcasts you will need to go subscribe to the Barrel Aged podcast stream HERE. While you are there review us and share the word. Follow the podcast, drop a review, send feedback/questions or become a member of the HBC Community. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Jonnie joined my in the HBC Headquarters in Redondo Beach. In the podcast we start discussing the resurrection exchange between Marcus Borg & Tony Jones [aka ToJo] & then end up on the necessity of a physical resurrection, atonement, eschatology, evangelical's Easter concern, and Pannenberg. Attempting to fill in for the BoDaddy is a difficult task but Jonnie did a pretty good job.  I think I will let him back on the TNT w/ the BoDaddy so Bo can make sure we actually stay on topic.  You will notice I actually start a couple lists of theological options and then get distracted by Pannenberg and John Cobb.  The BoDaddy is a pro and knows to limit such theological temptations.  During the podcast we drank the Burning Bush IPA and gave a shout out to 350.org for climate change info. In the podcast we discuss these books: 1) Bodies and Souls, or Spirited Bodies? & Beyond Liberalism and Fundamentalism by  Nancey Murphey 2) Jesus: God & Man by Wolfhart Pannenberg 3) Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time by Marcus Borg 4) Old Testament Theology by Gerhard von Rad Follow the podcast, drop a review, send feedback/questions or become a member of the HBC Community. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Jesuit Philosopher and Theologian Joseph Bracken is our guest this week on the podcast.  He recently retired from Xavier University & was honored with an amazing tribute - Seeking Common Ground - which includes articles from John Cobb, Catherine Keller, and more.  In this episode we take a tour through Bracken's influential career working toward common ground between religion & science, Aquinas & Whitehead, and Religious Pluralism.  I can't tell you how much I enjoy reading and talking with Father Joe.  Off the mic he is one of the most amazing nerds I have met & in conversation he has a quick & sensitive intellect. On top of all the nerdiness you even get to hear a little inside Jesuit scoop about the new Pope Francis I. Check out Bracken's previous visits to the podcast where we talk Trinity & Process and then my favorite - Christology!  I am sure you are headed to Amazon to get a Bracken book. Follow the podcast, drop a review, send feedback/questions or become a member of the HBC Community. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices