Ancient heavy infantry unit of 1,000 to 5,000 men
POPULARITY
4 episodes with roman legions
2 episodes with roman legions
3 episodes with roman legions
2 episodes with roman legions
2 episodes with roman legions
2 episodes with roman legions
4 episodes with roman legions
2 episodes with roman legions
2 episodes with roman legions
Passion WeekMonday: Cursing the Fig Tree, Cleansing the TempleJesus started the day cursing the fig tree which represents Israel and preceded to the Temple Mount. He stepped into the Court of the Gentiles and created a whip and drove out the money changers interrupting the Passover weekly procedures. The scribes and chief priests were so angry, they met to discuss how to destroy him. In this episode, we consider their language and the divine justice that will occur in this place of the Court of the Gentiles, per Josephus in the Siege of Jerusalem in 70AD. Matthew 21:12-17Mark 11:12-19Luke 19:45-48www.messagetokings.com
A look back to 2019, and a show about people vanishing in groups. What happened to the 9th Roman Legion. They marched north to deal with the Picts, and were never seen again. How about the 5th Battalion Norfolk, who charged into a wooded area near Kavak Tepe, and vanished. 3,000 heavily armed Chinese soldiers disappeared in 1937 while holding the west end of the Marco Polo Bridge. Their equipment was there, but no soldiers to use it.
#LONDINIUM90AD: Gaius & Germanicus observe that Adolf Hitler rallied Lippe villagers in his desperate January 1933 Lippe State campaign at the same spot (Leopoldshone) where Arminius and the united Teutons defeated three Roman Legions in 9 AD -- the worst defeat in Augustan Imperial history.. https://www.sky.com/watch/title/series/548580e1-95a2-3c60-a422-f513a9d81fd5 1770 Pantheon
With Hannibal continuing to tip the scales of power in the Po Valley, the young Scipio bears witness to treacherous setbacks as Rome's authority in the region unravels. Before being forced to abandon the north due to Hannibal's crushing defeat of the Roman Legions at the Battle of the Trebia in late 218 BC. Resulting in Scipio retreating to Rome to find his city feverishly raising new armies, however with the populace also deeply unsettled by a series of dark omens sent from the gods. Soon cascading into a sense of panic, upon learning the news of another military disaster at the Battle of Lake Trasimene. If you would like to support my work directly, you can kindly do so here: patreon.com/warlordsofhistory Check out the So There I Was podcast: sothereiwas.us
Was the ship keeping them alive or was it the Savior? “It will turn out exactly as God said it would” There is in Scripture a quality of character in the Roman military, specifically with Centurions. Roman politicians had questionable character but there is a different picture for Roman military officers. A Roman Legion is 600. A Roman Centurion is 100. (1) Jesus met with a Roman Centurion (Matthew 8:5-13) & then there was a Roman Centurion at His cross (Matthew 27:51-54) (2) Peter meets with a Roman Centurion ( Acts 10:1-2) (3) Paul meets with a Roman Centurion (Julius) in the Augustan Regiment here. Paul has complete trust in God and Julius has complete trust in Paul Two weeks under typhoon conditions traveling 476 plus miles. Many would say “It's a miracle” but few would give glory to God. Would you? Will you? Paul cared about “all” in Acts 26 and in Acts 27! What is your “Storm Story”? What storm have you gone through? Or are you in the midst of a storm? Or do you wonder what storm will come next? Can we sing in the storms of life? We must sing. Psalm 34:4, I SOUGHT THE LORD AND HE HEARD AND HE ANSWERED (repeat 3x) THAT'S WHY I TRUST HIM, THAT'S WHY I TRUST HIM!
The JSA travels back in time to Camelot at the behest of King Arthur and Merlin. The realm is under attack my an anachronistic Roman Legion. But, what villain is really behind it? You can follow the show @ComicsLloyd on Twitter or send an email to ClassicComicsMBL@gmail.com . You can find me on Twitter @MattB_Lloyd and at www.dccomicsnews.com where I write reviews and edit news stories. You can also check out my chapter in “Politics in Gotham: The Batman Universe and Political Thought.” https://www.amazon.com/Politics-Gotham-Universe- Political-Thought/dp/3030057755 “Black Panther and Philosophy: What Can Wakanda Offer the World?” https://www.amazon.com/Black-Panther-Philosophy- Blackwell- Culture/dp/1119635845/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2F69N3WJBZM F3&keywords=what+can+wakanda&qid=1642053514&spr efix=what+can+wakanda%2Caps%2C256&sr=8-1 “Batman's Villains and Villainesses: Multidisciplinary Perspectives On Arkham's Souls” https://www.amazon.com/Batmans-Villains-Villainesses- Multidisciplinary-Perspectives- ebook/dp/B0C5SHX9BJ/ref=sr_1_1?crid=D49SBV4K1UQ D&keywords=villains+and+villainess+arkham&qid=16954 06720&sprefix=villains+and+villainesses+arkaham%2Cap s%2C284&sr=8-1 All-Star Comics #64 Links All-Star Comics #64 at DC Fandom Wiki https://dc.fandom.com/wiki/All-Star_Comics_Vol_1_64 Power Girl https://dc.fandom.com/wiki/Kara_Zor-L_(Earth-Two) Wally Wood https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wally_Wood --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/comics-in-motion-podcast/message
Read on for today's agenda below prepared by David (thank you very much). - Retired US Diplomat to 5 different nations David Hunter shares his knowledge, passion, interest, and experience.1)Hamas Attacks Israel: In an attack last Saturday that allegedly caught Israeli intelligence off guard, Palestinian Hamas fighters launched from the tiny Gaza Strip at SW corner of Israel a massive attack inside Israel, including firing hundreds of missiles and sending fighters to border cities inside Israel itself. Over 100 Israeli hostages were captured and brought back to Gaza. Israel reports over 6000 citizens have been killed and thousands wounded. What motivated Hamas to launch this attack, and what will happen next?2)Israeli Jews Spitting at Christians and Invading Al Aqsa Mosque?: In Israel's Temple Mount Complex, extremely conservative Jews were photographed spitting at a Christian procession carrying a Cross. Also on Wednesday of last week, Israeli extremists invaded the Al Aqsa Mosque and prayed prostrate on this Muslim holy ground. Is this a result of increasing toleration of Jewish supremacy doctrine inside Israel?3)Azerbaijan Conquers Armenian Enclave:The Armenian enclave of Nagorno-Karabahk has just been captured by Azerbaijani troops. This despite Russian troops being stationed there to help preserve the status quo. Did Russia fail to help it's old ally Armenia defend it's claimed territory? Will there be long term consequences?4)German Victory Over the Roman Legions in 9 AD: In 9 AD, the Romans from Italy attempted to conquer the German tribes and make them slaves. A German who was drafted into the Roman Army, Armenius (aka Hermann the Warrior Chief), organized a plot to trap three Roman Legions and destroy them. This led Rome to give up on conquest of Germanic peoples. Did this event shape world history?
Steven Pressfield is best-selling author, screenwriter, and United States Marine Corps veteran. His latest book, Govt Cheese, is available now. You can order signed copies of Govt Cheese here: https://store.stevenpressfield.com/product/govt-cheese-signed-copy/Unsigned copies of Steve's books are available here: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Steven-PressfieldYou can sign up for Steve's newsletter at: www.https://stevenpressfield.com/Steve's Instagram is @steven_pressfieldThank you to our sponsors! The show doesn't happen without them!Combat Fuel: www.combat-fuel.co.uk Use code VSOM at checkout for a discount on your potions.Zulu Alpha Strap Company: https://zulualphastraps.com/Support the show
Battlefield Cinema rolls on with a review of a speculative fiction war movie about the fabled 9th Roman Legion that was lost to history around 120 AD. That's right, we're talking about Centurion! Directed by Neil Marshall, starring Michael Fassbender, Dominic West, Olga Kurylenko, and a host of other British actors you've definitely seen in something before. How does this movie's ancient battle stack up to others? How many meet-cutes can you recall that starts with public urination? Could Peter Jackson sue for this movie containing too many overhead shots of people running? Was this actually the correct movie? Find out all of that and more!
Get excited for our latest adventure through time as we explore the length of Hadrian's Wall, dipping into the history and significance of this magnificent archaeological remnant. Hadrian's Wall Community Archaeology Project Tullie House Museum and Art GalleryIf you want to see more links, images and references then you can't go past the Destination: History website. Music: Tegan FinlayHistory Nerds UnitedLet's make history fun again! Come listen to interviews with today's best authors.Listen on: Apple Podcasts Spotify----------------*Not AI generated. All content is original.*
Alex asks, 'When is the last documented evidence of one of the original Roman Legions being in existence? I remember reading about Legio V Macedonica being based in Egypt just before the Arab Conquests in the 640s, but I am unsure if this is factually correct'. Murray lists us the last documented evidence for the Legions. Join us on Patron patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast
Today Sara brings us the story of one of the most epic warrior Queens in history: BOUDICA! When the Romans destroy everything most precious to her, take her land, enslave her people and lash her publicly - this Queen of the Iceni tribe (in pre-celtic Britain) doesn't sit around and cry about it. She rallies her Celts, combining the warring tribes to lead a legendary show of force against the Roman colonies and the Roman Legions themselves. How do her and her ragtag army fare against the steeled force of Rome? You'll have to listen to find out! — A Broad is a woman who lives by her own rules. Broads You Should Know is the podcast about the Broads who helped shape our world! 3 Ways you can help support the podcast: Write a review on Apple Podcasts Share your favorite episode on social media / tell a friend about the show! Send us an email with a broad suggestion, question, or comment at BroadsYouShouldKnow@gmail.com — Broads You Should Know is hosted by Sara Gorsky. IG: @SaraGorsky Web master / site design: www.BroadsYouShouldKnow.com — Broads You Should Know is produced by Sara Gorsky & edited by Chloe Skye
"Alexander's Companion cavalry seemed to be the premier cavalry of its age, and was instrumental in the battles against the Persian empire. Why is it then, under the Successor Kingdoms' Generals, that they faired so poorly when confronting the inferior Roman cavalry? Was it due to the lack of Alexander himself, poor training, or just the professionalism of the Roman Legion?" Murray gives us his thoughts... Join us on Patron patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast
Hidden in a French cellar, a Roman Legion awakens from a self-imposed hibernation. Seeking revenge for the massacre of their fellows in the Teutoburg Forest in 9 AD, the legion emerges to exact revenge on their hated Germanic enemies. But they have overslept by nearly two thousand years--the world has changed, but the legion presses on. A NATO investigator has learned of their presence, and while inconceivable, he realizes time is running out. Mark Carlson brings "Out of the Darkness: Vengeance of the Last Roman Legion" to the Sunbury Press Books Show. The first of a four volume series, Carlson brings history to life in a unique way. He has more than 200 public articles in national magazines, and is a popular public speaker. A student of classical history, Carlson has worked on the series for nearly ten years. His other works include, "When Yamamoto Ran Wild," the essay collection "War at Sea," and "When Galleys Ruled the Sea." He lives in San Diego, California.
It's 2023 and we finally get to play the best launch title for the XboxOne ________________________________________________________________________ Find Us on these platforms: https://twitter.com/_RetroRenegades https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100077718475122 ________________________________________________________________________ Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCcT8wcspekw5tSzbc3qWPCg/join ________________________________________________________________________ Ryse: Son of Rome is a 2013 third-person action-adventure developed by Crytek and published by Microsoft Studios. Set in an alternate version of Ancient Rome, Ryse follows the life of the Roman centurion Marius Titus as he becomes one of the leaders in the Roman Legion. Gameplay revolves around Marius using his sword to strike enemies and shield to deflect attacks. Execution sequences are featured in the game, which are quick-time events that serve as an extension to combat. The game features a cooperative multiplayer mode, which tasks players to fight against waves of enemies in maps that are changing dynamically. ________________________________________________________________________ Grab a beer, a slice of pizza and come hang out with us. We play the greatest games from yesterday while discussing today's gaming news and reminisce on the past. A no topic, no fuks given eccentric cast. Come hang with us at 7:00PM EST | 6:00PM CST | 5:00PM MST | 4:00PM PST.. ________________________________________________________________________ TRY DUBBY FROM GAMERS TO GYM JUNKIES TO ENTREPRENEURS, OUR PRODUCT IS FOR ANYONE WHO WANTS TO BE BETTER. SAVE 10% WITH THIS LINK. https://www.dubby.gg/discount/Renegade238?ref=NePXKdCFpypc8b ________________________________________________________________________ Listen to RetroRenegades on all major podcast platforms https://anchor.fm/retro-renegades ________________________________________________________________________ Like some merch? https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCcT8wcspekw5tSzbc3qWPCg/store & https://willijay.redbubble.com ________________________________________________________________________ THE RETRO RENEGADES ARE: Graphic God Twitter: @Graphic_God Youtube: https://Youtube.com/GraphicGod Twitch: https://twitch.tv/Graphic_God SUPERSONICSTATION Youtube : https://youtube.com/user/SuperSonicSt... Twitch : https://twitch.tv/supersonicstation STINKINCORPSE Twitter: @stinkincorpse Youtube: https://youtube.com/channel/UChhVxkV0... UK Dazarus Twitter: @UKDazarus Youtube: https://youtube.com/channel/UCud_ef29... Jago Kuken Twitter: @RetroRenegade_ Youtube: https://youtube.com/channel/UCqKT2pP9... CRISPYBOMB Twitter: @Crispybomb EnFin3t Twitter: @EnFiN3t Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/c/RetroRenegades Jeepers VR Twitter: @Jeepers2u Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAHs-KAWDIYYN-cE5F-WiAQ DragonHeartYoby Twitter: @DragonHeartYoby Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/dragonheartyoby Cerebral Paul | Living Differently Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/c/CerebralPaul Twitter: https://twitter.com/CerebralPaul1 DoggyDog420 Twitter: @DoggyDog420Xbox Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/user/Axle1324 ________________________________________________________________________ FOLLOW OUR FELLOW #GAMERSUNITEDGUILD FRIENDS! Visit www.gamersunitedguild.com for loads of positive gaming content ________________________________________________________________________ The ORIGINAL Next Level Gaming https://www.youtube.com/c/TheORIGINALNextLevelGaming TXR (The Xbox Roundtable) Podcast https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7S-10RbSWEskn3r6xsQK6w 4GQTV https://www.youtube.com/c/4GQTV EverCanadian/Pack Opening Pro https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvUmRn5p2zS1d-oSNJGBong https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCICdj2AS4j6qR0QNOF6BxCg Cerebral Paul | Living Differently https://www.youtube.com/c/CerebralPaul GoGameGo https://www.youtube.com/c/gogamego --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/retro-renegades/support
Podcast: The Lunar Society (LS 37 · TOP 2.5% )Episode: Nadia Asparouhova - Tech Elites, Democracy, Open Source, & PhilanthropyRelease date: 2022-12-15Nadia Asparouhova is currently researching what the new tech elite will look like at nadia.xyz. She is also the author of Working in Public: The Making and Maintenance of Open Source Software.We talk about how:* American philanthropy has changed from Rockefeller to Effective Altruism* SBF represented the Davos elite rather than the Silicon Valley elite,* Open source software reveals the limitations of democratic participation,* & much more.Watch on YouTube. Listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or any other podcast platform. Read the full transcript here.Timestamps(0:00:00) - Intro(0:00:26) - SBF was Davos elite(0:09:38) - Gender sociology of philanthropy(0:16:30) - Was Shakespeare an open source project?(0:22:00) - Need for charismatic leaders(0:33:55) - Political reform(0:40:30) - Why didn't previous wealth booms lead to new philanthropic movements?(0:53:35) - Creating a 10,000 year endowment(0:57:27) - Why do institutions become left wing?(1:02:27) - Impact of billionaire intellectual funding(1:04:12) - Value of intellectuals(1:08:53) - Climate, AI, & Doomerism(1:18:04) - Religious philanthropyTranscriptThis transcript was autogenerated and thus may contain errors.Nadia Asparouhova 0:00:00You start with this idea that like democracy is green and like we should have tons of tons of people participating tons of people participate and then it turns out that like most participation is actually just noise and not that useful. That really squarely puts SPF into like the finance crowd much more so than startups or crypto. Founders will always talk about like building and like startups are like so important or whatever and like what are all of them doing in their spare time? They're like reading books. They're reading essays and like and then those like books and essays influence how they think about stuff. Dwarkesh Patel 0:00:26Okay, today I have the pleasure of talking with Nadia Asperova. She is previously the author of Working in Public, the Making and Maintenance of Open Source Software and she is currently researching what the new tech elite will look like. Nadia, welcome to the podcast. Thanks for having me. Yeah, okay, so this is a perfect timing obviously given what's been happening with SPF. How much do you think SPF was motivated by effective altruism? Where do you place them in the whole dimensionality of idea machines and motivations? Nadia Asparouhova 0:01:02Yeah, I mean, I know there's sort of like conflicting accounts going around. Like, I mean, just from my sort of like character study or looking at SPF, it seems pretty clear to me that he is sort of inextricably tied to the concepts of utilitarianism that then motivate effective altruism. The difference for me in sort of like where I characterize effective altruism is I think it's much closer to sort of like finance Wall Street elite mindset than it is to startup mindset, even though a lot of people associate effective altruism with tech people. So yeah, to me, like that really squarely puts SPF in sort of like the finance crowd much more so than startups or crypto. And I think that's something that gets really misunderstood about him. Dwarkesh Patel 0:01:44Interesting. Yeah, I find that interesting because if you think of Jeff Bezos, when he started Amazon, he wasn't somebody like John Perry Barlow, who was just motivated by the free philosophy of the internet. You know, he saw a graph of internet usage going up into the right and he's like, I should build a business on top of this. And in a sort of loopholy way, try to figure out like, what is the thing that is that is the first thing you would want to put a SQL database on top of to ship and produce? And I think that's what books was the answer. So and obviously, he also came from a hedge fund, right? Would you play somebody like him also in the old finance crowd rather than as a startup founder? Nadia Asparouhova 0:02:22Yeah, it's kind of a weird one because he's both associated with the early computing revolution, but then also AWS was sort of like what kicked off all of the 2010s sort of startup. And I think in the way that he's started thinking about his public legacy and just from sort of his public behavior, I think he fits much more squarely now in that sort of tech startup elite mindset of the 2010s crowd more so than the Davos elite crowd of the 2000s. Dwarkesh Patel 0:02:47What in specific are you referring to? Nadia Asparouhova 0:02:49Well, he's come out and been like sort of openly critical about a lot of like Davos type institutions. He kind of pokes fun at mainstream media and for not believing in him not believing in AWS. And I think he's because he sort of like spans across like both of these generations, he's been able to see the evolution of like how maybe like his earlier peers function versus the sort of second cohort of peers that he came across. But to me, he seems much more like, much more of the sort of like startup elite mindset. And I can kind of back up a little bit there. But what I associate with the Davos Wall Street kind of crowd is much more of this focus on quantitative thinking, measuring efficiency. And then also this like globalist mindset, like I think that the vision that they want to ensure for the world is this idea of like a very interconnected world where we, you know, sort of like the United Nations kind of mindset. And that is really like literally what the Davos gathering is. Whereas Bezos from his actions today feels much closer to the startup, like Y Combinator post AWS kind of mindset of founders that were really made their money by taking these non-obvious bets on talented people. So they were much less focused on credentialism. They were much more into this idea of meritocracy. I think we sort of forget like how commonplace this trope is of like, you know, the young founder in a dorm room. And that was really popularized by the 2010s cohort of the startup elite of being someone that may have like absolutely no skills, no background in industry, but can somehow sort of like turn the entire industry over on its head. And I think that was sort of like the unique insight of the tech startup crowd. And yeah, when I think about just sort of like some of the things that Bezos is doing now, it feels like she identifies with that much more strongly of being this sort of like lone cowboy or having this like one talented person with really great ideas who can sort of change the world. I think about the, what is it called? The Altos Institute or the new like science initiative that he put out where he was recruiting these like scientists from academic institutions and paying them really high salaries just to attract like the very best top scientists around the world. That's much more of that kind of mindset than it is about like putting faith in sort of like existing institutions, which is what we would see from more of like a Davos kind of mindset. Dwarkesh Patel 0:05:16Interesting. Do you think that in the future, like the kids of today's tech billionaires will be future aristocrats? So effective altruism will be a sort of elite aristocratic philosophy. They'll be like tomorrow's Rockefellers. Nadia Asparouhova 0:05:30Yeah, I kind of worry about that actually. I think of there as being like within the US, we were kind of lucky in that we have these two different types of elites. We have the aristocratic elites and we have meritocratic elites. Most other countries I think basically just have aristocratic elites, especially comparing like the US to Britain in this way. And so in the aristocratic model, your wealth and your power is sort of like conferred to you by previous generations. You just kind of like inherit it from your parents or your family or whomever. And the upside of that, if there is an upside, is that you get really socialized into this idea of what does it mean to be a public steward? What does it mean to think of yourself and your responsibility to the rest of society as a privileged elite person? In the US, we have this really great thing where you can kind of just, you know, we have the American dream, right? So lots of people that didn't grow up with money can break into the elite ranks by doing something that makes them really successful. And that's like a really special thing about the US. So we have this whole class of meritocratic elites who may not have aristocratic backgrounds, but ended up doing something within their lifetimes that made them successful. And so, yeah, I think it's a really cool thing. The downside of that being that you don't really get like socialized into what does it mean to have this fortune and do something interesting with your money. You don't have this sort of generational benefit that the aristocratic elites have of presiding over your land or whatever you want to call it, where you're sort of learning how to think about yourself in relation to the rest of society. And so it's much easier to just kind of like hoard your wealth or whatever. And so when you think about sort of like what are the next generations, the children of the meritocratic elites going to look like or what are they going to do, it's very easy to imagine kind of just becoming aristocratic elites in the sense of like, yeah, they're just going to like inherit the money from their families. And they haven't also really been socialized into like how to think about their role in society. And so, yeah, all the meritocratic elites eventually turn into aristocratic elites, which is where I think you start seeing this trend now towards people wanting to sort of like spend down their fortunes within their lifetime or within a set number of decades after they die because they kind of see what happened in previous generations and are like, oh, I don't want to do that. Dwarkesh Patel 0:07:41Yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, it's interesting. You mentioned that the aristocratic elites have the feel that they have the responsibility to give back, I guess, more so than the meritocratic elites. But I believe that in the U.S., the amount of people who give to philanthropy and the total amount they give is higher than in Europe, right, where they probably have a higher ratio of aristocratic elites. Wouldn't you expect the opposite if the aristocratic elites are the ones that are, you know, inculcated to give back? Nadia Asparouhova 0:08:11Well, I assume like most of the people that are the figures about sort of like Americans giving back is spread across like all Americans, not just the wealthiest. Dwarkesh Patel 0:08:19Yeah. So you would predict that among the top 10 percent of Americans, there's less philanthropy than the top 10 percent of Europeans? Uh, there's... Sorry, I'm not sure I understand the question. I guess, does the ratio of meritocratic to aristocratic elites change how much philanthropy there is among the elites? Nadia Asparouhova 0:08:45Yeah, I mean, like here we have much more of a culture of like even among aristocratic elites, this idea of like institution building or like large donations to like build institutions, whereas in Europe, a lot of the public institutions are created by government. And there's sort of this mentality of like private citizens don't experiment with public institutions. That's the government's job. And you see that sort of like pervasively throughout all of like European cultures. Like when we want something to change in public society, we look to government to like regulate or change it. Whereas in the U.S., it's kind of much more like choose your own adventure. And we don't really see the government as like the sole provider or shaper of public institutions. We also look at private citizens and like there's so many things that like public institutions that we have now that were not started by government, but were started by private philanthropists. And that's like a really unusual thing about the U.S. Dwarkesh Patel 0:09:39There's this common pattern in philanthropy where a guy will become a billionaire, and then his wife will be heavily involved with or even potentially in charge of, you know, the family's philanthropic efforts. And there's many examples of this, right? Like Bill and Melinda Gates, you know, Mark Zuckerberg. Yeah, yeah, exactly. And Dustin Moskovitz. So what is the consequence of this? How is philanthropy, the causes and the foundations, how are they different because of this pattern? Nadia Asparouhova 0:10:15Well, I mean, I feel like we see that pattern, like the problem is that what even is philanthropy is changing very quickly. So we can say historically that, not even historically, in recent history, in recent decades, that has probably been true. That wasn't true in say like late 1800s, early 1900s. It was, you know, Carnegie and Rockefeller were the ones that were actually doing their own philanthropy, not their spouses. So I'd say it's a more recent trend. But now I think we're also seeing this thing where like a lot of wealthy people are not necessarily doing their philanthropic activities through foundations anymore. And that's true both within like traditional philanthropy sector and sort of like the looser definition of what we might consider to be philanthropy, depending on how you define it, which I kind of more broadly want to define as like the actions of elites that are sort of like, you know, public facing activities. But like even within sort of traditional philanthropy circles, we have like, you know, the 5.1c3 nonprofit, which is, you know, traditionally how people, you know, house all their money in a foundation and then they do their philanthropic activities out of that. But in more recent years, we've seen this trend towards like LLCs. So Emerson Collective, I think, might have been maybe the first one to do it. And that was Steve Jobs' Philanthropic Foundation. And then Mark Zuckerberg with Chan Zuckerberg Initiative also used an LLC. And then since then, a lot of other, especially within sort of like tech wealth, we've seen that move towards people using LLCs instead of 5.1c3s because they, it just gives you a lot more flexibility in the kinds of things you can fund. You don't just have to fund other nonprofits. And they also see donor advised funds. So DAFs, which are sort of this like hacky workaround to foundations as well. So I guess point being that like this sort of mental model of like, you know, one person makes a ton of money and then their spouse kind of directs these like nice, feel good, like philanthropic activities, I think is like, may not be the model that we continue to move forward on. And I'm kind of hopeful or curious to see like, what does a return to like, because we've had so many new people making a ton of money in the last 10 years or so, we might see this return to sort of like the Gilded Age style of philanthropy where people are not necessarily just like forming a philanthropic foundation and looking for the nicest causes to fund, but are actually just like thinking a little bit more holistically about like, how do I help build and create like a movement around a thing that I really care about? How do I think more broadly around like funding companies and nonprofits and individuals and like doing lots of different, different kinds of activities? Because I think like the broader goal that like motivates at least like the new sort of elite classes to want to do any of this stuff at all. I don't really think philanthropy is about altruism. I just, I think like the term philanthropy is just totally fraud and like refers to too many different things and it's not very helpful. But I think like the part that I'm interested in at least is sort of like what motivates elites to go from just sort of like making a lot of money and then like thinking about themselves to them thinking about sort of like their place in broader public society. And I think that starts with thinking about how do I control like media, academia, government are sort of like the three like arms of the public sector. And we think of it in that way a little bit more broadly where it's really much more about sort of like maintaining control over your own power, more so than sort of like this like altruistic kind of, you know, whitewash. Dwarkesh Patel 0:13:41Yeah. Nadia Asparouhova 0:13:42Then it becomes like, you know, there's so many other like creative ways to think about like how that might happen. Dwarkesh Patel 0:13:49That's, that's, that's really interesting. That's a, yeah, that's a really interesting way of thinking about what it is you're doing with philanthropy. Isn't the word noble descended from a word that basically means to give alms to people like if you're in charge of them, you will give alms to them. And in a way, I mean, it might have been another word I'm thinking of, but in a way, yeah, a part of what motivates altruism, not obviously all of it, but part of it is that, yeah, you influence and power. Not even in a necessarily negative connotation, but that's definitely what motivates altruism. So having that put square front and center is refreshing and honest, actually. Nadia Asparouhova 0:14:29Yeah, I don't, I really don't see it as like a negative thing at all. And I think most of the like, you know, writing and journalism and academia that focuses on philanthropy tends to be very wealth critical. I'm not at all, like I personally don't feel wealth critical at all. I think like, again, sort of returning to this like mental model of like aristocratic and meritocratic elites, aristocratic elites are able to sort of like pass down, like encode what they're supposed to be doing in each generation because they have this kind of like familial ties. And I think like on the meritocratic side, like if you didn't have any sort of language around altruism or public stewardship, then like, it's like, you need to kind of create that narrative for the meritocratically or else, you know, there's just like nothing to hold on to. So I think like, it makes sense to talk in those terms. Andrew Carnegie being sort of the father of modern philanthropy in the US, like, wrote these series of essays about wealth that were like very influential and where he sort of talks about this like moral obligation. And I think like, really, it was kind of this like, a quiet way for him to, even though it was ostensibly about sort of like giving back or, you know, helping lift up the next generation of people, the next generation of entrepreneurs. Like, I think it really was much more of a protective stance of saying, like, if he doesn't frame it in this way, then people are just going to knock down the concept of wealth altogether. Dwarkesh Patel 0:15:50Yeah, yeah, yeah. No, that's really interesting. And it's interesting, in which cases this kind of influence has been successful and worse not. When Jeff Bezos bought the Washington Post, has there been any counterfactual impact on how the Washington Post has run as a result? I doubt it. But you know, when Musk takes over Twitter, I guess it's a much more expensive purchase. We'll see what the influence is negative or positive. But it's certainly different than what Twitter otherwise would have been. So control over media, it's, I guess it's a bigger meme now. Let me just take a digression and ask about open source for a second. So based on your experience studying these open source projects, do you find the theory that Homer and Shakespeare were basically container words for these open source repositories that stretched out through centuries? Do you find that more plausible now, rather than them being individuals, of course? Do you find that more plausible now, given your, given your study of open source? Sorry, what did? Nadia Asparouhova 0:16:49Less plausible. What did? Dwarkesh Patel 0:16:51Oh, okay. So the idea is that they weren't just one person. It was just like a whole bunch of people throughout a bunch of centuries who composed different parts of each story or composed different stories. Nadia Asparouhova 0:17:02The Nicholas Berbaki model, same concept of, you know, a single mathematician who's actually comprised of like lots of different. I think it's actually the opposite would be sort of my conclusion. We think of open source as this very like collective volunteer effort. And I think, use that as an excuse to not really contribute back to open source or not really think about like how open source projects are maintained. Because we were like, you know, you kind of have this bystander effect where you're like, well, you know, someone's taking care of it. It's volunteer oriented. Like, of course, there's someone out there taking care of it. But in reality, it actually turns out it is just one person. So maybe it's a little bit more like a Wizard of Oz type model. It's actually just like one person behind the curtain that's like, you know, doing everything. And you see this huge, you know, grandeur and you think there must be so many people that are behind it. It's one person. Yeah, and I think that's sort of undervalued. I think a lot of the rhetoric that we have about open source is rooted in sort of like early 2000s kind of starry eyed idea about like the power of the internet and the idea of like crowdsourcing and Wikipedia and all this stuff. And then like in reality, like we kind of see this convergence from like very broad based collaborative volunteer efforts to like narrowing down to kind of like single creators. And I think a lot of like, you know, single creators are the people that are really driving a lot of the internet today and a lot of cultural production. Dwarkesh Patel 0:18:21Oh, that's that's super fascinating. Does that in general make you more sympathetic towards the lone genius view of accomplishments in history? Not just in literature, I guess, but just like when you think back to how likely is it that, you know, Newton came up with all that stuff on his own versus how much was fed into him by, you know, the others around him? Nadia Asparouhova 0:18:40Yeah, I think so. I feel I've never been like a big, like, you know, great founder theory kind of person. I think I'm like, my true theory is, I guess that ideas are maybe some sort of like sentient, like, concept or virus that operates outside of us. And we are just sort of like the vessels through which like ideas flow. So in that sense, you know, it's not really about any one person, but I do think I think I tend to lean like in terms of sort of like, where does creative, like, creative effort come from? I do think a lot of it comes much more from like a single individual than it does from with some of the crowds. But everything just serves like different purposes, right? Like, because I think like, within open source, it's like, not all of open source maintenance work is creative. In fact, most of it is pretty boring and dredgerous. And that's the stuff that no one wants to do. And that, like, one person kind of got stuck with doing and that's really different from like, who created a certain open source projects, which is a little bit more of that, like, creative mindset. Dwarkesh Patel 0:19:44Yeah, yeah, that's really interesting. Do you think more projects in open source, so just take a popular repository, on average, do you think that these repositories would be better off if, let's say a larger percentage of them where pull requests were closed and feature requests were closed? You can look at the code, but you can't interact with it or its creators anyway? Should more repositories have this model? Yeah, I definitely think so. I think a lot of people would be much happier that way. Yeah, yeah. I mean, it's interesting to think about the implications of this for other areas outside of code, right? Which is where it gets really interesting. I mean, in general, there's like a discussion. Sorry, go ahead. Yeah. Nadia Asparouhova 0:20:25Yeah, I mean, that's basically what's for the writing of my book, because I was like, okay, I feel like whatever's happening open source right now, you start with this idea that like democracy is green, and like, we should have tons and tons of people participating, tons of people participate, and then it turns out that like, most participation is actually just noise and not that useful. And then it ends up like scaring everyone away. And in the end, you just have like, you know, one or a small handful of people that are actually doing all the work while everyone else is kind of like screaming around them. And this becomes like a really great metaphor for what happens in social media. And the reason I wrote, after I wrote the book, I went and worked at Substack. And, you know, part of it was because I was like, I think the model is kind of converging from like, you know, Twitter being this big open space to like, suddenly everyone is retreating, like, the public space is so hostile that everyone must retreat into like, smaller private spaces. So then, you know, chats became a thing, Substack became a thing. And yeah, I just feel sort of like realistic, right? Dwarkesh Patel 0:21:15That's really fascinating. Yeah, the Straussian message in that book is very strong. But in general, there's, when you're thinking about something like corporate governance, right? There's a big question. And I guess even more interestingly, when you think if you think DAOs are going to be a thing, and you think that we will have to reinvent corporate governance from the ground up, there's a question of, should these be run like monarchy? Should they be sort of oligarchies where the board is in control? Should they be just complete democracies where everybody gets one vote on what you do at the next, you know, shareholder meeting or something? And this book and that analysis is actually pretty interesting to think about. Like, how should corporations be run differently, if at all? What does it inform how you think the average corporation should be run? Nadia Asparouhova 0:21:59Yeah, definitely. I mean, I think we are seeing a little bit, I'm not a corporate governance expert, but I do feel like we're seeing a little of this like, backlash against, like, you know, shareholder activism and like, extreme focus on sort of like DEI and boards and things like that. And like, I think we're seeing a little bit of people starting to like take the reins and take control again, because they're like, ah, that doesn't really work so well, it turns out. I think DAOs are going to learn this hard lesson as well. It's still maybe just too early to say what is happening in DAOs right now. But at least the ones that I've looked at, it feels like there is a very common failure mode of people saying, you know, like, let's just have like, let's have this be super democratic and like, leave it to the crowd to kind of like run this thing and figure out how it works. And it turns out you actually do need a strong leader, even the beginning. And this, this is something I learned just from like, open source projects where it's like, you know, very rarely, or if at all, do you have a strong leader? If at all, do you have a project that starts sort of like leaderless and faceless? And then, you know, usually there is some strong creator, leader or influential figure that is like driving the project forward for a certain period of time. And then you can kind of get to the point when you have enough of an active community that maybe that leader takes a step back and lets other people take over. But it's not like you can do that off day one. And that's sort of this open question that I have for, for crypto as an industry more broadly, because I think like, if I think about sort of like, what is defining each of these generations of people that are, you know, pushing forward new technological paradigms, I mentioned that like Wall Street finance mindset is very focused on like globalism and on this sort of like efficiency quantitative mindset. You have the tech Silicon Valley Y company or kind of generation that is really focused on top talent. And the idea this sort of like, you know, founder mindset, the power of like individuals breaking institutions, and then you have like the crypto mindset, which is this sort of like faceless leaderless, like governed by protocol and by code mindset, which is like intriguing to me. But I have a really hard time squaring it with seeing like, in some sense, open source was the experiment that started playing out, you know, 20 years before then. And some things are obviously different in crypto, because tokenization completely changes the incentive system for contributing and maintaining crypto projects versus like traditional open source projects. But in the end, also like humans are humans. And like, I feel like there are a lot of lessons to be learned from open source of like, you know, they also started out early on as being very starry eyed about the power of like, hyper democratic regimes. And it turned out like, that just like doesn't work in practice. And so like, how is CryptoGhost or like Square that? I'm just, yeah, very curious to see what happened. Dwarkesh Patel 0:24:41Yeah, super fascinating. That raises an interesting question, by the way, you've written about idea machines, and you can explain that concept while you answer this question. But do you think that movements can survive without a charismatic founder who is both alive and engaged? So once Will McCaskill dies, would you be shorting effective altruism? Or if like Tyler Cowen dies, would you be short progress studies? Or do you think that, you know, once you get a movement off the ground, you're like, okay, I'm gonna be shorting altruism. Nadia Asparouhova 0:25:08Yeah, I think that's a good question. I mean, like, I don't think there's some perfect template, like each of these kind of has its own sort of unique quirks and characteristics in them. I guess, yeah, back up a little bit. Idea machines is this concept I have around what the transition from we were talking before about, so like traditional 5.1c3 foundations as vehicles for philanthropy, what does the modern version of that look like that is not necessarily encoded in institution? And so I had this term idea machines, which is sort of this different way of thinking about like, turning ideas into outcomes where you have a community that forms around a shared set of values and ideas. So yeah, you mentioned like progress studies is an example of that, or effective altruism example, eventually, that community gets capitalized by some funders, and then it starts to be able to develop an agenda and then like, actually start building like, you know, operational outcomes and like, turning those ideas into real world initiatives. And remind me of your question again. Dwarkesh Patel 0:26:06Yeah, so once the charismatic founder dies of a movement, is a movement basically handicapped in some way? Like, maybe it'll still be a thing, but it's never going to reach the heights it could have reached if that main guy had been around? Nadia Asparouhova 0:26:20I think there are just like different shapes and classifications of like different, different types of communities here. So like, and I'm just thinking back again to sort of like different types of open source projects where it's not like they're like one model that fits perfectly for all of them. So I think there are some communities where it's like, yeah, I mean, I think effective altruism is maybe a good example of that where, like, the community has grown so much that I like if all their leaders were to, you know, knock on wood, disappear tomorrow or something that like, I think the movement would still keep going. There are enough true believers, like even within the community. And I think that's the next order of that community that like, I think that would just continue to grow. Whereas you have like, yeah, maybe it's certain like smaller or more nascent communities that are like, or just like communities that are much more like oriented around, like, a charismatic founder that's just like a different type where if you lose that leader, then suddenly, you know, the whole thing falls apart because they're much more like these like cults or religions. And I don't think it makes one better, better or worse. It's like the right way to do is probably like Bitcoin, where you have a charismatic leader for life because that leader is more necessarily, can't go away, can't ever die. But you still have the like, you know, North Stars and like that. Dwarkesh Patel 0:27:28Yeah. It is funny. I mean, a lot of prophets have this property of you're not really sure what they believed in. So people with different temperaments can project their own preferences onto him. Somebody like Jesus, right? It's, you know, you can be like a super left winger and believe Jesus did for everything you believe in. You can be a super right winger and believe the same. Yeah. Go ahead. Nadia Asparouhova 0:27:52I think there's value in like writing cryptically more. Like I think about like, I think Curtis Yarvin has done a really good job of this where, you know, intentionally or not, but because like his writing is so cryptic and long winded. And like, it's like the Bible where you can just kind of like pour over endlessly being like, what does this mean? What does this mean? And in a weird, you know, you're always told to write very clearly, you're told to write succinctly, but like, it's actually in a weird way, you can be much more effective by being very long winded and not obvious in what you're saying. Dwarkesh Patel 0:28:20Yes, which actually raises an interesting question that I've been wondering about. There have been movements, I guess, if I did altruism is a good example that have been focused on community building in a sort of like explicit way. And then there's other movements where they have a charismatic founder. And moreover, this guy, he doesn't really try to recruit people. I'm thinking of somebody like Peter Thiel, for example, right? He goes on, like once every year or two, he'll go on a podcast and have this like really cryptic back and forth. And then just kind of go away in a hole for a few months or a few years. And I'm curious, which one you think is more effective, given the fact that you're not really competing for votes. So absolute number of people is not what you care about. It's not clear what you care about. But you do want to have more influence among the elites who matter in like politics and tech as well. So anyways, which just your thoughts on those kinds of strategies, explicitly trying to community build versus just kind of projecting out there in a sort of cryptic way? Nadia Asparouhova 0:29:18Yeah, I mean, I definitely being somewhat cryptic myself. I favor the cryptic methodology. But I mean, yeah, I mean, you mentioned Peter Thiel. I think like the Thielverse is probably like the most, like one of the most influential things. In fact, that is hard. It is partly so effective, because it is hard to even define what it is or wrap your head around that you just know that sort of like, every interesting person you meet somehow has some weird connection to, you know, Peter Thiel. And it's funny. But I think this is sort of that evolution from the, you know, 5163 Foundation to the like idea machine implicit. And that is this this switch from, you know, used to start the, you know, Nadia Asparova Foundation or whatever. And it was like, you know, had your name on it. And it was all about like, what do I as a funder want to do in the world, right? And you spend all this time doing this sort of like classical, you know, research, going out into the field, talking to people and you sit and you think, okay, like, here's a strategy I'm going to pursue. And like, ultimately, it's like, very, very donor centric in this very explicit way. And so within traditional philanthropy, you're seeing this sort of like, backlash against that. In like, you know, straight up like nonprofit land, where now you're seeing the locus of power moving from being very donor centric to being sort of like community centric and people saying like, well, we don't really want the donors telling us what to do, even though it's also their money. Like, you know, instead, let's have this be driven by the community from the ground up. That's maybe like one very literal reaction against that, like having the donor as sort of the central power figure. But I think idea machines are kind of like the like, maybe like the more realistic or effective answer in that like, the donor is still like without the presence of a funder, like, community is just a community. They're just sitting around and talking about ideas of like, what could possibly happen? Like, they don't have any money to make anything happen. But like, I think like really effective funders are good at being sort of like subtle and thoughtful about like, like, you know, no one wants to see like the Peter Thiel foundation necessarily. That's just like, it's so like, not the style of how it works. But you know, you meet so many people that are being funded by the same person, like just going out and sort of aggressively like arming the rebels is a more sort of like, yeah, just like distributed decentralized way of thinking about like spreading one's power, instead of just starting a fund. Instead of just starting a foundation. Dwarkesh Patel 0:31:34Yeah, yeah. I mean, even if you look at the life of influential politicians, somebody like LBJ, or Robert Moses, it's how much of it was like calculated and how much of it was just like decades of building up favors and building up connections in a way that had no definite and clear plan, but it just you're hoping that someday you can call upon them and sort of like Godfather way. Yeah. Yeah, that's interesting. And by the way, this is also where your work on open source comes in, right? Like, there's this idea that in the movement, you know, everybody will come in with their ideas, and you can community build your way towards, you know, what should be funded. And, yeah, I'm inclined to believe that it's probably like a few people who have these ideas about what should be funded. And the rest of it is either just a way of like building up engagement and building up hype. Or, or I don't know, or maybe just useless, but what are your thoughts on it? Nadia Asparouhova 0:32:32You know, I decided I was like, I am like, really very much a tech startup person and not a crypto person, even though I would very much like to be fun, because I'm like, ah, this is the future. And there's so many interesting things happening. And I'm like, for the record, not at all like down in crypto, I think it is like the next big sort of movement of things that are happening. But when I really come down to like the mindset, it's like I am so in that sort of like, top talent founder, like power of the individual to break institutions mindset, like that just resonates with me so much more than the like, leaderless, faceless, like, highly participatory kind of thing. And again, like I am very open to that being true, like I maybe I'm so wrong on that. I just like, I have not yet seen evidence that that works in the world. I see a lot of rhetoric about how that could work or should work. We have this sort of like implicit belief that like, direct democracy is somehow like the greatest thing to aspire towards. But like, over and over we see evidence that like that doesn't that just like doesn't really work. It doesn't mean we have to throw out the underlying principles or values behind that. Like I still really believe in meritocracy. I really believe in like access to opportunity. I really believe in like pursuit of happiness. Like to me, those are all like very like American values. But like, I think that where that breaks is the idea that like that has to happen through these like highly participatory methods. I just like, yeah, I haven't seen really great evidence of that being that working. Dwarkesh Patel 0:33:56What does that imply about how you think about politics or at least political structures? You think it would you you elect a mayor, but like, just forget no participation. He gets to do everything he wants to do for four years and you can get rid of in four years. But until then, no community meetings. Well, what does that imply about how you think cities and states and countries should be run? Nadia Asparouhova 0:34:17Um, that's a very complicated thoughts on that. I mean, I, I think it's also like, everyone has the fantasy of when it'd be so nice if there were just one person in charge. I hate all this squabbling. It would just be so great if we could just, you know, have one person just who has exactly the views that I have and put them in charge and let them run things. That would be very nice. I just, I do also think it's unrealistic. Like, I don't think I'm, you know, maybe like modernity sounds great in theory, but in practice just doesn't like I really embrace and I think like there is no perfect governance design either in the same way that there's no perfect open source project designer or whatever else we're talking about. Um, uh, like, yeah, it really just depends like what is like, what is your population comprised of? There are some very small homogenous populations that can be very easily governed by like, you know, a small government or one person or whatever, because there isn't that much dissent or difference. Everyone is sort of on the same page. America is the extreme opposite in that angle. And I'm always thinking about America because like, I'm American and I love America. But like, everyone is trying to solve the governance question for America. And I think like, yeah, I don't know. I mean, we're an extremely heterogeneous population. There are a lot of competing world views. I may not agree with all the views of everyone in America, but like I also, like, I don't want just one person that represents my personal views. I would focus more like effectiveness in governance than I would like having like, you know, just one person in charge or something that like, I don't mind if someone disagrees with my views as long as they're good at what they do, if that makes sense. So I think the questions are like, how do we improve the speed at which like our government works and the efficacy with which it works? Like, I think there's so much room to be made room for improvement there versus like, I don't know how much like I really care about like changing the actual structure of our government. Dwarkesh Patel 0:36:27Interesting. Going back to open source for a second. Why do these companies release so much stuff in open source for free? And it's probably literally worth trillions of dollars of value in total. And they just release it out and free and many of them are developer tools that other developers use to build competitors for these big tech companies that are releasing these open source tools. Why did they do it? What explains it? Nadia Asparouhova 0:36:52I mean, I think it depends on the specific project, but like a lot of times, these are projects that were developed internally. It's the same reason of like, I think code and writing are not that dissimilar in this way of like, why do people spend all this time writing, like long posts or papers or whatever, and then just release them for free? Like, why not put everything behind a paywall? And I think the answer is probably still in both cases where like mindshare is a lot more interesting than, you know, your literal IP. And so, you know, you put out, you write these like long reports or you tweet or whatever, like you spend all this time creating content for free and putting it out there because you're trying to capture mindshare. Same thing with companies releasing open source projects. Like a lot of times they really want like other developers to come in and contribute to them. They want to increase their status as like an open source friendly kind of company or company or show like, you know, here's the type of code that we write internally and showing that externally. They want to like recruiting is, you know, the hardest thing for any company, right? And so being able to attract the right kinds of developers or people that, you know, might fit really well into their developer culture just matters a lot more. And they're just doing that instead of with words or doing that with code. Dwarkesh Patel 0:37:57You've talked about the need for more idea machines. You're like dissatisfied with the fact that effective altruism is a big game in town. Is there some idea or nascent movement where I mean, other than progress ideas, but like something where you feel like this could be a thing, but it just needs some like charismatic founder to take it to the next level? Or even if it doesn't exist yet, it just like a set of ideas around this vein is like clearly something there is going to exist. You know what I mean? Is there anything like that that you notice? Nadia Asparouhova 0:38:26I only had a couple of different possibilities in that post. Yeah, I think like the progress sort of meme is probably the largest growing contender that I would see right now. I think there's another one right now around sort of like the new right. That's not even like the best term necessarily for it, but there's sort of like a shared set of values there that are maybe starting with like politics, but like ideally spreading to like other areas of public influence. So I think like those are a couple of like the bigger movements that I see right now. And then there's like smaller stuff too. Like I mentioned, like tools for thought in that post where like that's never going to be a huge idea machine. But it's one where you have a lot of like interesting, talented people that are thinking about sort of like future of computing. And until maybe more recently, like there just hasn't been a lot of funding available and the funding is always really uneven and unpredictable. And so that's to me an example of like, you know, a smaller community that like just needs that sort of like extra influx to turn a bunch of abstract ideas into practice. But yeah, I mean, I think like, yeah, there's some like the bigger ones that I see right now. I think there is just so much more potential to do more, but I wish people would just think a little bit more creatively because, yeah, I really do think like effective altruism kind of becomes like the default option for a lot of people. Then they're kind of vaguely dissatisfied with it and they don't like think about like, well, what do I actually really care about in the world and how do I want to put that forward? Dwarkesh Patel 0:39:53Yeah, there's also the fact that effective altruism has this like very fit memeplex in the sense that it's like a polytheistic religion where if you have a cause area, then you don't have your own movement. You just have a cause area within our broader movement, right? It just like adopts your gods into our movement. Nadia Asparouhova 0:40:15Yeah, that's the same thing I see like people trying to lobby for effective altruism to care about their cause area, but then it's like you could just start a separate. Like if you can't get EA to care about, then why not just like start another one somewhere else? Dwarkesh Patel 0:40:28Yeah, so, you know, it's interesting to me that the wealth boom in Silicon Valley and then tech spheres has led to the sound growth of philanthropy, but that hasn't always been the case. Even in America, like a lot of people became billionaires after energy markets were deregulated in the 80s and the 90s. And then there wasn't, and obviously the hub of that was like the Texas area or, you know, and as far as I'm aware, there wasn't like a boom of philanthropy motivated by the ideas that people in that region had. What's different about Silicon Valley? Why are they, or do you actually think that these other places have also had their own booms of philanthropic giving? Nadia Asparouhova 0:41:11I think you're right. Yeah, I would make the distinction between like being wealthy is not the same as being elite or whatever other term you want to use there. And so yeah, there are definitely like pockets of what's called like more like local markets of wealth, like, yeah, Texas oil or energy billionaires that tend to operate kind of just more in their own sphere. And a lot of, if you look at any philanthropic, like a lot of them will be philanthropically active, but they only really focus on their geographic area. But there's sort of this difference. And I think this is part of where it comes from the question of like, you know, like what forces someone to actually like do something more public facing with their power. And I think that comes from your power being sort of like threatened. That's like one aspect I would say of that. So like tech has only really become a lot more active in the public sphere outside of startups after the tech backlash of the mid 2010s. And you can say a similar thing kind of happened with the Davos elite as well. And also for the Gilded Age cohort of wealth. And so yeah, when you have sort of, you're kind of like, you know, building in your own little world. And like, you know, we had literally like Silicon Valley where everyone was kind of like sequestered off and just thinking about startups and thinking themselves of like, tech is essentially like an industry, just like any other sort of, you know, entertainment or whatever. And we're just kind of happy building over here. And then it was only when sort of like the Panopticon like turned its head towards tech and started and they had this sort of like onslaught of critiques coming from sort of like mainstream discourse where they went, oh, like what is my place in this world? And, you know, if I don't try to like defend that, then I'm going to just kind of, yeah, we're going to lose all that power. So I think that that need to sort of like defend one's power can kind of like prompt that sort of action. The other aspect I'd highlight is just like, I think a lot of elites are driven by these like technological paradigm shifts. So there's this scholar, Carlotta Perrins, who writes about technological revolutions and financial capital. And she identifies like a few different technological revolutions over the last, whatever, hundred plus years that like drove this cycle of, you know, a new technology is invented. It's people are kind of like working on it in this smaller industry sort of way. And then there is some kind of like crazy like public frenzy and then like a backlash. And then from after that, then you have this sort of like focus on public institution building. But she really points out that like not all technology fits into that. Like, not all technology is a paradigm shift. Sometimes technology is just technology. And so, yeah, I think like a lot of wealth might just fall into that category. My third example, by the way, is the Koch family because you had, you know, the Koch brothers, but then like their father was actually the one who like kind of initially made their wealth, but was like very localized in sort of like how he thought about philanthropy. He had his own like, you know, family foundation was just sort of like doing that sort of like, you know, Texas billionaire mindset that we're talking about of, you know, I made a bunch of money. I'm going to just sort of like, yeah, do my local funder activity. It was only the next generation of his children that then like took that wealth and started thinking about like how do we actually like move that onto like a more elite stage and thinking about like their influence in the media. But like you can see there's like two clear generations within the same family. Like one has this sort of like local wealth mindset and one of them has the more like elite wealth mindset. And yeah, you can kind of like ask yourself, why did that switch happen? But yeah, it's clearly about more than just money. It's also about intention. Dwarkesh Patel 0:44:51Yeah, that's really interesting. Well, it's interesting because there's, if you identify the current mainstream media as affiliated with like that Davos aristocratic elite, or maybe not aristocratic, but like the Davos groups. Yeah, exactly. There is a growing field of independent media, but you would not identify somebody like Joe Rogan as in the Silicon Valley sphere, right? So there is a new media. I just, I guess these startup people don't have that much influence over them yet. And they feel like, yeah. Nadia Asparouhova 0:45:27I think they're trying to like take that strategy, right? So you have like a bunch of founders like Palmer Luckey and Mark Zuckerberg and Brian Armstrong and whoever else that like will not really talk to mainstream media anymore. They will not get an interview to the New York Times, but they will go to like an individual influencer or an individual creator and they'll do an interview with them. So like when Mark Zuckerberg announced Meta, like he did not get grant interviews to mainstream publications, but he went and talked to like Ben Thompson at Strategory. And so I think there is like, it fits really well with that. Like probably mindset of like, we're not necessarily institution building. We're going to like focus on power of individuals who sort of like defy institutions. And that is kind of like an open question that I have about like, what will the long term influence of the tech elite look like? Because like, yeah, the human history tells us that eventually all individual behaviors kind of get codified into institutions, right? But we're obviously living in a very different time now. And I think like the way that the Davos elite managed to like really codify and extend their influence across all these different sectors was by taking that institutional mindset and, you know, like thinking about sort of like academic institutions and media institutions, all that stuff. If the startup mindset is really inherently like anti-institution and says like, we don't want to build the next Harvard necessarily. We just want to like blow apart the concept of universities whatsoever. Or, you know, we don't want to create a new CNN or a new Fox News. We want to just like fund like individual creators to do that same sort of work, but in this very decentralized way. Like, will that work long term? I don't know. Like, is that just sort of like a temporary state that we're in right now where no one really knows what the next institutions will look like? Or is that really like an important part of this generation where like, we shouldn't be asking the question of like, how do you build a new media network? We should just be saying like, the answer is there is no media network. We just go to like all these individuals instead. Dwarkesh Patel 0:47:31Yeah, that's interesting. What do you make of this idea that I think, let's say, that these idea machines might be limited by the fact that if you're going to start some sort of organization in them, you're very much depending on somebody who has made a lot of money independently to fund you and to grant you approval. And I just have a hard time seeing somebody who is like a Napoleon-like figure being willing long term to live under that arrangement. And that so there'll just be the people who are just have this desire to dominate and be recognized who are probably pretty important to any movement you want to create. They'll just want to go off and just like build a company or something that gives them an independent footing first. And they just won't fall under any umbrella. You know what I mean? Nadia Asparouhova 0:48:27Yeah, I mean, like Dustin Moskovitz, for example, has been funding EA for a really long time and hasn't hasn't walked away necessarily. Yeah. I mean, on the flip side, you can see like SPF carried a lot of a lot of risk because it's your point, I guess, like, you know, you end up relying on this one funder, the one funder disappears and everything else kind of falls apart. I mean, I think like, I don't have any sort of like preciousness attached to the idea of like communities, you know, lasting forever. I think this is like, again, if we're trying to solve for the problem of like what did not work well about 5.1c3 foundations for most of recent history, like part of it was that they're, you know, just meant to live on to perpetuity. Like, why do we still have like, you know, Rockefeller Foundation, there are now actually many different Rockefeller Foundations, but like, why does that even exist? Like, why did that money not just get spent down? And actually, when John D. Rockefeller was first proposing the idea of foundations, he wanted them to be like, to have like a finite end state. So he wanted them to last only like 50 years or 100 years when he was proposing this like federal charter, but that federal charter failed. And so now we have these like state charters and foundations can just exist forever. But like, I think if we want to like improve upon this idea of like, how do we prevent like meritocratic elites from turning into aristocratic elites? How do we like, yeah, how do we actually just like try to do a lot of really interesting stuff in our lifetimes? It's like a very, it's very counterintuitive, because you think about like, leaving a legacy must mean like creating institutions or creating a foundation that lasts forever. And, you know, 200 years from now, there's still like the Nadia Asparuva Foundation out there. But like, if I really think about it, it's like, I would almost rather just do really, really, really good, interesting work in like, 50 years or 20 years or 10 years, and have that be the legacy versus your name kind of getting, you know, submerged over a century of institutional decay and decline. So yeah, I don't like if you know, you have a community that lasts for maybe only last 10 years or something like that, and it's funded for that amount of time, and then it kind of elbows its usefulness and it winds down or becomes less relevant. Like, I don't necessarily see it as a bad thing. Of course, like in practice, you know, nothing ever ends that that neatly and that quietly. But, but yeah, I don't think that's a bad thing. Dwarkesh Patel 0:50:44Yeah, yeah. Who are some ethnographers or sociologists from a previous era that have influenced your work? So was there somebody writing about, you know, what it was like to be in a Roman Legion? Or what it was like to work in a factory floor? And you're like, you know what, I want to do that for open source? Or I want to do that for the New Tech Elite? Nadia Asparouhova 0:51:02For open source, I was definitely really influenced by Jane Jacobs and Eleanor Ostrom. I think both had this quality of, so yeah, Eleanor Ostrom was looking at examples of common pool resources, like fisheries or forests or whatever. And just like, going and visiting them and spending a lot of time with them and then saying like, actually, I don't think tragedy of the commons is like a real thing, or it's not the only outcome that we can possibly have. And so sometimes commons can be managed, like perfectly sustainably. And it's not necessarily true that everyone just like treats them very extractively. And just like wrote about what she saw. And same with Jane Jacobs sort of looking at cities as someone who lives in one, right? Like she didn't have any fancy credentials or anything like that. She was just like, I live in the city and I'm looking around and this idea of like, top down urban planning, where you have like someone trying to design this perfect city that like, doesn't change and doesn't yield to its people. It just seems completely unrealistic. And the style that both of them take in their writing is very, it just it starts from them just like, observing what they see and then like, trying to write about it. And I just, yeah, that's, that's the style that I really want to emulate. Dwarkesh Patel 0:52:12Interesting. Nadia Asparouhova 0:52:13Yeah. I think for people to just be talking to like, I don't know, like Chris just like just talking to like open source developers, turns out you can learn a lot more from that than just sitting around like thinking about what open source developers might be thinking about. But... Dwarkesh Patel 0:52:25I have this, I have had this idea of not even for like writing it out loud, but just to understand how the world works. Just like shadowing people who are in just like a random position, they don't have to be a lead in any way, but just like a person who's the personal assistant to somebody influential, how to decide whose emails they forward, how they decide what's the priority, or somebody who's just like an accountant for a big company, right? It's just like, what is involved there? Like, what kinds of we're gonna, you know what I mean? Just like, random people, the line manager at the local factory. I just have no idea how these parts of the world work. And I just want to like, yeah, just shadow them for a day and see like, what happens there. Nadia Asparouhova 0:53:05This is really interesting, because everyone else focuses on sort of like, you know, the big name figure or whatever, but you know, who's the actual gatekeeper there? But yeah, I mean, I've definitely found like, if you just start cold emailing people and talking to them, people are often like, surprisingly, very, very open to being talked to because I don't know, like, most people do not get asked questions about what they do and how they think and stuff. So, you know, you want to realize that dream. Dwarkesh Patel 0:53:33So maybe I'm not like John Rockefeller, and that I only want my organization to last for 50 years. I'm sure you've come across these people who have this idea that, you know, I'll let my money compound for like 200 years. And if it just compounds at some reasonable rate, I'll be, it'll be like the most wealthy institution in the world, unless somebody else has the same exact idea. If somebody wanted to do that, but they wanted to hedge for the possibility that there's a war or there's a revolt, or there's some sort of change in law that draws down this wealth. How would you set up a thousand year endowment, basically, is what I'm asking, or like a 500 year endowment? Would you just put it in like a crypto wallet with us? And just, you know what I mean? Like, how would you go about that organizationally? How would you like, that's your goal? I want to have the most influence in 500 years. Nadia Asparouhova 0:54:17Well, I'd worry much less. The question for me is not about how do I make sure that there are assets available to distribute in a thousand years? Because I don't know, just put in stock marketers. You can do some pretty boring things to just like, you know, ensure your assets grow over time. The more difficult question is, how do you ensure that whoever is deciding how to distribute the funds, distributes them in a way that you personally want them to be spent? So Ford Foundation is a really interesting example of this, where Henry Ford created a Ford Foundation shortly before he died, and just pledged a lot of Ford stock to create this foundation and was doing it basically for tax reasons, had no philanthropic. It's just like, this is what we're doing to like, house this wealth over here. And then, you know, passed away, son passed away, and grandson ended up being on the board. But the board ended up being basically like, you know, a bunch of people that Henry Ford certainly would not have ever wanted to be on his board. And so, you know, and you end up seeing like, the Ford Foundation ended up becoming huge influential. I like, I have received money from them. So it's not at all an indictment of sort of like their views or anything like that. It's just much more of like, you know, you had the intent of the original donor, and then you had like, who are all these people that like, suddenly just ended up with a giant pool of capital and then like, decided to spend it however they felt like spending it and the grandson at the time sort of like, famously resigned because he was like, really frustrated and was just like, this is not at all what my family wanted and like, basically like, kicked off the board. So anyway, so that is the question that I would like figure out if I had a thousand year endowment is like, how do I make sure that whomever manages that endowment actually shares my views? One, shares my views, but then also like, how do I even know what we need to care about in a thousand years? Because like, I don't even know what the problems are in a thousand years. And this is why like, I think like, very long term thinking can be a little bit dangerous in this way, because you're sort of like, presuming that you know what even matters then. Whereas I think like, figure out the most impactful things to do is just like, so contextually dependent on like, what is going on at the time. So I can't, I don't know. And there are also foundations where you know, the dono
I'm joined by Peachy aka Chris Peach (@_Peachy_Tips_) to chat about bringing your army concept to life on the tabletop. You may been inspired by a piece of lore or a Black Library book, or developed a custom background story, or just wanted to make your Stormcast historically accurate Roman Legion. In this video we will discuss how we go about converting, painting, and developing stories on the tabletop... even in matched play. You might know Peachy formerly of Warhammer TV who can now be found at The Painting Phase.
Nadia Asparouhova is currently researching what the new tech elite will look like at nadia.xyz. She is also the author of Working in Public: The Making and Maintenance of Open Source Software.We talk about how:* American philanthropy has changed from Rockefeller to Effective Altruism* SBF represented the Davos elite rather than the Silicon Valley elite,* Open source software reveals the limitations of democratic participation,* & much more.Watch on YouTube. Listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or any other podcast platform. Read the full transcript here.Timestamps(0:00:00) - Intro(0:00:26) - SBF was Davos elite(0:09:38) - Gender sociology of philanthropy(0:16:30) - Was Shakespeare an open source project?(0:22:00) - Need for charismatic leaders(0:33:55) - Political reform(0:40:30) - Why didn't previous wealth booms lead to new philanthropic movements?(0:53:35) - Creating a 10,000 year endowment(0:57:27) - Why do institutions become left wing?(1:02:27) - Impact of billionaire intellectual funding(1:04:12) - Value of intellectuals(1:08:53) - Climate, AI, & Doomerism(1:18:04) - Religious philanthropyTranscriptThis transcript was autogenerated and thus may contain errors.Nadia Asparouhova 0:00:00You start with this idea that like democracy is green and like we should have tons of tons of people participating tons of people participate and then it turns out that like most participation is actually just noise and not that useful. That really squarely puts SPF into like the finance crowd much more so than startups or crypto. Founders will always talk about like building and like startups are like so important or whatever and like what are all of them doing in their spare time? They're like reading books. They're reading essays and like and then those like books and essays influence how they think about stuff. Dwarkesh Patel 0:00:26Okay, today I have the pleasure of talking with Nadia Asperova. She is previously the author of Working in Public, the Making and Maintenance of Open Source Software and she is currently researching what the new tech elite will look like. Nadia, welcome to the podcast. Thanks for having me. Yeah, okay, so this is a perfect timing obviously given what's been happening with SPF. How much do you think SPF was motivated by effective altruism? Where do you place them in the whole dimensionality of idea machines and motivations? Nadia Asparouhova 0:01:02Yeah, I mean, I know there's sort of like conflicting accounts going around. Like, I mean, just from my sort of like character study or looking at SPF, it seems pretty clear to me that he is sort of inextricably tied to the concepts of utilitarianism that then motivate effective altruism. The difference for me in sort of like where I characterize effective altruism is I think it's much closer to sort of like finance Wall Street elite mindset than it is to startup mindset, even though a lot of people associate effective altruism with tech people. So yeah, to me, like that really squarely puts SPF in sort of like the finance crowd much more so than startups or crypto. And I think that's something that gets really misunderstood about him. Dwarkesh Patel 0:01:44Interesting. Yeah, I find that interesting because if you think of Jeff Bezos, when he started Amazon, he wasn't somebody like John Perry Barlow, who was just motivated by the free philosophy of the internet. You know, he saw a graph of internet usage going up into the right and he's like, I should build a business on top of this. And in a sort of loopholy way, try to figure out like, what is the thing that is that is the first thing you would want to put a SQL database on top of to ship and produce? And I think that's what books was the answer. So and obviously, he also came from a hedge fund, right? Would you play somebody like him also in the old finance crowd rather than as a startup founder? Nadia Asparouhova 0:02:22Yeah, it's kind of a weird one because he's both associated with the early computing revolution, but then also AWS was sort of like what kicked off all of the 2010s sort of startup. And I think in the way that he's started thinking about his public legacy and just from sort of his public behavior, I think he fits much more squarely now in that sort of tech startup elite mindset of the 2010s crowd more so than the Davos elite crowd of the 2000s. Dwarkesh Patel 0:02:47What in specific are you referring to? Nadia Asparouhova 0:02:49Well, he's come out and been like sort of openly critical about a lot of like Davos type institutions. He kind of pokes fun at mainstream media and for not believing in him not believing in AWS. And I think he's because he sort of like spans across like both of these generations, he's been able to see the evolution of like how maybe like his earlier peers function versus the sort of second cohort of peers that he came across. But to me, he seems much more like, much more of the sort of like startup elite mindset. And I can kind of back up a little bit there. But what I associate with the Davos Wall Street kind of crowd is much more of this focus on quantitative thinking, measuring efficiency. And then also this like globalist mindset, like I think that the vision that they want to ensure for the world is this idea of like a very interconnected world where we, you know, sort of like the United Nations kind of mindset. And that is really like literally what the Davos gathering is. Whereas Bezos from his actions today feels much closer to the startup, like Y Combinator post AWS kind of mindset of founders that were really made their money by taking these non-obvious bets on talented people. So they were much less focused on credentialism. They were much more into this idea of meritocracy. I think we sort of forget like how commonplace this trope is of like, you know, the young founder in a dorm room. And that was really popularized by the 2010s cohort of the startup elite of being someone that may have like absolutely no skills, no background in industry, but can somehow sort of like turn the entire industry over on its head. And I think that was sort of like the unique insight of the tech startup crowd. And yeah, when I think about just sort of like some of the things that Bezos is doing now, it feels like she identifies with that much more strongly of being this sort of like lone cowboy or having this like one talented person with really great ideas who can sort of change the world. I think about the, what is it called? The Altos Institute or the new like science initiative that he put out where he was recruiting these like scientists from academic institutions and paying them really high salaries just to attract like the very best top scientists around the world. That's much more of that kind of mindset than it is about like putting faith in sort of like existing institutions, which is what we would see from more of like a Davos kind of mindset. Dwarkesh Patel 0:05:16Interesting. Do you think that in the future, like the kids of today's tech billionaires will be future aristocrats? So effective altruism will be a sort of elite aristocratic philosophy. They'll be like tomorrow's Rockefellers. Nadia Asparouhova 0:05:30Yeah, I kind of worry about that actually. I think of there as being like within the US, we were kind of lucky in that we have these two different types of elites. We have the aristocratic elites and we have meritocratic elites. Most other countries I think basically just have aristocratic elites, especially comparing like the US to Britain in this way. And so in the aristocratic model, your wealth and your power is sort of like conferred to you by previous generations. You just kind of like inherit it from your parents or your family or whomever. And the upside of that, if there is an upside, is that you get really socialized into this idea of what does it mean to be a public steward? What does it mean to think of yourself and your responsibility to the rest of society as a privileged elite person? In the US, we have this really great thing where you can kind of just, you know, we have the American dream, right? So lots of people that didn't grow up with money can break into the elite ranks by doing something that makes them really successful. And that's like a really special thing about the US. So we have this whole class of meritocratic elites who may not have aristocratic backgrounds, but ended up doing something within their lifetimes that made them successful. And so, yeah, I think it's a really cool thing. The downside of that being that you don't really get like socialized into what does it mean to have this fortune and do something interesting with your money. You don't have this sort of generational benefit that the aristocratic elites have of presiding over your land or whatever you want to call it, where you're sort of learning how to think about yourself in relation to the rest of society. And so it's much easier to just kind of like hoard your wealth or whatever. And so when you think about sort of like what are the next generations, the children of the meritocratic elites going to look like or what are they going to do, it's very easy to imagine kind of just becoming aristocratic elites in the sense of like, yeah, they're just going to like inherit the money from their families. And they haven't also really been socialized into like how to think about their role in society. And so, yeah, all the meritocratic elites eventually turn into aristocratic elites, which is where I think you start seeing this trend now towards people wanting to sort of like spend down their fortunes within their lifetime or within a set number of decades after they die because they kind of see what happened in previous generations and are like, oh, I don't want to do that. Dwarkesh Patel 0:07:41Yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, it's interesting. You mentioned that the aristocratic elites have the feel that they have the responsibility to give back, I guess, more so than the meritocratic elites. But I believe that in the U.S., the amount of people who give to philanthropy and the total amount they give is higher than in Europe, right, where they probably have a higher ratio of aristocratic elites. Wouldn't you expect the opposite if the aristocratic elites are the ones that are, you know, inculcated to give back? Nadia Asparouhova 0:08:11Well, I assume like most of the people that are the figures about sort of like Americans giving back is spread across like all Americans, not just the wealthiest. Dwarkesh Patel 0:08:19Yeah. So you would predict that among the top 10 percent of Americans, there's less philanthropy than the top 10 percent of Europeans? Uh, there's... Sorry, I'm not sure I understand the question. I guess, does the ratio of meritocratic to aristocratic elites change how much philanthropy there is among the elites? Nadia Asparouhova 0:08:45Yeah, I mean, like here we have much more of a culture of like even among aristocratic elites, this idea of like institution building or like large donations to like build institutions, whereas in Europe, a lot of the public institutions are created by government. And there's sort of this mentality of like private citizens don't experiment with public institutions. That's the government's job. And you see that sort of like pervasively throughout all of like European cultures. Like when we want something to change in public society, we look to government to like regulate or change it. Whereas in the U.S., it's kind of much more like choose your own adventure. And we don't really see the government as like the sole provider or shaper of public institutions. We also look at private citizens and like there's so many things that like public institutions that we have now that were not started by government, but were started by private philanthropists. And that's like a really unusual thing about the U.S. Dwarkesh Patel 0:09:39There's this common pattern in philanthropy where a guy will become a billionaire, and then his wife will be heavily involved with or even potentially in charge of, you know, the family's philanthropic efforts. And there's many examples of this, right? Like Bill and Melinda Gates, you know, Mark Zuckerberg. Yeah, yeah, exactly. And Dustin Moskovitz. So what is the consequence of this? How is philanthropy, the causes and the foundations, how are they different because of this pattern? Nadia Asparouhova 0:10:15Well, I mean, I feel like we see that pattern, like the problem is that what even is philanthropy is changing very quickly. So we can say historically that, not even historically, in recent history, in recent decades, that has probably been true. That wasn't true in say like late 1800s, early 1900s. It was, you know, Carnegie and Rockefeller were the ones that were actually doing their own philanthropy, not their spouses. So I'd say it's a more recent trend. But now I think we're also seeing this thing where like a lot of wealthy people are not necessarily doing their philanthropic activities through foundations anymore. And that's true both within like traditional philanthropy sector and sort of like the looser definition of what we might consider to be philanthropy, depending on how you define it, which I kind of more broadly want to define as like the actions of elites that are sort of like, you know, public facing activities. But like even within sort of traditional philanthropy circles, we have like, you know, the 5.1c3 nonprofit, which is, you know, traditionally how people, you know, house all their money in a foundation and then they do their philanthropic activities out of that. But in more recent years, we've seen this trend towards like LLCs. So Emerson Collective, I think, might have been maybe the first one to do it. And that was Steve Jobs' Philanthropic Foundation. And then Mark Zuckerberg with Chan Zuckerberg Initiative also used an LLC. And then since then, a lot of other, especially within sort of like tech wealth, we've seen that move towards people using LLCs instead of 5.1c3s because they, it just gives you a lot more flexibility in the kinds of things you can fund. You don't just have to fund other nonprofits. And they also see donor advised funds. So DAFs, which are sort of this like hacky workaround to foundations as well. So I guess point being that like this sort of mental model of like, you know, one person makes a ton of money and then their spouse kind of directs these like nice, feel good, like philanthropic activities, I think is like, may not be the model that we continue to move forward on. And I'm kind of hopeful or curious to see like, what does a return to like, because we've had so many new people making a ton of money in the last 10 years or so, we might see this return to sort of like the Gilded Age style of philanthropy where people are not necessarily just like forming a philanthropic foundation and looking for the nicest causes to fund, but are actually just like thinking a little bit more holistically about like, how do I help build and create like a movement around a thing that I really care about? How do I think more broadly around like funding companies and nonprofits and individuals and like doing lots of different, different kinds of activities? Because I think like the broader goal that like motivates at least like the new sort of elite classes to want to do any of this stuff at all. I don't really think philanthropy is about altruism. I just, I think like the term philanthropy is just totally fraud and like refers to too many different things and it's not very helpful. But I think like the part that I'm interested in at least is sort of like what motivates elites to go from just sort of like making a lot of money and then like thinking about themselves to them thinking about sort of like their place in broader public society. And I think that starts with thinking about how do I control like media, academia, government are sort of like the three like arms of the public sector. And we think of it in that way a little bit more broadly where it's really much more about sort of like maintaining control over your own power, more so than sort of like this like altruistic kind of, you know, whitewash. Dwarkesh Patel 0:13:41Yeah. Nadia Asparouhova 0:13:42Then it becomes like, you know, there's so many other like creative ways to think about like how that might happen. Dwarkesh Patel 0:13:49That's, that's, that's really interesting. That's a, yeah, that's a really interesting way of thinking about what it is you're doing with philanthropy. Isn't the word noble descended from a word that basically means to give alms to people like if you're in charge of them, you will give alms to them. And in a way, I mean, it might have been another word I'm thinking of, but in a way, yeah, a part of what motivates altruism, not obviously all of it, but part of it is that, yeah, you influence and power. Not even in a necessarily negative connotation, but that's definitely what motivates altruism. So having that put square front and center is refreshing and honest, actually. Nadia Asparouhova 0:14:29Yeah, I don't, I really don't see it as like a negative thing at all. And I think most of the like, you know, writing and journalism and academia that focuses on philanthropy tends to be very wealth critical. I'm not at all, like I personally don't feel wealth critical at all. I think like, again, sort of returning to this like mental model of like aristocratic and meritocratic elites, aristocratic elites are able to sort of like pass down, like encode what they're supposed to be doing in each generation because they have this kind of like familial ties. And I think like on the meritocratic side, like if you didn't have any sort of language around altruism or public stewardship, then like, it's like, you need to kind of create that narrative for the meritocratically or else, you know, there's just like nothing to hold on to. So I think like, it makes sense to talk in those terms. Andrew Carnegie being sort of the father of modern philanthropy in the US, like, wrote these series of essays about wealth that were like very influential and where he sort of talks about this like moral obligation. And I think like, really, it was kind of this like, a quiet way for him to, even though it was ostensibly about sort of like giving back or, you know, helping lift up the next generation of people, the next generation of entrepreneurs. Like, I think it really was much more of a protective stance of saying, like, if he doesn't frame it in this way, then people are just going to knock down the concept of wealth altogether. Dwarkesh Patel 0:15:50Yeah, yeah, yeah. No, that's really interesting. And it's interesting, in which cases this kind of influence has been successful and worse not. When Jeff Bezos bought the Washington Post, has there been any counterfactual impact on how the Washington Post has run as a result? I doubt it. But you know, when Musk takes over Twitter, I guess it's a much more expensive purchase. We'll see what the influence is negative or positive. But it's certainly different than what Twitter otherwise would have been. So control over media, it's, I guess it's a bigger meme now. Let me just take a digression and ask about open source for a second. So based on your experience studying these open source projects, do you find the theory that Homer and Shakespeare were basically container words for these open source repositories that stretched out through centuries? Do you find that more plausible now, rather than them being individuals, of course? Do you find that more plausible now, given your, given your study of open source? Sorry, what did? Nadia Asparouhova 0:16:49Less plausible. What did? Dwarkesh Patel 0:16:51Oh, okay. So the idea is that they weren't just one person. It was just like a whole bunch of people throughout a bunch of centuries who composed different parts of each story or composed different stories. Nadia Asparouhova 0:17:02The Nicholas Berbaki model, same concept of, you know, a single mathematician who's actually comprised of like lots of different. I think it's actually the opposite would be sort of my conclusion. We think of open source as this very like collective volunteer effort. And I think, use that as an excuse to not really contribute back to open source or not really think about like how open source projects are maintained. Because we were like, you know, you kind of have this bystander effect where you're like, well, you know, someone's taking care of it. It's volunteer oriented. Like, of course, there's someone out there taking care of it. But in reality, it actually turns out it is just one person. So maybe it's a little bit more like a Wizard of Oz type model. It's actually just like one person behind the curtain that's like, you know, doing everything. And you see this huge, you know, grandeur and you think there must be so many people that are behind it. It's one person. Yeah, and I think that's sort of undervalued. I think a lot of the rhetoric that we have about open source is rooted in sort of like early 2000s kind of starry eyed idea about like the power of the internet and the idea of like crowdsourcing and Wikipedia and all this stuff. And then like in reality, like we kind of see this convergence from like very broad based collaborative volunteer efforts to like narrowing down to kind of like single creators. And I think a lot of like, you know, single creators are the people that are really driving a lot of the internet today and a lot of cultural production. Dwarkesh Patel 0:18:21Oh, that's that's super fascinating. Does that in general make you more sympathetic towards the lone genius view of accomplishments in history? Not just in literature, I guess, but just like when you think back to how likely is it that, you know, Newton came up with all that stuff on his own versus how much was fed into him by, you know, the others around him? Nadia Asparouhova 0:18:40Yeah, I think so. I feel I've never been like a big, like, you know, great founder theory kind of person. I think I'm like, my true theory is, I guess that ideas are maybe some sort of like sentient, like, concept or virus that operates outside of us. And we are just sort of like the vessels through which like ideas flow. So in that sense, you know, it's not really about any one person, but I do think I think I tend to lean like in terms of sort of like, where does creative, like, creative effort come from? I do think a lot of it comes much more from like a single individual than it does from with some of the crowds. But everything just serves like different purposes, right? Like, because I think like, within open source, it's like, not all of open source maintenance work is creative. In fact, most of it is pretty boring and dredgerous. And that's the stuff that no one wants to do. And that, like, one person kind of got stuck with doing and that's really different from like, who created a certain open source projects, which is a little bit more of that, like, creative mindset. Dwarkesh Patel 0:19:44Yeah, yeah, that's really interesting. Do you think more projects in open source, so just take a popular repository, on average, do you think that these repositories would be better off if, let's say a larger percentage of them where pull requests were closed and feature requests were closed? You can look at the code, but you can't interact with it or its creators anyway? Should more repositories have this model? Yeah, I definitely think so. I think a lot of people would be much happier that way. Yeah, yeah. I mean, it's interesting to think about the implications of this for other areas outside of code, right? Which is where it gets really interesting. I mean, in general, there's like a discussion. Sorry, go ahead. Yeah. Nadia Asparouhova 0:20:25Yeah, I mean, that's basically what's for the writing of my book, because I was like, okay, I feel like whatever's happening open source right now, you start with this idea that like democracy is green, and like, we should have tons and tons of people participating, tons of people participate, and then it turns out that like, most participation is actually just noise and not that useful. And then it ends up like scaring everyone away. And in the end, you just have like, you know, one or a small handful of people that are actually doing all the work while everyone else is kind of like screaming around them. And this becomes like a really great metaphor for what happens in social media. And the reason I wrote, after I wrote the book, I went and worked at Substack. And, you know, part of it was because I was like, I think the model is kind of converging from like, you know, Twitter being this big open space to like, suddenly everyone is retreating, like, the public space is so hostile that everyone must retreat into like, smaller private spaces. So then, you know, chats became a thing, Substack became a thing. And yeah, I just feel sort of like realistic, right? Dwarkesh Patel 0:21:15That's really fascinating. Yeah, the Straussian message in that book is very strong. But in general, there's, when you're thinking about something like corporate governance, right? There's a big question. And I guess even more interestingly, when you think if you think DAOs are going to be a thing, and you think that we will have to reinvent corporate governance from the ground up, there's a question of, should these be run like monarchy? Should they be sort of oligarchies where the board is in control? Should they be just complete democracies where everybody gets one vote on what you do at the next, you know, shareholder meeting or something? And this book and that analysis is actually pretty interesting to think about. Like, how should corporations be run differently, if at all? What does it inform how you think the average corporation should be run? Nadia Asparouhova 0:21:59Yeah, definitely. I mean, I think we are seeing a little bit, I'm not a corporate governance expert, but I do feel like we're seeing a little of this like, backlash against, like, you know, shareholder activism and like, extreme focus on sort of like DEI and boards and things like that. And like, I think we're seeing a little bit of people starting to like take the reins and take control again, because they're like, ah, that doesn't really work so well, it turns out. I think DAOs are going to learn this hard lesson as well. It's still maybe just too early to say what is happening in DAOs right now. But at least the ones that I've looked at, it feels like there is a very common failure mode of people saying, you know, like, let's just have like, let's have this be super democratic and like, leave it to the crowd to kind of like run this thing and figure out how it works. And it turns out you actually do need a strong leader, even the beginning. And this, this is something I learned just from like, open source projects where it's like, you know, very rarely, or if at all, do you have a strong leader? If at all, do you have a project that starts sort of like leaderless and faceless? And then, you know, usually there is some strong creator, leader or influential figure that is like driving the project forward for a certain period of time. And then you can kind of get to the point when you have enough of an active community that maybe that leader takes a step back and lets other people take over. But it's not like you can do that off day one. And that's sort of this open question that I have for, for crypto as an industry more broadly, because I think like, if I think about sort of like, what is defining each of these generations of people that are, you know, pushing forward new technological paradigms, I mentioned that like Wall Street finance mindset is very focused on like globalism and on this sort of like efficiency quantitative mindset. You have the tech Silicon Valley Y company or kind of generation that is really focused on top talent. And the idea this sort of like, you know, founder mindset, the power of like individuals breaking institutions, and then you have like the crypto mindset, which is this sort of like faceless leaderless, like governed by protocol and by code mindset, which is like intriguing to me. But I have a really hard time squaring it with seeing like, in some sense, open source was the experiment that started playing out, you know, 20 years before then. And some things are obviously different in crypto, because tokenization completely changes the incentive system for contributing and maintaining crypto projects versus like traditional open source projects. But in the end, also like humans are humans. And like, I feel like there are a lot of lessons to be learned from open source of like, you know, they also started out early on as being very starry eyed about the power of like, hyper democratic regimes. And it turned out like, that just like doesn't work in practice. And so like, how is CryptoGhost or like Square that? I'm just, yeah, very curious to see what happened. Dwarkesh Patel 0:24:41Yeah, super fascinating. That raises an interesting question, by the way, you've written about idea machines, and you can explain that concept while you answer this question. But do you think that movements can survive without a charismatic founder who is both alive and engaged? So once Will McCaskill dies, would you be shorting effective altruism? Or if like Tyler Cowen dies, would you be short progress studies? Or do you think that, you know, once you get a movement off the ground, you're like, okay, I'm gonna be shorting altruism. Nadia Asparouhova 0:25:08Yeah, I think that's a good question. I mean, like, I don't think there's some perfect template, like each of these kind of has its own sort of unique quirks and characteristics in them. I guess, yeah, back up a little bit. Idea machines is this concept I have around what the transition from we were talking before about, so like traditional 5.1c3 foundations as vehicles for philanthropy, what does the modern version of that look like that is not necessarily encoded in institution? And so I had this term idea machines, which is sort of this different way of thinking about like, turning ideas into outcomes where you have a community that forms around a shared set of values and ideas. So yeah, you mentioned like progress studies is an example of that, or effective altruism example, eventually, that community gets capitalized by some funders, and then it starts to be able to develop an agenda and then like, actually start building like, you know, operational outcomes and like, turning those ideas into real world initiatives. And remind me of your question again. Dwarkesh Patel 0:26:06Yeah, so once the charismatic founder dies of a movement, is a movement basically handicapped in some way? Like, maybe it'll still be a thing, but it's never going to reach the heights it could have reached if that main guy had been around? Nadia Asparouhova 0:26:20I think there are just like different shapes and classifications of like different, different types of communities here. So like, and I'm just thinking back again to sort of like different types of open source projects where it's not like they're like one model that fits perfectly for all of them. So I think there are some communities where it's like, yeah, I mean, I think effective altruism is maybe a good example of that where, like, the community has grown so much that I like if all their leaders were to, you know, knock on wood, disappear tomorrow or something that like, I think the movement would still keep going. There are enough true believers, like even within the community. And I think that's the next order of that community that like, I think that would just continue to grow. Whereas you have like, yeah, maybe it's certain like smaller or more nascent communities that are like, or just like communities that are much more like oriented around, like, a charismatic founder that's just like a different type where if you lose that leader, then suddenly, you know, the whole thing falls apart because they're much more like these like cults or religions. And I don't think it makes one better, better or worse. It's like the right way to do is probably like Bitcoin, where you have a charismatic leader for life because that leader is more necessarily, can't go away, can't ever die. But you still have the like, you know, North Stars and like that. Dwarkesh Patel 0:27:28Yeah. It is funny. I mean, a lot of prophets have this property of you're not really sure what they believed in. So people with different temperaments can project their own preferences onto him. Somebody like Jesus, right? It's, you know, you can be like a super left winger and believe Jesus did for everything you believe in. You can be a super right winger and believe the same. Yeah. Go ahead. Nadia Asparouhova 0:27:52I think there's value in like writing cryptically more. Like I think about like, I think Curtis Yarvin has done a really good job of this where, you know, intentionally or not, but because like his writing is so cryptic and long winded. And like, it's like the Bible where you can just kind of like pour over endlessly being like, what does this mean? What does this mean? And in a weird, you know, you're always told to write very clearly, you're told to write succinctly, but like, it's actually in a weird way, you can be much more effective by being very long winded and not obvious in what you're saying. Dwarkesh Patel 0:28:20Yes, which actually raises an interesting question that I've been wondering about. There have been movements, I guess, if I did altruism is a good example that have been focused on community building in a sort of like explicit way. And then there's other movements where they have a charismatic founder. And moreover, this guy, he doesn't really try to recruit people. I'm thinking of somebody like Peter Thiel, for example, right? He goes on, like once every year or two, he'll go on a podcast and have this like really cryptic back and forth. And then just kind of go away in a hole for a few months or a few years. And I'm curious, which one you think is more effective, given the fact that you're not really competing for votes. So absolute number of people is not what you care about. It's not clear what you care about. But you do want to have more influence among the elites who matter in like politics and tech as well. So anyways, which just your thoughts on those kinds of strategies, explicitly trying to community build versus just kind of projecting out there in a sort of cryptic way? Nadia Asparouhova 0:29:18Yeah, I mean, I definitely being somewhat cryptic myself. I favor the cryptic methodology. But I mean, yeah, I mean, you mentioned Peter Thiel. I think like the Thielverse is probably like the most, like one of the most influential things. In fact, that is hard. It is partly so effective, because it is hard to even define what it is or wrap your head around that you just know that sort of like, every interesting person you meet somehow has some weird connection to, you know, Peter Thiel. And it's funny. But I think this is sort of that evolution from the, you know, 5163 Foundation to the like idea machine implicit. And that is this this switch from, you know, used to start the, you know, Nadia Asparova Foundation or whatever. And it was like, you know, had your name on it. And it was all about like, what do I as a funder want to do in the world, right? And you spend all this time doing this sort of like classical, you know, research, going out into the field, talking to people and you sit and you think, okay, like, here's a strategy I'm going to pursue. And like, ultimately, it's like, very, very donor centric in this very explicit way. And so within traditional philanthropy, you're seeing this sort of like, backlash against that. In like, you know, straight up like nonprofit land, where now you're seeing the locus of power moving from being very donor centric to being sort of like community centric and people saying like, well, we don't really want the donors telling us what to do, even though it's also their money. Like, you know, instead, let's have this be driven by the community from the ground up. That's maybe like one very literal reaction against that, like having the donor as sort of the central power figure. But I think idea machines are kind of like the like, maybe like the more realistic or effective answer in that like, the donor is still like without the presence of a funder, like, community is just a community. They're just sitting around and talking about ideas of like, what could possibly happen? Like, they don't have any money to make anything happen. But like, I think like really effective funders are good at being sort of like subtle and thoughtful about like, like, you know, no one wants to see like the Peter Thiel foundation necessarily. That's just like, it's so like, not the style of how it works. But you know, you meet so many people that are being funded by the same person, like just going out and sort of aggressively like arming the rebels is a more sort of like, yeah, just like distributed decentralized way of thinking about like spreading one's power, instead of just starting a fund. Instead of just starting a foundation. Dwarkesh Patel 0:31:34Yeah, yeah. I mean, even if you look at the life of influential politicians, somebody like LBJ, or Robert Moses, it's how much of it was like calculated and how much of it was just like decades of building up favors and building up connections in a way that had no definite and clear plan, but it just you're hoping that someday you can call upon them and sort of like Godfather way. Yeah. Yeah, that's interesting. And by the way, this is also where your work on open source comes in, right? Like, there's this idea that in the movement, you know, everybody will come in with their ideas, and you can community build your way towards, you know, what should be funded. And, yeah, I'm inclined to believe that it's probably like a few people who have these ideas about what should be funded. And the rest of it is either just a way of like building up engagement and building up hype. Or, or I don't know, or maybe just useless, but what are your thoughts on it? Nadia Asparouhova 0:32:32You know, I decided I was like, I am like, really very much a tech startup person and not a crypto person, even though I would very much like to be fun, because I'm like, ah, this is the future. And there's so many interesting things happening. And I'm like, for the record, not at all like down in crypto, I think it is like the next big sort of movement of things that are happening. But when I really come down to like the mindset, it's like I am so in that sort of like, top talent founder, like power of the individual to break institutions mindset, like that just resonates with me so much more than the like, leaderless, faceless, like, highly participatory kind of thing. And again, like I am very open to that being true, like I maybe I'm so wrong on that. I just like, I have not yet seen evidence that that works in the world. I see a lot of rhetoric about how that could work or should work. We have this sort of like implicit belief that like, direct democracy is somehow like the greatest thing to aspire towards. But like, over and over we see evidence that like that doesn't that just like doesn't really work. It doesn't mean we have to throw out the underlying principles or values behind that. Like I still really believe in meritocracy. I really believe in like access to opportunity. I really believe in like pursuit of happiness. Like to me, those are all like very like American values. But like, I think that where that breaks is the idea that like that has to happen through these like highly participatory methods. I just like, yeah, I haven't seen really great evidence of that being that working. Dwarkesh Patel 0:33:56What does that imply about how you think about politics or at least political structures? You think it would you you elect a mayor, but like, just forget no participation. He gets to do everything he wants to do for four years and you can get rid of in four years. But until then, no community meetings. Well, what does that imply about how you think cities and states and countries should be run? Nadia Asparouhova 0:34:17Um, that's a very complicated thoughts on that. I mean, I, I think it's also like, everyone has the fantasy of when it'd be so nice if there were just one person in charge. I hate all this squabbling. It would just be so great if we could just, you know, have one person just who has exactly the views that I have and put them in charge and let them run things. That would be very nice. I just, I do also think it's unrealistic. Like, I don't think I'm, you know, maybe like modernity sounds great in theory, but in practice just doesn't like I really embrace and I think like there is no perfect governance design either in the same way that there's no perfect open source project designer or whatever else we're talking about. Um, uh, like, yeah, it really just depends like what is like, what is your population comprised of? There are some very small homogenous populations that can be very easily governed by like, you know, a small government or one person or whatever, because there isn't that much dissent or difference. Everyone is sort of on the same page. America is the extreme opposite in that angle. And I'm always thinking about America because like, I'm American and I love America. But like, everyone is trying to solve the governance question for America. And I think like, yeah, I don't know. I mean, we're an extremely heterogeneous population. There are a lot of competing world views. I may not agree with all the views of everyone in America, but like I also, like, I don't want just one person that represents my personal views. I would focus more like effectiveness in governance than I would like having like, you know, just one person in charge or something that like, I don't mind if someone disagrees with my views as long as they're good at what they do, if that makes sense. So I think the questions are like, how do we improve the speed at which like our government works and the efficacy with which it works? Like, I think there's so much room to be made room for improvement there versus like, I don't know how much like I really care about like changing the actual structure of our government. Dwarkesh Patel 0:36:27Interesting. Going back to open source for a second. Why do these companies release so much stuff in open source for free? And it's probably literally worth trillions of dollars of value in total. And they just release it out and free and many of them are developer tools that other developers use to build competitors for these big tech companies that are releasing these open source tools. Why did they do it? What explains it? Nadia Asparouhova 0:36:52I mean, I think it depends on the specific project, but like a lot of times, these are projects that were developed internally. It's the same reason of like, I think code and writing are not that dissimilar in this way of like, why do people spend all this time writing, like long posts or papers or whatever, and then just release them for free? Like, why not put everything behind a paywall? And I think the answer is probably still in both cases where like mindshare is a lot more interesting than, you know, your literal IP. And so, you know, you put out, you write these like long reports or you tweet or whatever, like you spend all this time creating content for free and putting it out there because you're trying to capture mindshare. Same thing with companies releasing open source projects. Like a lot of times they really want like other developers to come in and contribute to them. They want to increase their status as like an open source friendly kind of company or company or show like, you know, here's the type of code that we write internally and showing that externally. They want to like recruiting is, you know, the hardest thing for any company, right? And so being able to attract the right kinds of developers or people that, you know, might fit really well into their developer culture just matters a lot more. And they're just doing that instead of with words or doing that with code. Dwarkesh Patel 0:37:57You've talked about the need for more idea machines. You're like dissatisfied with the fact that effective altruism is a big game in town. Is there some idea or nascent movement where I mean, other than progress ideas, but like something where you feel like this could be a thing, but it just needs some like charismatic founder to take it to the next level? Or even if it doesn't exist yet, it just like a set of ideas around this vein is like clearly something there is going to exist. You know what I mean? Is there anything like that that you notice? Nadia Asparouhova 0:38:26I only had a couple of different possibilities in that post. Yeah, I think like the progress sort of meme is probably the largest growing contender that I would see right now. I think there's another one right now around sort of like the new right. That's not even like the best term necessarily for it, but there's sort of like a shared set of values there that are maybe starting with like politics, but like ideally spreading to like other areas of public influence. So I think like those are a couple of like the bigger movements that I see right now. And then there's like smaller stuff too. Like I mentioned, like tools for thought in that post where like that's never going to be a huge idea machine. But it's one where you have a lot of like interesting, talented people that are thinking about sort of like future of computing. And until maybe more recently, like there just hasn't been a lot of funding available and the funding is always really uneven and unpredictable. And so that's to me an example of like, you know, a smaller community that like just needs that sort of like extra influx to turn a bunch of abstract ideas into practice. But yeah, I mean, I think like, yeah, there's some like the bigger ones that I see right now. I think there is just so much more potential to do more, but I wish people would just think a little bit more creatively because, yeah, I really do think like effective altruism kind of becomes like the default option for a lot of people. Then they're kind of vaguely dissatisfied with it and they don't like think about like, well, what do I actually really care about in the world and how do I want to put that forward? Dwarkesh Patel 0:39:53Yeah, there's also the fact that effective altruism has this like very fit memeplex in the sense that it's like a polytheistic religion where if you have a cause area, then you don't have your own movement. You just have a cause area within our broader movement, right? It just like adopts your gods into our movement. Nadia Asparouhova 0:40:15Yeah, that's the same thing I see like people trying to lobby for effective altruism to care about their cause area, but then it's like you could just start a separate. Like if you can't get EA to care about, then why not just like start another one somewhere else? Dwarkesh Patel 0:40:28Yeah, so, you know, it's interesting to me that the wealth boom in Silicon Valley and then tech spheres has led to the sound growth of philanthropy, but that hasn't always been the case. Even in America, like a lot of people became billionaires after energy markets were deregulated in the 80s and the 90s. And then there wasn't, and obviously the hub of that was like the Texas area or, you know, and as far as I'm aware, there wasn't like a boom of philanthropy motivated by the ideas that people in that region had. What's different about Silicon Valley? Why are they, or do you actually think that these other places have also had their own booms of philanthropic giving? Nadia Asparouhova 0:41:11I think you're right. Yeah, I would make the distinction between like being wealthy is not the same as being elite or whatever other term you want to use there. And so yeah, there are definitely like pockets of what's called like more like local markets of wealth, like, yeah, Texas oil or energy billionaires that tend to operate kind of just more in their own sphere. And a lot of, if you look at any philanthropic, like a lot of them will be philanthropically active, but they only really focus on their geographic area. But there's sort of this difference. And I think this is part of where it comes from the question of like, you know, like what forces someone to actually like do something more public facing with their power. And I think that comes from your power being sort of like threatened. That's like one aspect I would say of that. So like tech has only really become a lot more active in the public sphere outside of startups after the tech backlash of the mid 2010s. And you can say a similar thing kind of happened with the Davos elite as well. And also for the Gilded Age cohort of wealth. And so yeah, when you have sort of, you're kind of like, you know, building in your own little world. And like, you know, we had literally like Silicon Valley where everyone was kind of like sequestered off and just thinking about startups and thinking themselves of like, tech is essentially like an industry, just like any other sort of, you know, entertainment or whatever. And we're just kind of happy building over here. And then it was only when sort of like the Panopticon like turned its head towards tech and started and they had this sort of like onslaught of critiques coming from sort of like mainstream discourse where they went, oh, like what is my place in this world? And, you know, if I don't try to like defend that, then I'm going to just kind of, yeah, we're going to lose all that power. So I think that that need to sort of like defend one's power can kind of like prompt that sort of action. The other aspect I'd highlight is just like, I think a lot of elites are driven by these like technological paradigm shifts. So there's this scholar, Carlotta Perrins, who writes about technological revolutions and financial capital. And she identifies like a few different technological revolutions over the last, whatever, hundred plus years that like drove this cycle of, you know, a new technology is invented. It's people are kind of like working on it in this smaller industry sort of way. And then there is some kind of like crazy like public frenzy and then like a backlash. And then from after that, then you have this sort of like focus on public institution building. But she really points out that like not all technology fits into that. Like, not all technology is a paradigm shift. Sometimes technology is just technology. And so, yeah, I think like a lot of wealth might just fall into that category. My third example, by the way, is the Koch family because you had, you know, the Koch brothers, but then like their father was actually the one who like kind of initially made their wealth, but was like very localized in sort of like how he thought about philanthropy. He had his own like, you know, family foundation was just sort of like doing that sort of like, you know, Texas billionaire mindset that we're talking about of, you know, I made a bunch of money. I'm going to just sort of like, yeah, do my local funder activity. It was only the next generation of his children that then like took that wealth and started thinking about like how do we actually like move that onto like a more elite stage and thinking about like their influence in the media. But like you can see there's like two clear generations within the same family. Like one has this sort of like local wealth mindset and one of them has the more like elite wealth mindset. And yeah, you can kind of like ask yourself, why did that switch happen? But yeah, it's clearly about more than just money. It's also about intention. Dwarkesh Patel 0:44:51Yeah, that's really interesting. Well, it's interesting because there's, if you identify the current mainstream media as affiliated with like that Davos aristocratic elite, or maybe not aristocratic, but like the Davos groups. Yeah, exactly. There is a growing field of independent media, but you would not identify somebody like Joe Rogan as in the Silicon Valley sphere, right? So there is a new media. I just, I guess these startup people don't have that much influence over them yet. And they feel like, yeah. Nadia Asparouhova 0:45:27I think they're trying to like take that strategy, right? So you have like a bunch of founders like Palmer Luckey and Mark Zuckerberg and Brian Armstrong and whoever else that like will not really talk to mainstream media anymore. They will not get an interview to the New York Times, but they will go to like an individual influencer or an individual creator and they'll do an interview with them. So like when Mark Zuckerberg announced Meta, like he did not get grant interviews to mainstream publications, but he went and talked to like Ben Thompson at Strategory. And so I think there is like, it fits really well with that. Like probably mindset of like, we're not necessarily institution building. We're going to like focus on power of individuals who sort of like defy institutions. And that is kind of like an open question that I have about like, what will the long term influence of the tech elite look like? Because like, yeah, the human history tells us that eventually all individual behaviors kind of get codified into institutions, right? But we're obviously living in a very different time now. And I think like the way that the Davos elite managed to like really codify and extend their influence across all these different sectors was by taking that institutional mindset and, you know, like thinking about sort of like academic institutions and media institutions, all that stuff. If the startup mindset is really inherently like anti-institution and says like, we don't want to build the next Harvard necessarily. We just want to like blow apart the concept of universities whatsoever. Or, you know, we don't want to create a new CNN or a new Fox News. We want to just like fund like individual creators to do that same sort of work, but in this very decentralized way. Like, will that work long term? I don't know. Like, is that just sort of like a temporary state that we're in right now where no one really knows what the next institutions will look like? Or is that really like an important part of this generation where like, we shouldn't be asking the question of like, how do you build a new media network? We should just be saying like, the answer is there is no media network. We just go to like all these individuals instead. Dwarkesh Patel 0:47:31Yeah, that's interesting. What do you make of this idea that I think, let's say, that these idea machines might be limited by the fact that if you're going to start some sort of organization in them, you're very much depending on somebody who has made a lot of money independently to fund you and to grant you approval. And I just have a hard time seeing somebody who is like a Napoleon-like figure being willing long term to live under that arrangement. And that so there'll just be the people who are just have this desire to dominate and be recognized who are probably pretty important to any movement you want to create. They'll just want to go off and just like build a company or something that gives them an independent footing first. And they just won't fall under any umbrella. You know what I mean? Nadia Asparouhova 0:48:27Yeah, I mean, like Dustin Moskovitz, for example, has been funding EA for a really long time and hasn't hasn't walked away necessarily. Yeah. I mean, on the flip side, you can see like SPF carried a lot of a lot of risk because it's your point, I guess, like, you know, you end up relying on this one funder, the one funder disappears and everything else kind of falls apart. I mean, I think like, I don't have any sort of like preciousness attached to the idea of like communities, you know, lasting forever. I think this is like, again, if we're trying to solve for the problem of like what did not work well about 5.1c3 foundations for most of recent history, like part of it was that they're, you know, just meant to live on to perpetuity. Like, why do we still have like, you know, Rockefeller Foundation, there are now actually many different Rockefeller Foundations, but like, why does that even exist? Like, why did that money not just get spent down? And actually, when John D. Rockefeller was first proposing the idea of foundations, he wanted them to be like, to have like a finite end state. So he wanted them to last only like 50 years or 100 years when he was proposing this like federal charter, but that federal charter failed. And so now we have these like state charters and foundations can just exist forever. But like, I think if we want to like improve upon this idea of like, how do we prevent like meritocratic elites from turning into aristocratic elites? How do we like, yeah, how do we actually just like try to do a lot of really interesting stuff in our lifetimes? It's like a very, it's very counterintuitive, because you think about like, leaving a legacy must mean like creating institutions or creating a foundation that lasts forever. And, you know, 200 years from now, there's still like the Nadia Asparuva Foundation out there. But like, if I really think about it, it's like, I would almost rather just do really, really, really good, interesting work in like, 50 years or 20 years or 10 years, and have that be the legacy versus your name kind of getting, you know, submerged over a century of institutional decay and decline. So yeah, I don't like if you know, you have a community that lasts for maybe only last 10 years or something like that, and it's funded for that amount of time, and then it kind of elbows its usefulness and it winds down or becomes less relevant. Like, I don't necessarily see it as a bad thing. Of course, like in practice, you know, nothing ever ends that that neatly and that quietly. But, but yeah, I don't think that's a bad thing. Dwarkesh Patel 0:50:44Yeah, yeah. Who are some ethnographers or sociologists from a previous era that have influenced your work? So was there somebody writing about, you know, what it was like to be in a Roman Legion? Or what it was like to work in a factory floor? And you're like, you know what, I want to do that for open source? Or I want to do that for the New Tech Elite? Nadia Asparouhova 0:51:02For open source, I was definitely really influenced by Jane Jacobs and Eleanor Ostrom. I think both had this quality of, so yeah, Eleanor Ostrom was looking at examples of common pool resources, like fisheries or forests or whatever. And just like, going and visiting them and spending a lot of time with them and then saying like, actually, I don't think tragedy of the commons is like a real thing, or it's not the only outcome that we can possibly have. And so sometimes commons can be managed, like perfectly sustainably. And it's not necessarily true that everyone just like treats them very extractively. And just like wrote about what she saw. And same with Jane Jacobs sort of looking at cities as someone who lives in one, right? Like she didn't have any fancy credentials or anything like that. She was just like, I live in the city and I'm looking around and this idea of like, top down urban planning, where you have like someone trying to design this perfect city that like, doesn't change and doesn't yield to its people. It just seems completely unrealistic. And the style that both of them take in their writing is very, it just it starts from them just like, observing what they see and then like, trying to write about it. And I just, yeah, that's, that's the style that I really want to emulate. Dwarkesh Patel 0:52:12Interesting. Nadia Asparouhova 0:52:13Yeah. I think for people to just be talking to like, I don't know, like Chris just like just talking to like open source developers, turns out you can learn a lot more from that than just sitting around like thinking about what open source developers might be thinking about. But... Dwarkesh Patel 0:52:25I have this, I have had this idea of not even for like writing it out loud, but just to understand how the world works. Just like shadowing people who are in just like a random position, they don't have to be a lead in any way, but just like a person who's the personal assistant to somebody influential, how to decide whose emails they forward, how they decide what's the priority, or somebody who's just like an accountant for a big company, right? It's just like, what is involved there? Like, what kinds of we're gonna, you know what I mean? Just like, random people, the line manager at the local factory. I just have no idea how these parts of the world work. And I just want to like, yeah, just shadow them for a day and see like, what happens there. Nadia Asparouhova 0:53:05This is really interesting, because everyone else focuses on sort of like, you know, the big name figure or whatever, but you know, who's the actual gatekeeper there? But yeah, I mean, I've definitely found like, if you just start cold emailing people and talking to them, people are often like, surprisingly, very, very open to being talked to because I don't know, like, most people do not get asked questions about what they do and how they think and stuff. So, you know, you want to realize that dream. Dwarkesh Patel 0:53:33So maybe I'm not like John Rockefeller, and that I only want my organization to last for 50 years. I'm sure you've come across these people who have this idea that, you know, I'll let my money compound for like 200 years. And if it just compounds at some reasonable rate, I'll be, it'll be like the most wealthy institution in the world, unless somebody else has the same exact idea. If somebody wanted to do that, but they wanted to hedge for the possibility that there's a war or there's a revolt, or there's some sort of change in law that draws down this wealth. How would you set up a thousand year endowment, basically, is what I'm asking, or like a 500 year endowment? Would you just put it in like a crypto wallet with us? And just, you know what I mean? Like, how would you go about that organizationally? How would you like, that's your goal? I want to have the most influence in 500 years. Nadia Asparouhova 0:54:17Well, I'd worry much less. The question for me is not about how do I make sure that there are assets available to distribute in a thousand years? Because I don't know, just put in stock marketers. You can do some pretty boring things to just like, you know, ensure your assets grow over time. The more difficult question is, how do you ensure that whoever is deciding how to distribute the funds, distributes them in a way that you personally want them to be spent? So Ford Foundation is a really interesting example of this, where Henry Ford created a Ford Foundation shortly before he died, and just pledged a lot of Ford stock to create this foundation and was doing it basically for tax reasons, had no philanthropic. It's just like, this is what we're doing to like, house this wealth over here. And then, you know, passed away, son passed away, and grandson ended up being on the board. But the board ended up being basically like, you know, a bunch of people that Henry Ford certainly would not have ever wanted to be on his board. And so, you know, and you end up seeing like, the Ford Foundation ended up becoming huge influential. I like, I have received money from them. So it's not at all an indictment of sort of like their views or anything like that. It's just much more of like, you know, you had the intent of the original donor, and then you had like, who are all these people that like, suddenly just ended up with a giant pool of capital and then like, decided to spend it however they felt like spending it and the grandson at the time sort of like, famously resigned because he was like, really frustrated and was just like, this is not at all what my family wanted and like, basically like, kicked off the board. So anyway, so that is the question that I would like figure out if I had a thousand year endowment is like, how do I make sure that whomever manages that endowment actually shares my views? One, shares my views, but then also like, how do I even know what we need to care about in a thousand years? Because like, I don't even know what the problems are in a thousand years. And this is why like, I think like, very long term thinking can be a little bit dangerous in this way, because you're sort of like, presuming that you know what even matters then. Whereas I think like, figure out the most impactful things to do is just like, so contextually dependent on like, what is going on at the time. So I can't, I don't know. And there are also foundations where you know, the donor like, writes in the charter like, this money can only be spent on you know, X cause or whatever, but then it just becomes really awkward over time because
I am joined this week by PhD researcher Adam Aderman, a doctoral student at Manchester Metropolitan University - located in the history department. There is considerable buzz now around adopting so called 'trauma informed' approaches, from prison spaces, work environments, to even our social polices. Issues of our mental health have never been more open to discussion, however it remains one of the biggest challenges of our time. In his amazing work Adam is uncovering how the ancient Roman world understood trauma. He explains the sources he is using, the lifestyle these men led, and of course the horrors of war they encountered. As well as more philosophical ideas such as their cultural ideas around death, he also shares some of the themes that are already coming through his findings. The lessons Adam is revealing here are especially timely, considering the contemporary problems we face as a society when attempting to re-settle formerly military personal back into civic life - with so many having experienced trauma in conflict zones.
THE SEQUEL IS HERE! 13 years ago, "Born to Run" was released and captivated the running (and non-running) world. Now author Chris McDougall has partnered with coach Eric Orton to write BORN TO RUN 2: The Ultimate Training Guide, the follow-up, fully illustrated companion. Chris and Eric join the show today to talk about some of the stories and anecdotes in the book, finding the joy in running, and why community is one of the most important things for all runners How to refocus on finding the enjoyment in running, even when you're chasing goals The Roman Legions & "all day pace" "100 Ups" and the story of a pharmacist who became a running star by running in place at his job Good running form - what do we mean? The importance of finding "your running people" AVAILABLE NOW: BORN TO RUN 2: The Ultimate Training Guide
Jasper and Murray are joined by Julien Blurel, the brains behind the Invicta YouTube channel. In the latest episode, Invicta demonstrates the true size of a Roman legion. This is the first of their new 'true size' series, which aims to bring history to life in 3D using the Unreal Engine. True Size of the Roman Legion really puts into context the Roman army camp, the Legion on the march and the Roman army order of battle. You can find it here. Join us on Patron patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast
Delicious biscuit, ideal for dunking. 飲茶，配酒，蘸咖啡，都美味的硬脆餅乾。 本集節目有： ✅ Luxury of Teatime 豐奢下午茶； ✅ How to Make Biscotti 義大利杏仁脆餅的做法； ✅ Provision of the Roman Legions 古羅馬士兵的口糧。
Pastor Andy Davis preaches on Mark 5:1-20, and an account about a demon-possessed man freed by Jesus. We see that demons may have power over humans, but no chance against God. - SERMON Transcript - Turn in your Bibles to Mark chapter 5. This morning we have the joy of resuming our study in this awesome gospel of Mark. We're right in the middle of two spectacular miracles back-to-back, the stilling of the storm at the end of Mark chapter 4 and now the driving out of the legion of demons in Mark 5. I said last time, a couple of months ago now, that the stilling of the storm is the most visually spectacular miracle Jesus ever did. How amazing is it then that immediately after that He does his most spectacular exorcism? That's exactly what this account reveals. There is no other account of an exorcism that even comes close to this one, the driving out of demons from a human being. Nothing else even comes close, just for the magnitude of the power that it reveals and the stunning transformation in one man revealed in Mark's gospel and the effect on the pigs, 2,000 of them perishing in one moment. There's no other power encounter with a demonized human being that even comes close. In terms of preaching, oftentimes at the very beginning of a sermon, a preacher has to speak some words of introduction to ensnare or beguile his congregation into being interested in the text. I don't have to do that this time. I would hope you're interested in what you've heard. I would hope you'd realize that all I need to do as a preacher is get out of the way of the text and just point to the Jesus that it reveals. Some time ago, I was meditating on the juxtaposition of Mark 4 and Mark 5, the stealing of the storm and the driving out of the Legion demon in Mark's gospel. The way it's written here, it's really astonishing because you could see Jesus at the end of Mark 4 standing on one side of the Sea of Galilee and perhaps in a visionary sense as a prophet, looking ahead to what's about to happen. He has to go through a hurricane and drive out an army of demons in Mark's Gospel to save one man. That's it. He saves that one man and comes back; He goes over and back for one man. And that's encouraging. Some of you are thinking, in Matthew's Gospel, there's two guys. I'm not talking about the two guys today. In Mark's gospel, there's a focus on that one individual. I think we're supposed to understand, in the Galatians 2:20 sense, that Christ loved me and gave himself for me. He did that for me. He was willing to go through a hurricane and drive out an army of demons to save me. So we need to just step aside and let the text do its work in us. And what is that work? Remember that the theme of the gospel of Mark is stated right from the beginning, Mark 1:1, “the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ”, the Son of God, that's the theme, Jesus as the Son of God. In the spirit of the Gospel of John, as I've said many times, actually all four gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, they all have this same purpose, though only John's Gospel says it so openly and directly. “These are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the son of God, and that by believing, you may have life in his name.” That's the purpose of the Gospel of John, and it's also the purpose of the Gospel of Mark: to bring you to the point where you can confess that Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah, the Anointed one, the Promised one. That He is more than just that, the Son of the living God, and that by confessing that from your heart, you might receive full forgiveness of sins and live forever in heaven and not die forever in hell. That's the reason this Gospel of Mark was written, and that's the purpose of all of the accounts in it. Not only that, not just that we would be able to make in a slogan sort of sense, “Who is Jesus? the Son of God.” That phrase, that we would have expounded before us, really means the infinite majesty of the second person of the Trinity, the infinite majesty of Jesus. It means that we'll be spending eternity finding out how glorious and majestic Jesus is. We've only just begun the greatness of Jesus, the Son of God. That's what we have before us. It's not enough to just have the slogan, “Who's Jesus? Son of God.” Remember how, when on the way to the villages around Caesarea Philippi, Jesus asked, “Who do people say I am?” and Peter replied, “You are the Messiah,” and then a few minutes later he's taking Jesus aside and rebuking him. Now that's a bad look, friends. Peter was underestimating Jesus, the Son of God, all of us do. The ministry of the word through the power of the Spirit is to get us not to underestimate Jesus and to see the infinite greatness of Christ. The infinite greatness of Jesus is what we're seeing here. The effortless power that Jesus has, that He displays here, power that only almighty God could have, effortless stilling of a hurricane and the turbulent sea immediately after that, effortless, just a word and it's done. And then effortless power over 6,000 demons, saying in Matthew's gospel, a single word, "Go," and they're gone. No effort at all, they instantly obey. "The ministry of the word through the power of the Spirit is to get us not to underestimate Jesus and to see the infinite greatness of Christ. " Sadly in the account that we're studying today, we also see mixed reaction. We see many who saw the effects, even the miracle with their own eyes, and responded in faithless fear, driving Jesus away because they didn't want the implications of what it would mean to have Jesus in their region. The unreasoning unbelief was so strong they would rather have, it seems in the end, this demon-possessed, stark-raving homicidal maniac in their region, rather than Jesus, peaceful Jesus, loving Jesus staying in their region. The gospels all make it clear that many people will see the evidence for Jesus and reject. It ends up dividing people into two categories. I. A Demon-Possessed Maniac Terrorizes a Region Let's walk through the text now. It begins with a demon-possessed maniac who terrorizes a region. What is the context? Jesus and his disciples had left the huge crowds to get away to the other side of the Sea of Galilee. Perhaps the disciples thought a time of R&R was coming, a little bit of relaxation, getting away from all of that. Little did they know what was awaiting them as they got into the boat, this raging hurricane in which they thought they were going to die. Then once that's done, as they land on the other side, they're confronted by a demon-possessed maniac of terrifying power. Look at verse 1-2, “They went across the sea to the region of the Gerasenes” and verse 2, “when Jesus got out of the boat, a man with an evil spirit came from the tombs to meet him.” The region of the Gerasenes or Gadarenes, a little village near there was called Gerasa from which we get Mark's term, Gerasenes. There's a larger city nearby called Gadara, which also gave its name to the region, Gadarene. That's why you end up with two different names in the gospel. The demon-possessed maniac is described in verse 2 as “a man with an unclean spirit”. This is a demon, an unclean spirit is a demon. Demons are angels, spirit beings that rebelled long ago with Satan and were evicted from heaven as described in Revelation 12. They're called unclean because their thoughts and their works were pure evil. The encounter begins with Jesus and his disciples getting out of the boat. The demon-possessed man sees them from a distance and comes from the tombs down to the shoreline. This man is an absolute monster. His human personality has been swallowed alive by the demons inside him. Look at verse 3 through 5, the description of his plight. This man lived in the tombs and no one could bind him anymore, not even with a chain, for he had often been chained hand in foot, but he tore the chains apart and broke the irons on his feet. No one was strong enough to subdue him. Night and day among the tombs and in the hills, he would cry out and cut himself with stones. I believe those words describe the most wretched human being on the surface of the earth in history. I can't imagine a more wretched condition to be in than this, worse than Nebuchadnezzar turned into an animal for seven years eating grass, worse than any tortured individual in a prison, worse than anyone suffering from a malady. This is the most wretched human being ever described in the pages of history, I believe. Look at the text, it says he lived in the tombs. No one in their right mind would live out in the tombs of dead people. These are often caves blocked up with boulders or big stones. At best, they would offer rudimentary protection from the elements, they would be cold, they would be dark, they would be hard, no place in which to live. This man is absolutely severed from all human society. He has a family as we see at the end of the account, but his condition has cut himself off from all interactions with them. It says no one could bind him anymore, not even with a chain.The account gives a sense of history with this man. He had originally been bound, or actually many times been bound with chains and even shackles, maybe fetters or manacles, large flat pieces of iron that would be heated up and then pounded by a blacksmith into curved pieces to fit around his wrists or his ankles. The chains would have large strong links in them, sizable links to restrain a powerful man, but this man had broken every chain ever put on him and shattered every shackle, verse 4, “for he had often been chained hand and foot,” but he tore the chains apart, he broke the irons on his feet. Demons gave this man supernatural power. They are vastly more powerful than we people are, physically. They can do amazing physical things. Remember at the resurrection account after Jesus had risen from the dead and the tomb was empty, a single angel came down and rolled back the boulder that was in front of Jesus's tomb and sat on it. So imagine the kind of supernatural power these evil angels give this man. It says no one could bind him anymore, in verse 4, “no one was strong enough to subdue him.” The Greek word here means “to tame” as if he's a wild beast. This implies many efforts to take this man down, perhaps four or five grown men, or more trying to work with this guy. One grabbing an arm, another grabbing another arm, one grabbing a leg, the other maybe coming up behind him and hitting him on the head to knock him unconscious so they could put the chains on him. It's horrible the circumstance here. Then once he's conscious again, if that's indeed what they did, he then in a rage, tears them off and they're all running for the hills. Finally, the people in that region had given up. He's not chained now. There's nothing they can do. They just stayed away from that area. His lifestyle is stunningly sad. It's a human being created in the image of God, but he's rendered to an almost animal-like existence. Luke tells us that he had, for a long time, gone without clothing. He didn't wear any clothing. He was naked with no shame at all like an animal. But furthermore, he rarely slept and he was immersed in self-harm, verse 5, “night and day among the tombs and in the hills he would cry out and cut himself with stones,” roaming restlessly as demons do, seeking rest but not finding it, yearning for rest, going from tomb to tomb, from hill to hill night and day, crying out as if for deliverance. But who could ever set this man free? The most wretched human being I think in history. He is terrorizing that region. II. The Son of God Terrorizes the Demons Point two, then the Son of God comes to terrorize the demons. That's pretty exciting, isn't it? Now who's afraid of who here? The encounter with Jesus is initiated, this demon-possessed monster sees people landing from a distance and comes down to the shoreline, and what he did is really astonishing. Look at verse 6, “when he saw Jesus from a distance, he ran and fell on his knees in front of him.” Now here's the fascinating thing. The more you study this, the more amazing this gets. These terrified demons, and they are terrified, we're going to make that case plainly in the scripture, they are afraid of Jesus, but instead of running away from him of whom they are terrified, they run to him to get closer to him, that's counterintuitive. Why are the demons running to Jesus? Do they want an encounter with Jesus? Oh no, not at all. They are pure darkness, he is pure light. They hate him with every fiber of their being. They do not want to be near pure light, they who are pure darkness. Why then are they coming closer? Furthermore, they make the man fall down on his knees in a display of humble submission, even of worship before Jesus. Think about that text that says “every knee shall bow and every tongue confess.” So that's what these demons are doing, falling down in front of Jesus. Why do they draw near? It's very obvious, they know exactly who Jesus is. Verse 7, “he shouted at the top of his voice, ‘What do you want with me, Jesus, son of the most high God?’” They are terrified of him, and yet they run toward him. This is my theory on why. What else can they do? They understand Jesus's power in ways we don't. They understand omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence in ways we don't. And the demons understood, Psalm 1:39, “Where can I go from your spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? If I go up to the heavens, you are there. If I go down to the depths, you are there.” Or again, as God says about his enemies in Amos 9:1-4, these are physical human enemies, but we can apply it here to demons as well, Amos 9, this is God speaking about his enemies, "Not one will get away. None will escape. Though they dig into the depths of the grave, from there my hand will take them. Though they climb up to the heavens, from there I will bring them down. Though they hide themselves at the top of Carmel, there I'll hunt them down and seize them. Though they hide from me at the bottom of the sea, there I will command the serpent to bite them. Though they are driven into exile by their enemies, there I will command the sword to slay them. I will fix my eyes upon them for evil and not for good." Oh, it is a dreadful thing to have God as your enemy. Where can you go? There is nowhere to run to, nowhere to hide for these demons, and they know it in ways we don't. So they come to Jesus and in Mark 7, He drives out the demon of the Syrophoenician, the Canaanite woman from her daughter, and the daughter is not even there, and Jesus says to this Syrophoenician woman, "You may go home. The demon has left your daughter." "When did that happen?" "Oh, a second ago." "You didn't even go, you didn't lay hands on her." "Not needed." "You didn't say anything." "Not needed. I just thought it." And the demon got its eviction notice. That's the power of Jesus and the demons know it. "It is a dreadful thing to have God as your enemy. Where can you go? There is nowhere to run to, nowhere to hide for these demons, and they know it in ways we don't. " They come toward Jesus because they have a request to make of him. The demons come to Jesus, making the man shout at the top of his voice, "What do you want with me, Jesus, son of the most high God?" The demons are utterly unruly, they frequently make their human hosts scream or shriek or foam at the mouth. This one's shouting at the top of his voice, clearly they are terrified of Jesus. The reason for the terror is they did not understand Jesus, the Son of God, the incarnate Son of God invading their dark realm. They literally say, "What business have we with each other, son of the most high God? What business do we have? What are you here to do?" The reason for their terror is the power of almighty God and of his perfect and holy son, Jesus. Now you have to understand, demons have very accurate theology. They got the theological stuff right, better than us. James 2:19 says, “You believe that there's one God, good, even the demons believe that, and they shudder.” They get all the facts right, but they're just in an absolute wrong relationship with the God behind the facts. They hate him, but they know the truth about him. And furthermore, demons know their future. Matthew 25:41, “Jesus, the judge of all the earth, the judge of heaven and earth will say to the goats, ‘Depart from me you who are cursed into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.’” The lake of fire was made for Satan and demons, and that's where they're going, and there's no salvation plan for them. Also, in Revelation 12:12, the devil is filled with fury because he knows that his time is short. We must imagine the demons know this, but now Jesus, in his incarnation and now in his public ministries which have been going on a year or two, this assault of the son of God on their earthly territory is unprecedented. For all redemptive history, demons have been operating in secret, in the darkness, in the shadows of the spiritual realm, doing absolutely whatever they wanted to make life utterly miserable for human beings and to fight against God at every point. That's what demons do and they're still doing it today. But now Jesus has invaded, the Son of God, the Son of Light, pure light, into this realm of darkness and they're terrified. They want to know, what is the purpose? They want to know about timing. In Matthew 8:29, the demon says, "What do you want with us, son of God? Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?" They are well aware that there's a pit of torture ready now, before they even get to the lake of fire, there is a place of demon incarceration, short of the lake of fire. As far as I read scripture, there are no demons now in the lake of fires, a not-yet situation. Most of the demons are roaming and causing trouble in a hidden way on earth, but there are some that are incarcerated. They've been arrested by the power of God. It says in Luke 8:31, in the same account, they begged him repeatedly not to order them to go into the “abyss.” It's a Greek word, meaning “bottomless.” It's a pit. But the demons in Matthew 8:29 speak of torture, of torture in the pit, as does our text. Look at verse 7, “Swear to God that you won't torture me.” Do you see now the fear that demons have of him? They are afraid of incarceration and torture now, right now, and they don't want it. They're afraid of it, so they come to Jesus to make this request of him. This torture implies demonic agony of which they're clearly terrified. Peter speaks in his epistle of a temporary place of restraint and torture for demons, [2 Peter 2:4]. God didn't spare angels who sin but threw them down into “Tartarus” that's the Greek word there for “the pit” and delivered them to be kept in chains of darkness until judgment. Those chains cannot break, they're restrained and held. They're very aware that Jesus can instantly do this to them at any moment. He has overwhelming power over all demons. The demons are also afraid of losing their jurisdiction. Look at verse 10, “He begged Jesus again and again not to send them out of the area.” Not only do they not want to lose their freedom, but they want to stay right there in their area. They've got a geographical area that they're working. The Greek says that they're begging him earnestly, or again and again, they're pleading with Jesus because they want to stay there. This demon-possessed man is the greatest nightmare of that entire region, a murderous, powerful maniac who threatens them all. But it is also clear that the Son of the most high God is the demon's greatest nightmare, if we could use that language. They are terrified. They are as terrified of Jesus as that region would've been terrified of that man. III. The Son of God Drives Out the Legion Third point, the Son of God drives out the Legion. Jesus commands him to leave and he will soon. He doesn't leave immediately, but in verse 8 it says, “Jesus had said to him, ‘Come out of this man, you evil spirit.’” I think He stated his intention, "I'm going to drive you out," but they're going to have this conversation first, and Jesus wants to have that conversation with him. He demands the demon's name [verse 9]. “Then Jesus asked him, ‘What is your name?’ ‘My name is Legion,’ he replied, ‘For we are many.’” The demons have no desire to reveal anything about themselves, they want to stay hidden. They want to stay in the darkness just like these days. They don't want to reveal anything, but they have no choice. When Jesus says, "What is your name?" They must give it, they must answer his questions, so He demands their name. Angels have names, we know two of them in the Bible, Michael and Gabriel. Demons must have names as well, but here they use a human term, “legion”. And the reason they gave is, "We are many." Legion was a division of the Roman Empire's world-conquering army, a little bit larger than a modern day brigade, which would be about 3,000 soldiers. A legion is about 5,000 to 6,000 Roman soldiers. They had conquered that part of the world. So first of all, it shows theologically multiple demons can inhabit one person. We get that from this, but it also shows something of the demon's personality and mind. Though the demons might ordinarily have been boastful about their cumulative might, they would never have dreamed of boasting in front of Jesus. We are mighty and we are powerful, they're saying, but they're not doing that in front of Jesus, no way. I want you to picture the spectacle in the spiritual realm, the spectacle of Jesus against an army of demons. In 1960, there was a movie called Spartacus, which was about a slave revolt in the Roman era, and the climactic scene is a battle between the slave army and multiple, multiple Roman Legions. It's really quite a spectacular scene over a wide field. You get a sense of the machine-like efficiency of the Roman legions as they come down in formation and then quickly spread out into battle line and come relentlessly toward the slave army. You know as you're looking, you're going to lose. There's no way you can defeat the legions, they're just that powerful. But picture that, all that's unfolding and one man goes out across the field by himself with no weapons in his hand, and that man is Jesus. As he takes a stand and raises his hand and says, "Begone," they turn and drop their weapons and flee and He's left alone on the battlefield. That's the picture I get. If you didn't see that movie," don't worry about it, just know that it’s a massive army, one man goes forward, and who's afraid of whom. Again, just like the storm, do you not see effortless power? Effortless, that's what we've got. The demons come, they throw themselves in front of Jesus and they make this request, a demonic request. [Verses 11-12], “A large herd of pigs was feeding on the nearby hillside, the demons begged Jesus, ‘Send us among the pigs, allow us to go into them.’” So I would say this clearly shows this is a gentile dominated region. No Jews would be raising pigs, because it was unclean for them to eat. These pig herders are there looking at this and this huge herd of pigs is there, 2,000 in number. The demons continue their begging, their pleading, their groveling to Jesus. In Matthew's Gospel, as I mentioned, it's a single word. Go to Matthew's account, in Matthew 8, you're going to see in the middle of a bunch of black letters, if you have a red letter edition, you're going to see one red 2 letter word. It's all Jesus says in Matthew's account, "Go,” and they go."Go,” and they're gone. One word. It reminds me of Luther's A Mighty Fortress Is Our God. "The prince of darkness grim, we tremble not for him. His rage we can endure, for lo, his doom is sure. One little word shall fell him. That word above all earthly powers, no thanks to them, abideth.” That's the power of Jesus's word. When He says go, they've got to go. Awesome. That's the supreme power of Jesus Christ. He draws out the name Legion so that we can be amazed, because we can't see it. You can't see the demons, but you have a sense of what Legion means. What happens next is a display of the power as well—the death of the pigs [verse 13]. He gave them permission and the evil spirits came out and went into the pigs. The herd, about 2,000 in number, rushed down the steep bank into the sea and were drowned. This is to show visibly the scope of the demonic defeat, to make it obvious in the physical realm what Jesus was dealing with here, the death of the pigs, the sheer destructiveness of these demons. “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy.” That's what these demons do. Some of you have sympathy for the animal owners there, the pig farmers who look like they lost all of that, they didn't lose anything. The harvest came early. They went pig fishing. That's kind of an interesting thing when you think about it. I know the text doesn't say they went pig fishing, but if you're the owner of the pigs, the market price is going to be a little low because there's a big influx of pig meat, but they’ll be fine. So don't think that way economically, et cetera. But again, it wasn't Jesus that destroyed the pigs, it was the demons. Now here's the question, a very significant question. Why does he give permission to the demons to do what they want to do? Why doesn't he send them into the pit? Why doesn't he incarcerate them? We bumped into the same question in the Book of Job, if you remember, why does he allow the demons to roam? Why does he allow them to do damage? It's vital for us to understand what Satan reveals in the Book of Job, that hedge of protection. I look on it as a whole matrix, like a maze of walls of protection that they can't go through. God is controlling the demonic activities, and they're running rough shot where they're permitted to run, and then mysteriously, some gate opens and they flood in like a plague of locusts and do the damage, and then suddenly the gate comes down and they're stopped and that's it. That's what's going on every day by the mysterious purpose of God. They are God's lackeys, though they are not trying to serve God, they are doing his will in some very complex way. When we get to heaven, we'll understand why God let the demons do what they do, et cetera, but that's it. Don't think for a moment it's because he couldn't have stopped them. He could have collected all of the demons in an instant, they'd be in the lake of fire now, but He's using them for his own mysterious purposes. When the time is right, He will send out his angels and they will collect all the demons and they will be in the lake of fire, and there'll be no escape. IV. Two Opposite Human Responses Fourth point, two opposite human responses. The report spreads in the Gadarenes, and the people rejected Jesus. Look at verses 14-17, “Those tending the pigs ran off and reported this in the town and countryside and the people went out to see what had happened. When they came to Jesus, they saw the man who had been possessed by the Legion of demons sitting there dressed and in his right mind and they were afraid. They were afraid. Those who had seen it told the people what had happened to the demon-possessed man and told about the pigs as well. Then the people began to plead with Jesus to leave their region.” This is tragic. Instead of, as they should have done, falling in front of Jesus in wonder and worship, and say as the Philippian jailer said in Act 16, “What must I do to be saved?”, instead they beg him to leave. I suppose it's the same terror that comes on people who really don't understand Jesus's goodness, they're afraid of what he's going to do in their lives, they're afraid of becoming Christians because they don't know what is going to happen. They're afraid, and they drive him out, they don't want him. They're just afraid because they don't understand his goodness. You see how meek and mild Jesus is, He just accedes to their wishes. "Okay, I'll leave." He walks away and gets back in the boat. We need to understand the infinite power of Jesus, but also the incredible gentleness, as we sang earlier, "Come into me, come into me." That's him. He's so gentle. I don't think you ever get a better text juxtaposing the infinite power of Jesus and his gentleness as in Isaiah 40, which talks about how He has all of the stars in the palm of his hand, this kind of thing, the infinite majesty, the nations are a drop in the bucket and dust on the scales and all that. But right in the middle of that, Isaiah 40:11, “He tends his flock like a shepherd. He gathers the lambs in his arms and carries them close to his heart. He gently leads those that have young.” That's who Jesus is. Why do they want him to leave? Along with that, we get the previously possessed man, and he has the exact opposite response. He doesn't ever want to leave Jesus again. He wants to be by Jesus's side forever, forever. Look at verse 18-20, “But as Jesus was getting into the boat, the man who had been demon possessed begged to go with him. Jesus did not let him but said, ‘Go home to your family and tell them how much the Lord has done for you and how he has had mercy on you.’” So the man went away and began to tell in the Decapolis how much Jesus had done for him, and all the people were amazed. This formerly demon-possessed man's a different story altogether, isn't he? I believe more things happened than is recorded here. I think once the demons were out, Jesus preached the gospel to him, explained to him about the kingdom of God, the need for repentance so that his sins could be forgiven, and the man listened and believed. The text says in verse 15 that, “they saw him there dressed in his right mind.” Isn't that beautiful? It's kind of like the prodigal son coming to himself. It's like, "What am I doing here? Slopping pigs when I could be in my father's house." This man comes to his right mind, and again, supports that therapeutic view of salvation. He saves you by healing you, healing your mind so that you can see Jesus properly, you can see his beauty and his power and his love and you want him. He's dressed in his right mind, his sins are covered, that's a metaphor, the “dressing”. I think it's just an account, he's dressed now, he's not naked, but also the covering. His sins are forgiven and he's in his right mind and wants to be with Jesus forever. He sees Jesus properly, he loves him, he cherishes him. All he wants is to know him and be with him. He pleads with Jesus to stay with him. "He saves you by ... healing mind so that you can see Jesus properly, you can see his beauty and his power and his love." Now, three entities plead with Jesus for something. The demons begged to not be driven out of the area and stay in the area and go in the pigs. The unbelieving people asked Jesus to leave their area, and He does it. This man says, "I want to go with you." He says no. Isn't it true that God's ways are not our ways? But instead he has a mission for this man. He sends him out with a mission to do, verse 19, "Go home to your family and tell them how much the Lord has done for you and how he has had mercy on you." “Go win your family. You kind of put them through a hard time. Now go home and show them that you've been healed and win them. Tell your family how God has had mercy on you, how much the Lord has done for you and how he has had mercy on you.” I wonder what that was like when he walked through the threshold the first time, it's like, "Uh-oh, here comes trouble." "No, no, I'm different now." His job is to tell them the mercy of Jesus in his life and to win them. So it says in verse 20, “The man went away and began to tell the Decapolis how much Jesus had done for him and all the people were amazed.” The Decapolis just literally means 10 cities, it's just a region there of 10 cities together. Apparently this man was effective because Jesus is going to return to the Decapolis in Mark 7:31 and there'll be many people waiting there for him to do healings. It's the fruit of this man's ministry. What a testimony this man must have had. I don't know how it began. How would you begin? "I used to be a demon-possessed raving maniac. And now I'm not. Now I'm healed." Imagine the joy of talking about Jesus that he must have had. V. Lessons What are some lessons and applications? First of all, I just want to ask you a question: Do you think demons are less active in our world than they were in Jesus' world? I hope you're saying no, because if you're saying no, you don't understand how much they have deceived you. They're every bit as active now as they ever were then. We Americans are naturalists, materialists, and I don't mean by that shopaholics, I mean we tend to think of things in a scientific material way. We tend to think of stories about demons and angels as a little weird, almost medieval. We definitely believe in the most high God, and then we believe in science, and we don't tend to do much in that middle realm with angels and demons, but they are every bit as active in 21st century America as they were in first century Palestine. They are deceptive and they're powerful, and they are around us at every moment. We need to be aware of them and understand the destructive power of demons. They are there to steal and kill and destroy. I wonder how many of the convicted serial killers or individuals that are incarcerated in psychiatric hospitals or asylums or prisons, I wonder if anyone is diagnosing them based on this. Or are they trying to get the chemical balances right and talk about their childhood or do other things? I’m not minimizing those sciences, but I'm just saying, is there a whole realm of possibility that's unthinkable in 21st-century treatment of individuals like this? For us Christians, let it not be so. We need to be aware that they're around and they're trying to make our lives miserable. We need to say then that demons are every bit as active. They're still here. They're still powerful. They still hate us, et cetera, but they're still terrified of Jesus. They are terrified of him. His power is infinite. He is far above all rule and authority, power and dominion. They are controlled by him, channeled by him. Hedges of protection and walls of protection everywhere, or else they'd run amok on the surface of the earth. We need to be thankful. We need to be aware of how demons could be assaulting you, annoying you, irritating you, making you susceptible to sin, alluring you, feeding you with depression, feeding you with hopelessness, feeding you with ideas of ways of acting out on the flesh. Put on your spiritual armor. Put it on every day, every moment. Be mindful, be not unaware of his schemes. Beyond that, see that the real issue here is worship Christ. Worship of Jesus. The name that is above every name, worship him, have a sense of his infinite power. Just fall down before him, not like this demon-possessed man did an abject terror, but fall down before him because you love him and want to tell him how much you love him for dying for you and rising again. Finally, what reaction do you have to the Jesus in this account? Like this healed man, do you want to spend the rest of your life with him? Do you want to spend eternity learning him? I do. Friends, it is the greatest honor of my life to stand up in front of you week after week and exalt Jesus. There's nothing in my life with more honor than that. I hope that your esteem of Jesus has gone up because we studied Mark 5:1-20 today. So I'm asking you, is that you? Do you love him? Do you know you're a sinner? His bloodshed for you is sufficient for your sins, are you trusting in that? Or like these townspeople, do you want him to go away? Just leave you alone? That's the question you have to ask. Use your testimony with your family. I want to tell my family how much Jesus has done for me and how He has been kind to me. Can I tell you what the Lord has done for me and how He has had mercy? I mean what a great phrase, “what He has done for me and how He has had mercy. I mean He could have mercy on you too.” Close with me in prayer. Lord, thank you for the time we've had to study in Mark 5:1-20. Thank you for what the text shows us about your infinite power and thank you for your kindness to us, weak sinners. I thank you for your gentleness and meekness and humbly acceding to the wishes of unbelieving townspeople who want you to leave. But I thank you for your wisdom in sending this single man out in Mark's gospel, this single man to go win his family. Lord, give us opportunities to share the gospel this week, help us to be bold, perhaps even tell this story and see what people think. But Lord give us opportunities to win the lost in Jesus name. Amen.
When did Jesus' story move from being a Jewish story to a Gentile story? Dr. J. Vernon McGee guides us through an important transition, when the gospel moves from Jerusalem to the world. Take a front row seat as Peter (a committed Jew) introduces Cornelius (gentile and the captain of the Roman Legion) to Jesus.
Today Sara brings us the story of one of the most epic warrior Queens in history: BOUDICA! When the Romans destroy everything most precious to her, take her land, enslave her people and lash her publicly - this Queen of the Iceni tribe (in pre-celtic Britain) doesn't sit around and cry about it. She rallies her Celts, combining the warring tribes to lead a legendary show of force against the Roman colonies and the Roman Legions themselves. How do her and her ragtag army fare against the steeled force of Rome? You'll have to listen to find out! — A Broad is a woman who lives by her own rules. Broads You Should Know is the podcast about the Broads who helped shape our world! 3 Ways you can help support the podcast: Write a review on Apple Podcasts Share your favorite episode on social media / tell a friend about the show! Send us an email with a broad suggestion, question, or comment at BroadsYouShouldKnow@gmail.com — Broads You Should Know is hosted by Sara Gorsky. IG: @SaraGorsky Web master / site design: www.BroadsYouShouldKnow.com — Broads You Should Know is produced by Sara Gorsky & edited by Chloe Skye
The crowdfunded Roll is something but different from most virtual tabletops, and they've launched their first RPG. D&D has a new playtest, Cthulhu is coming for the Roman Legions, and there's a talk with the Mutant Lord. It's the Audio EXP podcast. About Audio EXP Audio EXP is Geek Native's highlights podcast. Each week there's a recap of some significant or exciting RPG news, releases, conventions and interviews. The average length of the podcast is just over 10 minutes long. You will find a transcript of this week's podcast and links to the stories mentioned here: https://www.geeknative.com/141621/audio-exp-146-introducing-new-rpgs/
Today Pastor Rob Fuquay portrays a Centurion in the Roman Legion serving in Judea under Pontious Pilate, prefect of Caesarea, and loyal subject to his divine sonship, Emperor Augustus. Loyal, that is, until he avowed faith in Another. Listen as Pastor Rob dramatically portrays this story. See sermon notes and more at stlukesumc.com/sermons To support St. Luke's in our mission to be an open, antiracist, justice-seeking church, visit http://stlukesumc.com/give. We are an open community of Christians helping people find and give hope through Jesus Christ - regardless of their gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, nationality, disability, or socioeconomic background. —— STAY CONNECTED St. Luke's UMC Facebook: https://facebook.com/stlukesindy St. Luke's UMC Instagram: https://instagram.com/stlukesindy St. Luke's UMC Twitter: https://twitter.com/stlukesindy St. Luke's UMC YouTube: https://youtube.com/stlukesindy St. Luke's UMC Instagram: http://vimeo.com/stlukesindy
The Daily Quiz Show | History Today's category is History, how many can you get right? Quiz content sourced from https://opentdb.com/ and https://the-trivia-api.com/ Follow on Social Media: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/dailyquizshow/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/dailyquizshowpodcast Twitter: https://twitter.com/thedailyquizpod TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@dailyquizshow YouTube: https://youtube.com/channel/UCHb1Y98Oxpq-AQNc0SfxUrg/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
On this week's episode, Cam and Evan discuss the Roman-Macedonian Wars that coincided with Rome's rise to imperial status in its conquest of the Mediterranean. At the start of the conflict, Rome was still just one of the major powers in the Mediterranean. Once the dust would settle from their Punic and Macedonian Wars, however, the Roman Republic would become the dominant force in the area on the backs of a new type of infantry: the Roman Legions. While Alexander the Great and his diadochi had conquered the eastern Mediterranean using their improved phalanx formation, Rome would introduce the world to their manipular legions with resounding success. You can form a testudo with the LU boys on Twitter: @leftunreadpod (Twitter and Instagram) @poorfidalgo @gluten_yung You can reach out to us at leftunreadpod@gmail.com. Theme music by Interesting Times Gang. Check them out at: itgang.bandcamp.com.
1 (2m 12s): I give my whole life to honor this. Who was, say crown him for 0 (2m 35s): she . 1 (10m 54s): Jeez, His mercy and the Jeez, we cried the whole. 1 (12m 39s): Thank you God, for your holiness. Thank you for the gift Of salvation. Thank you for the gift of 0 (12m 50s): Just 1 (12m 52s): Covering for our sentence. Lord, I can be made right with you. 2 (13m 42s): All right. You may be seated. Well, good morning. Glad to see so many of you here. We had a debate among staff. How many people would come the day after Christmas? So it's glad to glad to see you all. I love about you, but why am I driving this morning? And just seeing the sun on the green Hills was just amazing. Anybody else see that and enjoy that. Nice to see that fresh grass, you know, starting to grow. And just seeing that as I was driving in, reminds me of the road trips that I used to go on. 2 (14m 24s): We haven't been able to go on as many road trips with our girls and they tend to get car six, where I'm looking forward to the age where we get to go on road trips as a family. I can remember all the road trips growing up, going to Yellowstone or driving out to Minnesota with a family. It was just a good time. And I think over the years, road SERPs have changed in my mind a little bit. They've changed because now we use Google maps or different or car navigation systems to get there. I can remember the day before the days when, when you had to write out the directions on a piece of paper or have a roadmap next to you. So you knew where you were going, which road to take or intersection or highway. 2 (15m 5s): And, and I think we've lost a little bit of the road trip. The fun that comes with that kind of a sense of adventure as you're going out there. And I think we were more focused too, because I can remember like, okay, need to turn on, need to turn on this highway and you have to be focused. Okay, don't pass that highway. Cause there's no, there's no nothing that pops up a red light that says, you've, you've missed your exit. You've missed your exit. And so I just, over the years, going on this road trips, you, you look for the intersections. You look for the fork road, the forks and the rows of the change in highways. And now we kind of set the program and our car just yells at us, which way to go and which way to turn if only life was that easy. 2 (15m 53s): If only there was a big right-hand turn right in front of us, that says, you need to go this way. Now, if only life was that easy, it also makes me think of something that was very, very popular twenty-five years ago, twenty-five years ago, the Christmas and Thanksgiving season that the tickle me Elmo doll was the hot ticket. Does anybody remember the tickle me Elmo doll? Yes. Okay. I was, I was in high school, so I, I didn't get a tickle me Elmo doll, but it's this doll that you, you, you, you touched her, you squeeze the nose and it would say Elmo would laugh. And he would make funny noises. 2 (16m 34s): It sold for 29, 28, 99 in the store. But for whatever reason, that year, 25 years ago, it went bonkers. They sold out nearly of the 400,000 Elmos that they made. And it's reported that that doll began to scalpers were selling them for $1,500. Each there's a report that in Denver, one was sold for $7,100. Over $7,000 was paid for this Elmo doll. It was the gift for that year's Christmas season, 25 years ago, there's even a report that on December 20th, there was a raffle charity that had one and it was purchased for $18,000. 2 (17m 20s): This is how hot the tickle me Elmo doll was a man at Walmart. Working at Walmart was injured by a stampede of 300 people trying to get to the tickle me, Elmo dolls, all for this doll that you squeeze his nose or tickle on it. And it laughs and giggles. And it's programmed to do that. The next year they made a doll that was called love me, Elmo. And you, what that Elmo does is when you squeezed it, when you push the button, it said, it would say your Elmo sweetheart, or Elmo loves you or hugs and kisses. That's what was programmed into this Elmo doll. If only life were that simple, where God says worship me and he pushes a button on us. 2 (18m 4s): And we say, we worship you God, but it's not right. It's not that easy. We weren't created that way. We weren't created with a button with which God pushes and we instantly respond in worship and adoration to him. That's not the way that we are. We have choices and we are, we weren't programmed by God. We're not programmed by our DNA. Our DNA will tell us if we're male or female or tell us our height or our color of our eyes, the color of our hair, but it won't tell us it won't give us directions on the choices that we have in front of us. And so this morning, we come to the text in Joshua chapter 23 in chapter four, and I titled it, choose for yourselves, choose for yourself. 2 (18m 51s): That was a choice that was put in front of the people. Let's pray. Before we open up the scripture Lord, we want to consider the year that is almost past us and consider 20 20, 20 22. That is at our doorstep. Lord. I pray that this, this text just from Joshua 23 and 24 would be our, really our guideposts, our, our, our, our signs posts telling us which way to go. Lord prayed. You speak to us each individual in this room, each individual who's watching online or in the law for, in patio. 2 (19m 32s): Lord, may your word go forth powerfully in Jesus name? We pray. Amen. So I, I often go back this time of year, as we're looking into the next year, you know, new year's is a time to think of your goals for next year and all the, the things that you want to do that you want to change in your life. And I always, I often come back to this text, consider 2022. And these are the words of 110 year old man. Who's on, who's going the way of the earth. He is at the end of his life. And he recognized that, and he has these things to say, I think we need to take them with some weight. 2 (20m 16s): Joshua 24 verse 29 says now it came to pass. After these things that Joshua, the son of nun, servant of the Lord died being 110 years old. And this is the Joshua that was born in Egypt as a slave. And he knew what it was to S to have to build idols or do things for the Egyptian gods. He, he, he was a slave in Egypt. He saw what the gods of Egypt required for those who worshiped him. That was his first 40 years of his life for the next 40 years of his life. He served at as Moses, his right-hand man, his assistant. 2 (20m 57s): He served Moses for those 40 years and he witnessed what the God of Israel would do and where the God of Israel wanted to take the people. And he saw the way that the, the people for those 40 years, as they wandered in the wilderness, continued to serve these other gods. The last 30 years of his life could be the most exciting. It was the 30 years as that he was the leader over Israel. After Moses had passed away, he was put in charge of the leadership. He was the one that was to bring the people into the new promised land. He was the one that was to go forth and, and fight these battles against the, the, the people that live in that land, those nations. 2 (21m 40s): And he has some very heavy words. And because these are his dying words, I think they have some weight to him. Now, just as a side note, we see that he dies at 110 and on his tombstone, if he had a tomb. So it would say Joshua son of nun, servant of the Lord. And this week I got to get coffee with a friend. And I, and I, and I asked him a few directive questions. What do you want your headstone to say, what do you want to read on your headstone? Because if you know how you want you at the end of your life to go, then you know, what path and what directions to take along the way. 2 (22m 20s): Joshua says servant of the Lord, Solomon and Ecclesiastes he's. He looks back on his life in that book. And he looks back on his mistakes and his failures, his, the vanities of life and the values that he, that he wanted to have the, he looks at pleasure and the practical wisdoms. And he says this at the end of . He said, let us hear the con the conclusion of the whole matter fear God, and keep his commandments for this is man's all for God will bring every work into judgment, including every secret thing, whether good or evil Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, they all gave on blessings to their sons. 2 (23m 4s): As they're dying words, Jesus, on the cross, his dying words were, it is finished to tell a star there's a weight to that. So we come to Joshua chapter 23, and let's look at these verses. As we recognize that these are the words of a, of a dying man who served as the Lord, his whole life, Joshua 23 verses one through three. It says now it came to pass a long time. After the Lord had given rest Israel from all their enemies roundabout, the Joshua was old and advanced in age and Joshua called for all of Israel, for their elders, their heads for their judges and for their officers and said to them, I am old and well advanced in age. 2 (23m 52s): You've seen all that. The Lord, your God has done to all these nations because of you for the Lord, your God is he who fought for you. And as you go on in Joshua chapter 23 and 24, which we won't cover every verse this morning. So I would encourage you to read that maybe over the next coming days, as you look down at the new years, but Joshua 23 chapter, 20 days full of reminders and warnings for the people, Joshua had assembled a number of the leaders. And he said, these are the reminders that I want you to have. And these are also the warnings and Joshua in verse six of 23, he says, therefore, be very courageous to keep and to do all that is written in the book of the law of Moses, Les, you turn to aside to the left-hand or to the right-hand or to the left, Joshua Joshua was reminding them to mind the crossroads of life. 2 (24m 46s): Keep those in mind, don't turn to the left or don't turn to the right, keep away from those alternative paths. You, the word of God is, is a straight and narrow path and we don't want, and Joshua is reminding them not to turn to the left to the right. Speaking of the GPS roadmaps a year, a number of years ago, I had a very, one of the firsts GPS is out there that gave directions and it was really rudimentary. And it was a little tiny scream about this, about this big. And I was on a Roach, a motorcycle road trip from here all the way out to Houston, Texas. I was going to go visit my brother out there. And it ended up being a very long day. 2 (25m 29s): I left Los Cruces, New Mexico at about six in the morning, ran out of gas in the middle of Texas, went through a rain storm. And as I'm pulling into Houston, Texas about midnight, this my GPS begins to give me directions and I wasn't paying close enough attention. It had given kind of two directions right in a row. And I missed the second one. And so it began to reroute me and I pulled me off the interstate and I'm going through, it's raining and I'm going. And I'm going in. I pull off into this neighborhood. And I later I found out that the, the GPS had taken me into a neighborhood. I should not have been at at nine o'clock or that late at night. And that section of town, my brother who lived there, it was like, that's not the neighborhood to be in because as I didn't mind the directions that were right there in front of me, we have to mind the crossroads. 2 (26m 17s): Joshua was saying Joshua 23, verse eight also says, but you shall hold fast to the Lord. Your God, as you have done to this day to keep the course, keep the course, a friend of mine in Santa Barbara. He, he he'd, he'd sailed to Hawaii. He got a little schooner and he'd sailed to Hawaii. He said, one of the things you have to do when you're aiming for an island, that's thousands of miles away is make sure that every day, your course is true. He said to miss Hawaii, by a degree or two would have been hundreds of miles and he would have altogether missed it. But so you have to keep the course hold fast to the Lord, your God, Joshua 23, verses 11 and 12. 2 (27m 3s): He says, therefore, Terek take careful heed to yourselves that you love the Lord, your God, or else. Indeed, if you will go back and clean to the remnant of these nations, Joshua was saying, if you don't devote yourself to the Lord, you'll begin to wander. You'll begin to stray from the path. You'll be go back into all the things that you were doing. All the things that the nations around you were doing worshiping these other gods verse 14 says behold, this day, I'm going the way of the earth. And you know, in your hearts and in all your souls, that not one good thing has failed. You not want a good thing has failed of all the good things, which the Lord, your God spoke concerning. 2 (27m 46s): You all have come to pass for you. Not one of them has failed. Josh was reminding them to remember that God is so good. God is so good. God keeps his promises. He promised them that they would have this land. He promised them that they would give God would give them rest over these other nations. As we come to chapter 24, Josh was going to give a proclamation at this place called Shekim. And whether these are two different speeches or one there's some debate. It, it they're, they're the, they're the last speeches. 2 (28m 26s): They're the last declarations of a dying man. So Joshua chapter 24 verse one says, and Joshua gathered all the tribes of Israel to check him. And he called for the elders of Israel for their heads, for their judges and for the officers. And they presented themselves before the Lord check him was a historical place. Check them is where Abraham having left or of the Kaldi's left his Homeland. God made him promises. And God called him out of that country to go into the land of Canaan, to give, go into land. A promised land and years of delay had, had, had kept him back until he entered into Keenan. 2 (29m 7s): The land of promise. And there, once Abraham was in where God had called him to go, God appears to him a second time. And after God appeared to him, Abraham set up an altar and worship God there and check them, check them is, is a historical place. It's where previously Joshua 30 years prior as they entered into the promised land that he had had them set up another altar there at Shekim. So at Shekem he is, he's going to give them once again, he's going to re remind them of God's goodness, in verses 12 or two through 13, we'll summarize it. And just say that God brings to mind all the things that God has done for them. 2 (29m 48s): He reminds them of his goodness. He reminds them of that. They were chosen people. He reminds them that they were taken to this special place. He reminds them that all that they were given in this land is good land flowing with milk and honey, a land where they didn't have to build walls. It was all there for them. He reminds them how they were delivered from their enemies, how God fought for them. And he reminds them of their history. And I think so often we forget our history too. We forget our own individual histories. Have you forgotten what God's done for you? 2 (30m 29s): Maybe as we look into 2022, we re remember all that God has brought us through this past year and years prior, God has done so much for us. And it's easy to forget those things. As you look in to the future, as you try to, as we try to look into the future, we forget all that God has done for us and with us and through us. I think that's especially true for, for those of us. Who've grown up in the church. I shared this with the youth group. I think we have to keep a sensitive heart. When you've grown up in the church, you forget all that God has saved you from and all that God has kept you from all the hurt and the pain, the loss Psalm 1 0 3 is an amazing song. 2 (31m 13s): It says this. It says, bless the Lord. Oh my soul. And forget not all of his benefits who forgives all your iniquities, who heals all your diseases, who redeems your life from destruction, who crowns you with loving kindness and tender mercies who satisfies your mouth with good things so that your youth is restored or renewed. Like the Eagles, forget not his benefits, but after reminding them, Joshua now brings him to the place of the choice where Josh was going to say, choose for yourselves. It's going to be a charge as well as a choice in Joshua 24, verses 14 and 15, it says now therefore, fear the Lord serve him in sincerity and truth and put away the gods, which your fathers served on. 2 (32m 2s): The other side of the river in Egypt serve the Lord. Joshua has to say, put away those idols. Those idols are there in and amongst you put those away, get rid of those things. And I believe our culture today still saturates us with idols. No, not the little idols, as much as they, maybe they had back in those days, no longer little figurines or statutes or those, those are still around. We can still see those, but the idols are those things that we put so much identity in. I believe at our, I had our identity can become an idol. It can become a God that we begin to serve when it's something other than God, when our identity is identified or attached to something outside of God, when our identity, our identity is wrapped up in our political affiliation, it becomes an idol. 2 (32m 53s): When our social media following becomes our identity or our position at work or our abilities or skills or achievements, those things can become the idols of today. It became our identity. I remember when I was a swimmer at UCFB, I wore a sweater. I wore that shirt like almost every day or the sweatshirt. I walked around campus with that big UCS B swimmer jacket. I wanted everyone to know I was a swimmer. I identified as a swimmer. I was proud to be a collegiate athlete until the Lord began to show in my heart that you are, that is you become your identity. Tell the day that I had to go and tell the coach, the coach, I need to step down from the swim team. 2 (33m 35s): I want to get involved more with this group called campus crusade for Christ. And I took that sweatshirt up and I folded it up. And I didn't allow myself to wear that because I didn't want to be identified as that anymore. I wanted to be identified as a follower of Christ. Those things that we just begin to, I, they begin to become idols in our life. And they're, they're tough. They're harsh masters. When we allow those idols to rule our life, what about money or consumerism? Letting that become an idol? It doesn't matter how much money or if you have a lot of money or you're broke the pursuit of money in the acquisition of these things is an idol for many in our culture. 2 (34m 19s): Many people trust their money more than they trust God. And it's not that money is bad. We don't want to say that it's not, it's a tool and it's something to be used correctly. I quit. I guess the question I ask is, do you, do you have money or does money have you entertainment? I believe in, in our culture has become an idol. It's just, we're just obsessed with entertainment. And we have Netflix and all these different things, which we can just be entertained around the clock. I mean, I still remember the days where the TV went blank and I'm not that old. I don't think I remember the TV went blank at night and there was no program on here. 2 (35m 0s): What do I do now? But now we have around the clock, just a myriad of different things to entertain us. And not that that's bad once again, it's not that entertainment is bad, but it's when it's let, when we let it become all consuming in our lives is where we need to have some caution comfort. I believe is another one of those things. Are we seeking to make our lives as comfortable and safe as possible? When comfort becomes your idol, that's all you seek for. And these things, I don't believe they're evil in and of themselves. They're just the improper focus of time that we put into them. And we make these things become greater than they should be in our lives. 2 (35m 44s): Let's look at verse 15. Joshua gave the warning to put those things away. Now in verse 15, it says, and if, if it seems evil to you to serve the Lord, choose for yourselves this day, whom you will serve whether the gods, which your fathers served that were on the other side of the river or the gods of the Amorites whose land you live. But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord. I saw some of you of your mouth. That verse that's it's it's one of those verses that's memorized in me. It's it was, it was a plaque on my door growing up. It was a plaque that went to after my dad passed away. 2 (36m 25s): My mom bought a new house that went onto her door, and now it rests. And it's posted on our door as well. And Joshua gives the charges has choose for yourselves. He says, whom will you serve for Joshua? That choice was easy. Joshua had made that choice long ago in, in, in the English. We use the future tense to choose, to make that choice. Choose for yourselves. We, we, we say that's a future sense, but in the Hebrew tent has a fuller meaning. 2 (37m 9s): Francis Schaeffer said, he said it expresses a continuous action involves the future, but it also can point to the past. Joshua's undoubtedly affirming. I have chosen and I will choose Joshua had done that by the small and big choices that he had made along the path of 110 years of living. Joshua could make this statement because he had lived a life that continuously chose to serve the Lord. Joshua chose to fight against the Amalekites choosing when it might cost and everything, including his life. 2 (37m 50s): Joshua chose to reject the golden calf. Choosing when the flesh might be satisfied. Joshua chose to serve the Lord by serving Moses, choosing a humble place. Joshua chose to be believed. God's promises about the promised land choosing against the majority. Joshua chose to recognize the leadership of the captain of the Lord's army there on that bank, choosing to surrender to God and Joshua chose to take leadership of Israel to lead them into the land, choosing faith, instead of unbelief, those are the decisions that Josh Joshua had made. But now he says, but as for me and my house, and he was saying, I am willing to go alone. 2 (38m 37s): Are we willing to go alone? When the culture around us goes different directions, Joshua had made this decision. It didn't matter what others would choose to do. It didn't matter that if he and his house were the only ones that would continue to serve the Lord, a song came to mind as I was studying. That says, though, no, the no, the, no one go with me still yet. I will follow. We'll get to sing that later. Joshua and the decision had been made. He had put his hand to the plow, as Jesus mentioned, and he would not turn back. There was a guy named Mike rider, who, who DISA, discipled me throughout college and, and, and afterwards, and he called this a super decision. 2 (39m 26s): He called this a super decision as decisions. You, you, a decision you make once that you will not stray from, from Mike rider, the decision that he shared with us, one of those decisions was that he would have a daily devotion time with the Lord. Didn't matter if he had, you know, had to get on a plane ride at 4:00 AM, he would wake up early enough to have a quiet time with the Lord. That was one of his super decisions. One of his other super decisions that he shared with us was that he was going to be at church on Sundays, whether he felt like it or not, he was not going to let the circumstances affect him being at church and the fellowship. Good job, everybody. Christmas day after Christmas day, his other super decision was that he and his wife and his family would allow a college group to meet at his house every week. 2 (40m 17s): And he did that. They did that for about 15 years, even when their kids were little, until her kids were in college and pass college, he held a, a college group at his house in which with a lot of my me and my friends were discipled. Those are the super decisions that he had made. And I think about the super decision that these 40 martyrs of Sebastian made it back in 3 28 D there were a Roman Legion, which is now modern day Turkey, Turkey, and it was these 40 Christian soldiers. There were in the Roman army. And so the, the, the, the commander realized, Hey, we might have an Allegiant allegiance issue. Are these Christians gonna, you know, take this, take, which, which side are they gonna take? 2 (41m 1s): If things really go down. And so he said, we can no longer have these 40 Christian soldiers here in my army. I want you to bow down and pledge to Caesar is Lord the Caesar's God. And these 40 soldiers said, we will refuse. We are 40 Christian soldiers. So the commander had them beaten and scourged, they will not turn back. So he said, I will punish you then by putting on a frozen lake naked, it was 40 Christian soldiers saying a tune of 40 Christian soldiers for Christ. 2 (41m 43s): And they were there on that naked on that frozen lake, no one turned out. They were there huddled together, forties, Christian soldiers for God, surrounded by guards, not allowing them to leave. They decided to let's let's up the ante. So they put up hot tubs, they put up these tubs of hot water around it. So if you got too cold and you just want to jump out, you wanted to claim the authority of Caesar and renounce your Christian faith, and you can do that. And they made it easier with having these little hot tubs around. Well, for one of those soldiers, back in 3 20 80, it was all too much. And he, and he ditched his fellow soldiers and he ran, he jumped into a hot tub. 2 (42m 23s): And sadly, because of the temperature he died instantly, he was, he was overcome and they began singing the song 39 brave soldiers for Christ. What was all too much for one of the soldiers, one of the guards that was on the edge and hearing 39 soldiers for Christ. And he said, no, it needs to be 40. And he said, I once made that profession of faith to believe in Christ. And so what he did is he took off his, his uniform stripped off his clothes and he jumped back into and he jumped into those forties, 1 39 soldiers making it once again, 40 foot soldiers for Christ and those 40 soldiers for Christ all died in the ice that night, they took a stand. 2 (43m 12s): So Joshua brings us to this thing, or you have to choose for yourself, choose for yourself this day, whom you will serve. But he says, but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord, I guess, looking at 2022, what and whom will you serve the culture around? This is long departed from serving the Lord. It's becoming actually, serving the Lord. What will your choice be? You're not an Elmo doll. You're not an Elmo loves you there. God gets to push a button. And you said, Lord, I'm choosing to obey. You know, it's a free will choice. 2 (43m 54s): And it's a place this morning where we get to look back on the choices and where they've OLED. And to look into the, into the distant horizon and say, Lord, where do you want me to go? What choices do you want me to make this year? So who or what we choose to serve this year? So transition now to communion it's commune and Sunday, the fact is that none of us are strong enough. None of us are strong enough to live out this journey day by day. None of us have the wisdom that we need to even direct our own paths or our own lives. 2 (44m 38s): None of us have a lived or able to live a perfect life as Jesus did. That's why recalled to remember Jesus, his perfect sacrifice that he paid the penalty for our sin. We need to remember that the lamb of God's body was broken for us, that the lamb of God's blood was shed for us. Remember that by his death, we have been freed from the penalty of sin. Remember his resurrection and chew and choose to live in a way that speaks that he is coming back with that. We walk in freedom, righteousness, obedience, faith, hope, love. So with the elements in our hand in John chapter six, Jesus made the first of his seven. 2 (45m 25s): I am statements. And the first of his seven, I am statements. He said, I am the bread of life. And Jesus was speaking to all his disciples. He had a large group disciples outside of, outside of the 12. And Jesus said to them, assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the son of man and drink of his blood, you will have no life. Whoever eats of my flesh and drinks, my blood has eternal life. And I will raise him up at the last day. Many of his disciples heard that eating his flesh and drinking his blood. And they were, they turned away. Many of his disciples, the larger group of disciples began to leave him. 2 (46m 9s): It was too hard of a statement to S to take. So Jesus looks at the 12 and John six, and he said this, he said, do you also want to go away? So do you also want to go away? What are you going to choose? You're going to choose to follow those others. You got to love Simon Peter, because he's the one who, who, who sings out and speaks to the 12. He says, Lord to whom, shall we go? Or to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. And also we have come to believe and know that you are the Christ, the son of the living, God, that's what we do, but eating of the bread and drink of the cup. 2 (46m 59s): When we realize how good we have it to where else, or to whom else would we serve? Where else would we go? Let's take the bread. First Corinthians, Paul writes a letter to them and says for, I received from the Lord, which I also delivered to you that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which he was betrayed, he took bread. And we had given thanks. He broke. And he said, take eat. This is my body, which is broken for you. Let's do this this morning. And remember it. So Jesus, In the same manner, he also took the cup after supper saying this cup is my new covenant in my blood. 2 (47m 58s): Do this. As often as you drink in remembrance of me for us, often as you eat this bread and drink of the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes. Let's pray. Lord, help us not to forget your benefits. What would help us not to forget your blessings that come along with serving you, Lord, oh God, you are good. 2 (48m 43s): And you do good. And you have paved the path you've gone before us Lord. And you were the light unto our feet and the light into our path. Lord would give us wisdom to recognize those things in our lives this morning that have become idols or, or gods help us to realize the path that they have taken the path that they have made a stray down. Let us renounce those things, Lord and get rid of those things in our lives. Lord, give us wisdom to recognize your goodness in the path that leads to eternal life, help us to make the choice. 2 (49m 29s): Lord that honors and serves you. Lord Jesus name. We pray. Amen. 1 (49m 47s): Did you all stand with me? I have decided to follow the cheese. I have to follow cheese. I have to follow the cheese. 1 (50m 15s): Still alive. 1 (51m 27s): I have decided to follow and cheese. I have these two follow on cheese. I have to follow the cheese. No attorney, no turning, no turning 0 (51m 56s): Back. 1 (52m 2s): No turning back.
Join me as we discover explore all the elements of perfectionism, from its root causes to its surface manifestations, through an Internal Family Systems lens, grounded in a Catholic world view. Through poetry, quotes, research findings, personal examples and the current professional literature, I pull together many strands into a unified whole to help you deeply grasp the internal experience of perfectionism. Intro The Quintessential Persona Leanna Smith We are together in this great adventure, this podcast, Interior Integration for Catholics, we are journeying together, and I am honored to be able to spend this time with you. I am Dr. Peter Malinoski, clinical psychologist and passionate Catholic and together, we are taking on the tough topics that matter to you. We bring the best of psychology and human formation and harmonize it with the perennial truths of the Catholic Faith. Interior Integration for Catholics is part of our broader outreach, Souls and Hearts bringing the best of psychology grounded in a Catholic worldview to you and the rest of the world through our website soulsandhearts.com Let's get into answering the questions -- the who, what, where, when, why, and how of perfectionism. This is episode 85 of the Interior Integration for Catholics Podcast it's titled: Perfectionism: Who, What, Where, When, Why, and How Perfectionism -- a major, major problem for so many Catholics. A major, major problem for so many of us. Thomas Curran and Andrew Hill 2019 Psychological Bulletin Article: Perfectionism Is Increasing Over Time: A Meta-Analysis of Birth Cohort Differences From 1989 to 2016 reviewed dozens of studies from a 27 year timespan all using the same instrument the Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale by Hewitt and Flett 164 study samples comprising more than 41,000 college students in the US, Canada and Great Britain between 1989 and 2016 Results: there is no doubt. Perfectionism among college students is on the rise. Between 1989 and 2016, the scores for socially prescribed perfectionism — or perceiving that other have excessive expectations of me — increased by 33%. Other-oriented expectations — putting unrealistic expectations on others — went up 16% and self-oriented perfectionism — our irrational desire to be perfect — increased 10% The Who of Perfectionism -- the Parts The What of Perfectionism -- What is it? What are the different kinds of perfectionism, what are the elements? Where Does Perfectionism Come From Within Us When Does Perfectionism Get Activated? Why Does Perfectionism Start and Why Does it Keep Going? How Do We Overcome Perfectionism? How do we resolve it? Not just a descriptive diagnosis, but a proscriptive conceptualization that gives a direction for healing, resolving the perfectionism. Not just symptom management, this is your cross nonsense. There are real crosses that God gives us. Yes. But those crosses fit well. The crosses we impose upon ourselves do not fit well. What -- What is perfectionism? You know that I want precise definitions when we dive into deep topics together. I think it's ironic that there is a lot of unclear, sloppy thinking about perfectionism by perfectionists. Shining a bright clear light on it. Definition of Perfectionism Brene Brown: The Gifts of Imperfection: Perfectionism is a self-destructive and addictive belief system that fuels the primary thought: If I look perfect, live perfectly, and do everything perfectly, I can avoid or minimize painful feelings or shame, judgment and blame Marc Foley O.C.D. Editor of Story of a Soul: Study Edition There is an unhealthy striving for perfection which psychologists call perfectionism. Perfectionism is the state of being driven to achieve a standard of perfection in an area of life that is fueled by either the fear of failure or the need for approval. This unhealthy striving is not the type of perfection to which God calls us. So you may have perfectionistic parts that would like to challenge me on this. Your perfectionistic parts may say to me So, Dr. Peter, Mr. Catholic Psychologist, you want us to have low standards, huh? You think that would be better, for us to be lazy, to be weak, to take our ease, to relax, to give up the fight, to be mediocre, to be lukewarm, huh? Is that what you are saying? Didn't St. Jerome say: Good, better, best, never let it rest, 'till your good is better, and your better's best First off, let's start with your quote. Often attributed to St. Jerome, but there's no evidence for it in his writings: Fr. Horton addresses this alleged quote on his blog fauxtations. September 26, 2016 post. "Good, better, best: St. Jerome?" Oldest google books attribution is from 2009. 1904 Dictionary of Modern Proverbs 1897 Christian Work: Illustrated Family Newspaper. Others attribute it to Tim Duncan, NBA all-star player, often considered the greatest power forward of all time. I want you to pursue excellence. Perfectionism is not the same thing as striving for excellence or a commitment to self-improvement. There is a critical distinction between striving for excellence and perfectionism. Let's discuss what perfectionism is not. Brene Brown: Perfectionism is not self-improvement./ Perfectionism is, at it's core, about trying to earn approval and acceptance Most perfectionists were raised being praised for achievement and performance (grades, manners, rule-following, people-pleasing, appearance, sports). Somewhere along the way, we adopted this dangerous and debilitating belief system: I am what I accomplish and how well I accomplish it. Please. Perform. Perfect. Healthy striving is self-focused – How can I improve? Perfectionism – is other focused – What will they think?” End quote. What will they think? Brene Brown Daring Greatly: How the Courage to be vulnerable Transforms the Way We Live, Love, Parent and Lead: “Perfectionism is not the same thing as striving for excellence. Perfectionism is not about healthy achievement and growth. Perfectionism is a defensive move. It's the belief that if we do things perfectly and look perfect, we can minimize or avoid the pain of blame, judgment, and shame.” Agnes M. Stairs, Smith, Zapolski, Combs, and Settles: Clarifying the construct of perfectionism Assessment 2012 732 people 15 different perfectionism measures -- Factor analytic modeling Found nine different personality traits associated with perfectionism: Need for Order, Need for Satisfaction of a Job Well Done, Details and Checking, Perfectionism toward Others, High Personal Standards, Black and White Thinking about Tasks, Perceived Pressure from Others, Dissatisfaction with Personal Performance, Reactivity to Mistakes. 9 personality traits Order I like things to be neat Things should always be put away in their place I like to be orderly in the way I do things Satisfaction I feel satisfied with my work after I do something well I get excited when I do a good job I feel great satisfaction when I feel I have perfected something Details and Checking I often check my work carefully to make sure there are no mistakes It takes me a long time to do something because I check my work many times Perfectionism toward Others I have high standards for the people who are important to me I expect a lot from my friends I expect others to excel at whatever they do High Standards I set extremely high standards for myself I expect high levels of performance from myself I have very high goals Black and White Thinking about Tasks and Activities I will not do something if I cannot do it perfectly There's no point in doing something if I cannot do it perfectly Perceived Pressure from Others People expect high levels of performance from me Others expect me to be perfect I often feel that people make excessive demands of me Dissatisfaction It feels like my best is never good enough I often don't live up to my own standards I rarely feel that what I have done is good enough Reactivity to Mistakes When I make a mistake, I feel really bad If one thing goes wrong, I feel that I cannot do anything right I feel like a complete failure if I do not do something perfectly Signs of Being a Perfectionist GoodTherapy.org article last updated 11-05-2019 Not be able to perform a task unless they know they can do it perfectly. View the end product as the most important part of any undertaking. As a result, they may focus less on the process of learning or completing a task to the best of their ability. Not see a task as finished until the result is perfect according to their standards. Procrastinate. People with perfectionism may not want to begin a task until they know they can do it perfectly. Take an excessive amount of time to complete a task that does not typically take others long to complete. Examples of Perfectionistic Behaviors -- GoodTherapy.org article last updated 11-05-2019 Spending 30 minutes writing and rewriting a two-sentence email. Believing that missing two points on a test is a sign of failure. Difficulty being happy for others who are successful. Holding oneself to the standards of others' accomplishments or comparing oneself unfavorably and unrealistically to others. Skipping class or avoiding a chore because it is pointless to make an effort unless perfection can be achieved. Focusing on the end product rather than the process of learning. Avoiding playing a game or trying a new activity with friends for fear of being shown up as less than perfect. The Who of Perfectionism -- the Parts Definition of Parts: Separate, independently operating personalities within us, each with own unique prominent needs, roles in our lives, emotions, body sensations, guiding beliefs and assumptions, typical thoughts, intentions, desires, attitudes, impulses, interpersonal style, and world view. Each part also has an image of God and also its own approach to sexuality. Robert Falconer calls them insiders. You can also think of them as separate modes of operating if that is helpful. Types of perfectionism -- Jay Early IFS therapist Self-Therapy Volume 3. Four types of perfectionist parts -- Not-enough perfectionist Creative Block perfectionist Control perfectionist Inner Critic Not-Enough perfectionist Always must do more on your projects -- not good enough yet. Working right up to deadlines, perfecting. Afraid to finish project because your perfectionistic parts believe this will expose your shortcomings and led to being judged and ridiculed -- humiliation. Creative Block Perfectionist Need to be perfect the first time Ideas are not good enough Fear of being judged and rejected. Mike Litman: You don't have to get it right. You just have to get it going. This podcast is an example. Didn't know what I was doing. Early episodes were very different. Learning curve. How many people listened? Not many. Control perfectionist World must be perfectly in control and in order. I must always do the right thing. I must always make the right choice Rigid control over behavior Saps vitality Obliterates sponteneity Need predictability to feel safe Inner Critic Enforces the goals of being perfect Judges and shames about your work, your life, your spiritual practices Labels you stupid, incompetent, sloppy, inadequate or bad. Good intention: to help you avoid being judged or shamed for mistakes. Types of Inner Critic: Jay Earley Personal-Growth-Programs.com -- Transforming your Inner Critic. Freedom from your Inner Critic. Perfectionist This critic tries to get you to do things perfectly. It sets high standards for the things your produce, and has difficulty saying something is complete and letting it go out to represent your best work. It tries to make sure that you fit in and that you will not be judged or rejected. Its expectations probably reflect those of people who have been important to you in the past. Guilt-Tripper This critic is stuck in the past. It is unable to forgive you for wrongs you have done or people you have hurt. It is concerned about relationships and holds you to standards of behavior prescribed by your community, culture and family It tries to protect you from repeating past mistakes by making sure you never forget or feel free. Underminer This critic tries to undermine your self-confidence and self-esteem so that you won't take risks. It makes direct attacks on your self-worth so that you will stay small and not take chances where you could be hurt or rejected. It is afraid of your being too big or too visible and not being able to tolerate judgment or failure. Destroyer It makes pervasive attacks on your fundamental self worth. It shames you and makes you feel inherently flawed and not entitled to basic understanding or respect. This most debilitating critic, comes from early life deprivation or trauma. It is motivated by a belief that it is safer not to exist. Molder This critic tries to get you to fit into a certain mold based on standards held by society, your culture or your family. It wants you to be liked and admired and to protect you from being abandoned, shamed or rejected. The Molder fears that the Rebel or the Free Spirit in you would act in ways that are unacceptable. So it keeps you from being in touch with and expressing your true nature. Taskmaster This critic wants you to work hard and be successful. It fears that you may be mediocre or lazy and will be judged a failure if it does not push you to keep going. Its pushing often activates a procrastinator or a rebel that fights against its harsh dictates. Inner Controller This critic tries to control your impulses: eating, drinking, sexual activity, etc. It is polarized with an Indulger –addict who it fears can get out of control at any moment. It tends to be harsh and shaming in an effort to protect you from yourself. It is motivated to try to make you a good person who is accepted and functions well in society. Three Main Manager Roles Contribute to Perfectionism in Catholics. Often in serious Catholics there is a triumvirate of managers who govern the system if there is not sufficient self-energy. Triumvirate trium virum, genitive plural of tres viri "three men," from tres "three" (see three) + viri, plural of vir "man" a group of three men holding power, in particular ( the First Triumvirate ) the unofficial coalition of Julius Caesar, Pompey, and Crassus in 60 BC and ( the Second Triumvirate ) a coalition formed by Antony, Lepidus, and Octavian in 43 BC. Standard Bearer, Primary Manager and the Inner Critic. Talking only about Catholics here, Catholics who take their faith seriously. I'm going to simplify this down. Three roles. Most people are mostly blended most of the time. Rare for someone to be really recollected at a natural level And most of the time with reasonably well functioning people, the blend is with a manager. Managers are the parts who run our systems in such a ways as to proactively minimize exiles being activated and breaking through Managers handle the day-to-day activities Some of these managers are very, very competent, very good at what they do. Efficient, effective. They work strategically, with forethought and planning to keep in control of situations and relationships to minimize the likelihood of you being hurt. They work really hard to keep you safe. controlling, striving, planning, caretaking, judging, Can be pessimistic, self-critical, very demanding. Three major roles in perfectionism. The standard bearer, the primary manager, and the internal critic. Standard Bearer Definition of a Standard for a military unit -- Wikipedia: A bright, colorful flag acting as a strong visual beacon to the soldiers of the unit -- -- it doesn't always have to be a flag. The standard for a Roman Legion was their aquila -- their eagle. The standard of the Roman Legion, the eagle had quasi-religious importance to the Roman soldier, far beyond being merely a symbol of his legion. To lose a standard was extremely grave, and the Roman military went to great lengths both to protect a standard and to recover it if it were lost Is the standard the deep and loving relationship with God? Nope. Is the standard the close, intimate relationship with our Mother Mary? Nyet. What is the standard that the standard bearer carries aloft The standard is the unwritten list of rules and expectations that the standard bearer has come up with by his or her own limited vision, about what he or she things Gods wants from us. The standard is the code of conduct that the standard bearer wishes to impose on all the parts The standard might be quite unreasonable, especially in the extreme cases of perfectionism and scrupulosity And the standard needs to be interpreted -- other parts are not deemed capable of deciphering the standard. Oh no. Who needs to decipher and interpret the standard? That's right, you've got it -- the standard bearer. In the tripartite Freudian model of the mind, The standard bearer corresponds to the superego. The standard bearer wants to act in the role of conscience, giving directives to the system. Why? To keep us safe and secure. That's the goal. Safe from internal enemies (such as exiles with their burdens -- especially shame -- the exiles with their burdens are Freud's Id) and external enemies. Satan, demons, villains of all kinds And also to keep us safe from God's Wrath. Or God's Apathy. Or God's disappointment. Or Something Undesirable from God -- you like, like being smited with a thunderbolt. Good Boy in my system IIC 71 -- A New and Better Way of Understanding Myself and Others If blended. That's key if he blends with me, takes over with other managers, he will lapse into this role of being a standard bearer. Otherwise, he's not like that. Primary Manager This is a part that is blended and in charge almost all the time in fairly "well-adjusted people." When there seems to be a consistent single "personality" you are often seeing what I call the primary manager part. This part can have a lot of self-energy, and only blend to certain degree. This part can also believe that it is essentially the self, or that it needs to function in the role of the self Primary manager parts either Doesn't trust the self Or forget. Lapse back into old patterns Or get caught up when exiles are activated. Collaborator in my system -- formerly the Competent One Inner Critic Evaluator in my system. Formerly my Internal Critic. My internal critic's attitude toward farms growing up in Wisconsin. If I ever have a farm. Now I have a farm. Radical new views. Never painted my barn. How my parts work together on this podcast episode When I am blended and have taken over the self, I set the standards. I speak for God. I am in the role of standard bearer. When I am blended, I shielded Good Boy from the unreasonableness of his demands. I goaded Collaborator, pressed him on to ever better performance. I am the workhorse. Executing. Trying to make it all happen I'm a firefighter. I get angry and rebel against the triumvirate of managers -- YouTube time. Other firefighter activity -- Chocolate, video games, masturbation, porn, food, shopping, chocolate. Backlash exacerbates the polarization. I work to protect us. Where Does Perfectionism Come From Perfectionism is a symptom. It's an effect of a deeper issue. Still a problem in itself. Curran and Hall: Our findings suggest that self-oriented perfectionism, socially prescribed perfectionism, and other-oriented perfectionism have increased over the last 27 years. We speculate that this may be because, generally, American, Canadian, and British cultures have become more individualistic, materialistic, and socially antagonistic over this period, with young people now facing more competitive environments, more unrealistic expectations, and more anxious and controlling parents than generations before. Pete Walker “Perfectionism is the unparalleled defense for emotionally abandoned children. The existential unattainability of perfection saves the child from giving up, unless or until, scant success forces him to retreat into the depression of a dissociative disorder, or launches him hyperactively into an incipient conduct disorder. Perfectionism also provides a sense of meaning and direction for the powerless and unsupported child. In the guise of self-control, striving to be perfect offers a simulacrum of a sense of control. Self-control is also safer to pursue because abandoning parents typically reserve their severest punishment for children who are vocal about their negligence.” Jay Earley: Self-Therapy Vol. 3 chapter on perfectionism. Fear Need for approval Marie Forleo, Everything is Figureoutable “Perfectionism at its core isn't about high standards. It's about fear. Fear of failure. Fear of looking stupid, fear of making a mistake, fear of being judged, criticized, and ridiculed. It's the fear that one simple fact might be true: You're just not good enough. Michael Law “At its root, perfectionism isn't really about a deep love of being meticulous. It's about fear. Fear of making a mistake. Fear of disappointing others. Fear of failure. Fear of success.” Hiding -- driven by shame. Genesis 3. Chinonye J. Chidolue “Perfection is a faux. It's a mask carved by our own poor esteem to hide who we really are and make others see what really isn't us.” But what's behind those? Let's go deeper Shame. Deep sense of fundamental inadequacy. Not being loved. Not being lovable. Essentially flawed. Being bad. Unworthy. Episodes 37-49 When Does Perfectionism Get Activated? Some are perfectionistic all the time Some are episodic. Some of the time. Situation factors or internal factors activate Shame. Fear Anger Shame is: a primary emotion, a bodily reaction, a signal, a judgement, and an action. Why Does it Keep Going? Self Images Shame -- that is the main driver of perfectionism. I am unacceptable as I am right now. I have to engage in a self-improvement program. That's what he took away from experience. Not just taught, but construed. The potential to become good enough to earn the love -- provides hope for the future in the short run. But hamster on a wheel. Breeds rebellion, acting out. Perfectionistic parts always get what they don't want. Winding up alienated, isolated, alone Glennon Doyle Melton "We can choose to be perfect and admired or to be real and loved." Ze Frank -- salty quote: “Perfectionism may look good in his shiny shoes, but he's a bit of an asshole and no one invites him to their pool parties.” How Do We Overcome Perfectionism? Standard Advice -- focused on symtpoms Oregon Counseling Become more aware of your tendencies toward perfectionism Focus on the Positives Allow yourself to make mistakes Set more reasonable goals Learn how to receive Criticism Lower the pressure you put on yourself Focus on meaning over perfection Try not to procrastinate Cut out negative influences Go to therapy. Others Sharon Martin, LCSW in California Practice self-compassion Adopt a growth mindset Instead of focusing on outcomes, enjoy the process Be true to yourself rather than trying to please everyone Be more assertive with your own needs Love your imperfect self. Tanya Peterson Choosing Therapy.com Keep track of your thoughts Practice mindfulness Focus on your strengths Stop comparing yourself to others Find your own meaning and purpose Rekindle your sense of pleasure and gratitude Think about your life at age 100 Let yourself experiment. These are almost all symptom based approaches. Superficial. Likely to not get to the root cause. Sound good. Hard to accomplish though because of the perfectionism and its roots. Two major types of approaches Treat perfectionism as an enemy to be ignored, dismissed, fought against, or overcome. Byron Brown based on the Diamond Approach 1999 Souls without Shame. Robert W. Firestone and colleagues in their Voice Therapy approach Conquer your Inner Critical Voice Rick Carson in his 1983 book Taming Your Gremlin By far the approach most serious Catholic favor in dealing with perfectionism and scrupulosity Will power Suppression Domination over the undesireable internal experience. Triumph of the will! Victory. Never works. Not for long. And when it seems to work, it's unstable, tenuous, shaky. Revenge of the repressed. But what if perfectionism and the parts around it have something important to say to you? Treat perfectionism as an ally to be seen, heard, to be accepted, befriended, understood, and ultimately transformed. Hal and Sidra Stone based on Voice Dialogue, 1993 Embracing your inner critic: turning self-criticism into a creative asset Jay Earley and Bonnie Weiss based on Internal Family Systems therapy 2010 Self-therapy for your inner critic: transforming self-criticism into self-confidence Ann Weiser Cornell based on Inner Relationship Focusing in her 2005 book The Radical Acceptance of Everything Pat Allen also takes this approach in her 1995 book Art Is a Way of Knowing.[14] These approaches see the inner critic as attempting to help or protect the person—but in a covert, distorted, or maladaptive way. This perspective makes it possible to connect with the critic and transform it over time into a helpful ally. Earley's approach. Getting to the root. Shame IIC 37-49. Engage with the parts burdened with shame. Neural Networks -- one neural network Dan Siegel's interpersonal neurobiology. Lee Health IFS is considered a brain-based psychotherapy designed specifically to access and modify neural networks through intentional interactions via a guided meditative processes. These brain based interactions are the key to helping create different pathways often referred to as “rewiring” or “remapping”. IEADP Foundation These processes serve to engage the brain stem, limbic system and prefrontal cortex simultaneously in the safe and emotional tolerable setting of the therapist's office. This increase in the individual's ability to stay in the window of tolerance while being present with strong emotional states, body sensations and memories allows the client to engage the “witnessing mind” and increases the response flexibility to the strong emotional states that previously would elicit eating disorder behaviors Experiential Exercise What did you think -- let me know call or text 317.567.9594. Also, if you have found great resources that were helpful for your scrupulosity or perfectionism let me know. Next episode Episode 86, will come out on November 1, All Saints Day Scrupulosity -- I have such a different take -- Scrupulosity is what happens with perfectionism gets religion. One more element that we haven't discussed that is so central to scrupulosity, that make scrupulosity much more than a religious spiritual perfectionism. My own battle with scrupulosity. Grandpa Roberts: God helps those who help themselves. Today we laid a foundation for understanding perfectionism. Next episode, we get much more into Solutions for scruplosity and perfectionism. Remember, you as a listener can call me on my cell any Tuesday or Thursday from 4:30 PM to 5:30 PM. I've set that time aside for you. 317.567.9594. (repeat) or email me at crisis@soulsandhearts.com. Resilient Catholics Community. 84 on the waiting list. Greater discussion of that in the last episode, episode 84. We have been working through the Individual Results Sheet for dozens of RCC members -- amazed at how our Initial Measures Kit can provoke all kinds of new thinking about their parts and their internal worlds. Work with Catholic Standard Bearers, Primary Managers and Inner Critics Catholic therapists or therapists in training -- If you are really interested in Internal Family System and you want to be with me and other Catholic therapists, working on your human formation with your colleagues, The Interior Therapist Community is for you. We have a couple more spots open in the last Foundations Experiential Group for the fall of 2021, so check out all our offerings at soulsandhearts.com/itc.
This week T-Bone's coaching odyssey delves into Mick Malthouse's black and white years; from his beef with Bucks, to his love of Licuria, to his 'rat' whispering, to his sociopathic midweek rituals...Malthouse called upon the Roman Legion, and Sun Tzu himself, to break the Collywobbles and finally lead the Pies through the gates of Valhalla.
Show Notes Episode 314: Check A Coin With Your Witcher This week Host Dave Bledsoe slaps a coin down on the bar and demands free drinks only to be told his useless memorabilia is not legal tender. (Again) On the show this week we are talking about the curious culture of the Challenge Coin! (COIN CHECK!) Along the way we learn what Dave had to do to earn his only Challenge Coin. (Fortunately it did not involve an Ookie Cookie as far as we can tell!) Then we dive right into the odd history and application of a military tradition that has somehow crept into the everyday life of America. From its humble beginning in the Roman Legion, where the Imperator would reward the Butchest Optio in the ranks, to its evolution over the skies of France in World War One, where the leader would press one into the hands of the butchest gunner in the squadron! (Oh Carl, you are SO virile!) Finally the modern incarnation that began with bullets and like most things involving the Special Forces grew out of control really quick! (Never drink with Specs Op, just don't!) All the way up to today, when Challenge Coins are handed out like tic tacs by assistant managers during the monthly sales meeting at Quicky Jim's Reliable Second Hand Cars! (Vernon you've topped last month's numbers AGAIN!) If you don't know what a challenge coin is, you will by the time we are done thus earning yourself a challenge coin! See Dave for your coin! Our Sponsor this week is Seltzer Koin, when you really want a coin and don't mind paying for it, Seltzer Koin! We open with NBC News talking about challenge coins and close with Violet Orandi coin checking her local Witcher! Show Theme: https://www.jamendo.com/track/421668/prelude-to-common-sense The Show on Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheHell_Podcast The Show on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/whatthehellpodcast/ www.whatthehellpodcast.com Give us your money on Patreon https://www.patreon.com/Whatthehellpodcast The Show Line: 347 687 9601 Closing Music: https://youtu.be/HiXY-xghv-Q We are a proud member of the Seltzer Kings Podcast Network! http://seltzerkings.com/ Citations Needed: Coin Check https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/coin-check/ Challenge Coin Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Challenge_coin A Brief History of Challenge Coins https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/12630/brief-history-challenge-coins Military's prized 'challenge coins' become copycat fad among agencies, politicians, companies https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/militarys-prized-challenge-coins-become-copycat-fad-in-federal-washington/2011/02/12/ABaTEZQ_story.html NYPD Defends "Challenge Coins" That Call East Flatbush Precinct "Fort Jah" https://gothamist.com/news/nypd-defends-challenge-coins-dubbing-east-flatbush-precinct-fort-jah Uncited Additional Reading: https://www.courant.com/breaking-news/hc-br-state-police-challenge-coin-trooper-tirade-20200715-43pydiewrnff7bp7g6ckfp7alm-story.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/11/us/politics/challenge-coins.html Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
David Drake picked up writing, so he says, as a therapy for his time spent riding tanks around Vietnam and Cambodia. But what started as short stories ended up as a brilliant and far-reaching career that explored historic fantasy, horror, sci fi, and everything in between. Whether you love Roman legions, Byzantine politics, or Space Opera that combines the spirits of each, Drake has something for you – all his characters are exquisitely human and complex. … Continue...Episode 98 – Interview with David Drake
Simon Scarrow is a Sunday Times No. 1 bestselling author. His many successful books include his Eagles of the Empire novels featuring Roman soldiers Macro and Cato, most recently TRAITORS OF ROME, THE BLOOD OF ROME, DAY OF THE CAESARS, INVICTUS and BRITANNIA, as well as HEARTS OF STONE, set in Greece during the Second World War, SWORD AND SCIMITAR, about the 1565 Siege of Malta, and a quartet about Wellington and Napoleon including the No. 1 Sunday Times bestseller THE FIELDS OF DEATH. He is the author with T. J. Andrews of the bestselling novels ARENA, INVADER and PIRATA. Find out more at http://www.simonscarrow.co.uk and on Facebook /officialsimonscarrow and Twitter @SimonScarrowHis latest book, Blackout, is available here: https://amzn.to/3sCpPHGLinks to Geraint's books are available at www.grjbooks.comAudiobooks available at: https://www.audible.co.uk/search?searchAuthor=Geraint+JonesIf you are a veteran struggling with mental health, or you just want a bit of help adjusting to civvie life, then say hello to the Royal British Legion at @royalbritishlegion or http://www.rbl.orgThank you to our sponsors! The show doesn't happen without them!Combat Fuel - www.combat-fuel.co.ukCombat Combover - www.combatcombover.comwww.theescapegames.co.uk Kamoflage Ltd - www.kamoflage.co.ukRite Flank - www.riteflank.co.ukZulu Alpha Strap Company - @zulualphastrapsFor clips and content from the show, behind the scenes, and photos and videos of the guests' time on operations, follow @veteranstateofmind on Facebook and Instagram, and go to www.vsompodcast.com for links to all the connected sites, and an online submissions form for sending in your questions to the show. Cheers!Support the show (https://www.paypal.com/donate/?token=Ea-uUc26ENbNBYWd6-2779MBUZrl6WymCW_b0GdibwrG6-xBlWcpjLS6osk9OqZFbR9wOm&country.x=GB&locale.x=GB)
An extended sample from Gez's audiobook, Legion, a historical fiction story set during the early Roman Empire.Thanks to everyone who has supported it so far. Much appreciated!Click here to hear the rest: https://www.audible.co.uk/search?searchAuthor=Geraint+JonesClick here for Gez's books: http://www.grjbooks.comWe'll be back on Monday with a Marine Corps veteran of Afghanistan.Support the show (https://www.paypal.com/donate/?token=Ea-uUc26ENbNBYWd6-2779MBUZrl6WymCW_b0GdibwrG6-xBlWcpjLS6osk9OqZFbR9wOm&country.x=GB&locale.x=GB)
Based on his new book, Simon Elliott joins us to tell the tale of Hispana IX and to try and get to the bottom of what happened to an entire formation which vanished from the historical record.
We use data to identify and solve problems all the time. In truth, this is nothing new. When wheelwrights were making wagon wheels, they paid attention to what went into a wheel that lasted longer than another. How many spokes, what kind of wood to use, and whether or not it was worth putting a metal hoop around the wheel. The Roman Legions paid attention to the most effective shield formations and used that data to build a massive empire. Farmers learned that cross-pollinating different varieties of the same plants could create whole new varieties by promoting desired characteristics. They just needed the right mix of plants and bees to help in the process. For a while now, there has been concern about the number of bees dying off around the world. Whole colonies have been collapsing. Already, the bee population has dropped sufficiently that some beekeepers are actually driving their colonies around to different farms to make sure the crops are pollinated. Given the role they play in the food chain – pollinating all sorts of flora to keep the bottom of the chain going – people have been looking feverishly to find the cause. Researchers from Penn State’s Ecology Program recently made some headway in this area. A recent study looked at the combined effect of habitat loss and a changing climate on the bee population. Habitat loss is of course fairly obvious. The more people spread out, the less room there is for a natural bee colony. Especially in the big cities where there is little grass to be had, to say nothing of the lack of forests and fields full of flowers. A changing climate is naturally more difficult to quantify as one has to take into account a number of factors such as day-to-day weather and longer term cycles that exist both in the earth’s orbit and the sun’s sunspot cycle. However, it was found that the warmer winters and increased rains in the northeastern part of the United States had a definite negative effect on the bee population. The researchers relied heavily on data from the United States Geological Survey in conjunction with spatial maps and predictive models to reach their conclusions. One of these conclusions is that different species of bees are affected by different kinds of environmental changes. One species may be heavily affected by sunlight, another by the amount of precipitation. So, what affected the bees more in general? Loss of habitat or climate? Bees are pretty adaptable as it turns out. Unless you suddenly build a massive industrial complex where there was nothing before, the bees will work around it for the most part. However, the climate is tougher for them to handle. That’s because changes in rainfall and temperature don’t just affect the bees directly, they affect their food supply. If it is hot or cold enough to knock out a weaker bee colony, it’s also bad enough to knock out a lot of the flowers they fed on. That means another colony can’t just move in and take over. There is literally nothing to take over. How will this research help us come up with solutions to the bee problem? It’s too early to say. Yet, these Penn State researchers have taken an important step in getting us to a solution. They identified the problem at hand and used data to better define it. With this new research, others can pick up the baton and keep things moving in the right direction. That’s how things get done, by collecting, refining, and analyzing the data again and again until the solution to the problem finally becomes clear. That’s why TARTLE puts so much emphasis on data privacy and sharing. In sharing our data to support important work like the above we are helping to solve problems that are bigger than any one of us, but collectively should be well within our grasp. What’s your data worth? www.tartle.co
Matt Cooper and Joel Benner continue to set the stage for the story of Caesar. Did you know the Roman Legion had a bunch of tough guys with dad-bods in their army? You do now!
Book Club is back and so is Codex Alera! We’re on the final book of this epic about Roman Legions with Pokemon fighting giant wolfmen and the Zerg. Will it be a sad goodbye or will we say good riddance to our first completed series?
The Roman Legions were the height of military professionalism of their day. How, then, was a young Roman officer able to cobble together a loose federation of lightly armed Germanic tribesmen and hand Rome one of her most disastrous defeats? All of this right under the nose of his commanding officer? Love, betrayal, fate…The Battle of Teutoburg Forest has it all, and that is why it is a battle you might not know, but should. http://battlerattlepodcast.com/
After months of reading Vegetius and learning the more subtle arts of war, we finally get to some hard tactics and formations. The Roman Legion was one of the most powerful military organizations in history; their methods of war time tested against all types of foe. While their style certainly had some flaws, there is much to be learned from it and applied to our wargaming. We finish it out with the Maxims of Vegetius as we prepare to move on to our Fiction Focus. Support our Patreon! www.patreon.com/theartofwargaming Email: artofwargamingpodcast@gmail.com Facebook: @theartofwargamingpodcast Instagram: @artofwargamingpodcast Check out more of The Art of Wargaming at www.taowargaming.com Check out more earVVyrm podcasts at www.earvvyrm.com
In our first episode, we discuss how a 4th century CE practice by the Roman Legions can help us today, plus we answer listener questions on improvised weapons, cover and concealment, and the some insight on the causes of the ammo pandemic. So, lock and load, sit back, and get ready for a great episode!It's Pearl Snap Tactical - warrior culture with a southern twang.
The ‘sacramentum militaie’ (military sacrament) was used with recruits into the Roman army who swore an oath of allegiance and received a mark (such as a tattoo or a brand) and a new name. The Roman Legions had their sacramentum, and the Church had its sacramentum. Christianity so dominated the Roman Empire that we no longer think of the military and legal meanings of sacrament for Romans. The Christians understood whose kingdom they lived in and whose kingdom they were passing through. Music recorded by St. Mark Choir pursuant to One License
Anthony Fasolo was a career officer in the US Army. In Vietnam he was placed in charge of reporting American GI's wounded, other injuries and deaths to families. He worked with the Army to assist Members of Congress, the President and relatives of US soldiers. My Vietnam Story By Anthony Fasolo(Edited December 13, 2020)The SOLDIERS of United States Army Vietnam (USARV) Casualty and Med-Evac Branch worked at Long Binh. FRIARS, LOYALS, CROWNS, PUNCHES, AND ETHERS. These are the young soldiers who typed up all the casualty reports, proofread the letters of sympathy sent by commanders to next of kin (NOK)and followed up on all army dead and wounded in Vietnam. We worked 12 hour shifts seven days a week. We were allowed a short leave period and I went to Bangkok Thailand to be with my wife who had flown there from Germany where she had been staying with our three children. Other soldiers went to Hawaii, Hong Kong or Australia, all transported at government expense. My tour in Vietnam started just before Christmas 1969. Wearing my jungle fatigues, I arrived at Cam Ranh Bay shortly after midnight aboard a World Airways commercial jet. Even though the Viet Cong had attacked this area the night before, our parked plane was illuminated by huge spotlights. Fully expecting to run to the waiting busses, I was surprised that we walked. I did take some comfort from the fact that the military busses which took us to the In-processing Center had heavy metal screened windows. This reassured me that we were in a war zone. At the In-processing Center, I learned that my orders had been changed and I was being assigned to the Headquarters of the United States Army in Vietnam (USARV). I was to continue in-processing and in the morning flown to Long Binh. We were then shown a film featuring General Westmoreland, the Commander of the U.S. Forces in Vietnam. He tried to explain to us why we were in this strange land. However, as it was 0200 and since we'd been traveling for about 15 hours, I'm not sure if any of the message got through. However, our long, surreal day/night was still not over. We were taken to a large room containing a long trough like horses drink out of. There were many spigots. A young US soldier instructed us to brush our teeth for five minutes with fluoride toothpaste. He explained that the Army wanted us to keep our teeth decay free, as there were few dentists in Vietnam. Those wearing the Army's dress green uniform were told to remove the jacket lest they get stained. I laughed to myself as I imagined the Roman Legions getting the same instructions and told to brush their teeth and being asked to remove their breastplates as they entered a Country. “Centurion Flavius take off that breast plate since you might stain it with this fluoride treatment!”. We were finally allowed to go to sleep after receiving more equipment. In the morning, the serious part started. I was flown to Long Binh, the Headquarters of the United States Army Vietnam (USARV) to begin my tour at the USARV Casualty and Medevac Branch. On my second day, I saw Bob Hope and his Christmas Show. As I viewed the very appreciative service men and women, I had the uneasy feeling that many of them would be casualties.
This week Dave, Gavin, and Andrew start a series on Partisan Prepping by talking about physical fitness and ruck marching. Intro Hello to all you patriots out there in podcast land and welcome to Episode 271 of Canadian Patriot Podcast. The number one live Podcast in Canada. Recorded Nov 16, 2020. Andrew Dave Gavin We’d love to hear your feedback about the show. Please visit canadianpatriotpodcast.com/feedback/ or email us at feedback@canadianpatriotpodcast.com A version of the show is Available on Stitcher at and iTunes http://www.stitcher.com/s?fid=77508&refid=stpr and iTunes at https://itunes.apple.com/ca/podcast/canadian-patriot-podcast/id1067964521?mt=2 We need your help! To support the show visit patreon.com/cpp and become a Patreon. You can get a better quality version of the show for just $1 per episode. Show you’re not a communist, buy a CPP T-Shirt, for just $19.99 + shipping and theft. Visit canadianpatriotpodcast.com home page and follow the link on the right. What are we drinking Andrew - Milk Chocolate Stout Gavin - Water Dave- Beer Patriot Challenge We’re asking patriots to do 5 things everyday; Exercise for at least 45 minutes Practice a skill for at least 10 minutes Read a book for at least 15 minutes Drink at least 2 liters of water Complete 1 task that will improve your life Grab the template from our website and post it in your social media Partisan Prepping 1 - Rucking What is ruck marching? Walking under a load From Go Ruck RUCK•ING [VERB] // Walking with a weighted rucksack (aka backpack). It implies action, energy, and purpose. Rucking requires strength, endurance, and character — and builds it, too. Derives from the military where soldiers had to carry their own equipment going back to at least the Roman Legion. Modern militaries use it for conditioning and training It is simple, low cost, low impact, cardio training Why ruck march? For fun and fitness 200lb man example Running at 8 km/h (7:27 pace) burns 755 calories Walking (5.5km/h) 390 calories Rucking 50% more calories. 50lb pack, 585 calories per hour Less (at least different) stress on joints 12x weight with running 3x weight with rucking/walking Build strength in your shoulders, back, and lower body It’s a good way to do cardio, low impact, still gets to target heart rate zone How to select a rucksack Factors to consider Cost Size pockets/pouches and organization Expansion and integration in to your systems Frame Internal External Padded yoke/shoulder straps Waist belt Recommendations Mystery Ranch Eberlestock Go Ruck (maybe) Tactical 3 Day Assault packs 5.11, First Tactical, etc Surplus US ALICE pack - 62L US MOLLE pack - 65L CF82 - 45L USMC FILBE - 81L How to pack your rucksack Heavy items in the middle close to the body (between the shoulder blades) Start light 10% of your body weight or less add a few lbs at a time until you reach 25% Any weight will work. Protip: start with 4l jugs of water 1L of water = 1kg/2.2lbs If you over packed dump the water on the ground, no one will be mad, and you don’t lose expensive weights Waterproof clothes (ziplock bags) Use compartments/pouches Put frequently used items at the top How to ruck A dry foot is a happy foot Good boots and (wool)socks Hydration before and during Electrolytes Food Carbs, protein, fats It is vitally important to that your spine remains neutral Squeeze the glutes and activate the posterior chain to bring the spin into neutral Balance the load between shoulder straps and waist belt Walking Technique Short steps Both feet on the ground Lean slightly forward natural/neutral arms Going up hills good foot placement Going down hill walk with a natural bend in knee, try to go slow Do not stop Do not run How long / How often Once or twice a week with light weight for 20 to 30 minutes to start Increase time or weight (while maintaining pace) It is easy to overtrain by going too heavy, too far, too fast Accessory workouts Squats Deadlifts Lunges Leg presses and curls (if you have the machines) Standards Organization Time Weight Distance US Army Expert Infantryman Badge 3h Fighting Load 70lbs (31 kg) 12 Miles (19.3 km) Canadian ForcesLFC PFS (BFT) 2h 26m Full Fighting Order 13.2kg (29 lbs)Ruck 11.3kg (/25lbs) (8 miles) 13 km CSOR Modified Ruck 2h 24m 35 kg (77 lb) rucksack,no helmet, no rifle (7.5 miles) 12 km British ArmyAnnual Fitness Test 2 hours full combat gear including SA8025 kg for infantry,20 kg for artillery, armour/cavalry, and engineers/sappers15 kg for other arms and services (8 miles) 12.9 km FM21-18 Table 3-1 Fighting Load Table 3-2 Approach March Load BFT Kit list Useful links https://www.artofmanliness.com/articles/the-benefits-of-rucking/ https://www.ruckformiles.com/guides/top-15-ruck-march-training-tips/ Ruck Programming 101 | Getting Selected | SOFLETE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPnJPbDk6DE How to Pack Your Ruck Sack Like A BOSS | Get Selected | SOFLETE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOxRh8m15po Rucking More Doesn't Mean Rucking Better | Get Selected | SOFLETE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VfZtVvdm1g Book Club November12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos Jordan Peterson December Fahrenheit 451 Ray Bradbury Shilling Buy an Official Big Luau Shirt on Amazon so we get affiliate revenue Outro Andrew - https://ragnaroktactical.ca/ Visit us at www.canadianpatriotpodcast.com We value your opinions so please visit www.canadianpatriotpodcast.com/feedback/ or email us at feedback@canadianpatriotpodcast.com and let us know what you think. Apologies to Rod Giltaca Remember “You are the True North Strong and Free”
Editor's Note: This is the second in a series of podcasts over the coming weeks promoting the Seminole Wars Foundation's virtual challenge, The Major Dade Memorial March to Fort King that launches Dec. 22. Registration to join Laumer's Legion is now open. Visit www.seminolewars.us for details. Jerry C. Morris spotted the innocuously titled newspaper notice by chance in the Nov. 20, 1988 Tampa Tribune-Times: "Historian to Lead Excursion." That historian was the late Frank Laumer and he was recruiting his legion of soldier-reenactors to recreate the march of Major Francis L. Dade's ill-fated column along the Fort King Road, from Tampa to Bushnell. The former trucker and ex-paratrooper gave it a moment's consideration and told his wife, Linda, "I think I want to do this." No longer as fit and trim as he was when he jumped out of perfectly good airplanes for the Army in 1956, nevertheless, 50-year-old Jerry signed up. At a planning meeting with the Dade Battlefield Society, the personable Jerry quickly made contacts with living historians who helped outfit him in the proper period soldier’s attire. A month later, in late December 1988, Jerry joined a group of not especially fit middle-aged men to pace the route of Major Dade’s ill-fated march of 1835. Although its composition was not exactly the size of a Roman Legion -- or even a Roman Century, for that matter -- when the trek began, the hard-physical marching soon quickly decimated the ranks hour by hour and day by day until by the time they reached Dade Battlefield Historic State Park, roughly a baker's dozen of hearty troopers remained. Among them was ...Jerry Morris, who said he really only intended to walk one day's worth (12 to 15 miles) just for the experience. But, one foot in front of the other lead to one hour after another and one day after another until five days later he found himself, to his complete surprise, finishing the 60-mile or so trek. Jerry joins us to tell us first his story of how a scrawny teenager, standing 5'9" and 119 pounds soaking wet, proved the Army doubters wrong about his capabilities and physical caliber to complete airborne training and become an elite paratrooper in the 82nd Airborne Division. Then he explains how that drive, determination, and stick-to-itiveness served him well 32 years afterward when he decided on a whim to become a soldier volunteer again, enlisting in the elite ranks of the historical-enthusiast marchers of Laumer's Legion. Jerry has remained a stalwart sentinel every since, proving himself many times to be an indispensable voice, mover, and shaker in the Seminole Wars' commemoration community to this day.Once a scrawny 5'9" 119-pound teenager, Jerry built himself into a man "built like a fireplug" (above) with paratrooper jump wings tattooed to his "slab-like" forearm, Jerry Morris set out cheerfully on a whim to march the Fort King Road with Laumer's Legion in 1988. Enraptured by Frank Laumer's captivating campside tales of Dade's men in 1835, Jerry has stayed on with the troop, remaining a stalwart sentinel in the Legion's informal ranks, ever since.In an Aug. 15, 2015 commemoration of the 1842 procession and interment of the remains of Dade's men into the St. Augustine National Cemetery at St Francis Barracks, an older Jerry Morris (above and below) rides atop a memorial caisson with funeral pall, pulled by 2 elegant mules, owned and driven here by Denise and Tom Fitzgerald.Completing the march to Fort King has been Jerry's longstanding dream ever since the 1988 march. Relying on a motor scooter for his mobility these days, Jerry even at 82 has never surrendered that desire. On Veterans Day 2020, Jerry registered formally for The Major Dade Memorial March virtual challenge so he can finally reach Fort King, 32 years after he first entered the elite ranks of Laumer's Legion. We'll hear more from Jerry in upcoming episodes about how he researched and documented the full route of the Fort King Military Road, as well as a pamphlet, An Army Moves on Its Stomach, about what soldiers ate as rations in Florida-based Army garrisons and while marching along blazed trails, such as the Fort King Military Road. Host Patrick Swan is a board member with the Seminole Wars Foundation. He is a combat veteran and of the U.S. Army, serving in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuwait, and Kosovo, and at the Pentagon after 9/11. A military historian, he holds masters degrees in Public History, Communication, and Homeland Security, and is a graduate of the US Army War College with an advanced degree in strategic studies. This podcast is recorded at the homestead of the Seminole Wars Foundation in Bushnell, Florida. Like us on Facebook, LinkedIn, and YouTube. Get the latest episode without delay where and when you want it by subscribing through your favorite podcast provider, such as iHeart, Stitcher, Spotify, DoubleTwist, Pandora, Podbean, Google podcasts, iTunes or directly from the Seminole Wars Foundation website at www.seminolewars.us
Much of the success of the Roman Legion, and by proxy the Roman State, was due to the intricate level of organization within every level of its military fighting force. On the battlefield, every individual was keenly aware of their place within the myriad clockwork of the overall strategy. No movement wasted, nothing left to chance or confusion, this was the way of Roman Warfare. In this episode, we examine the underlying structure of this legendary fighting force. Support our Patreon! www.patreon.com/theartofwargaming Email: artofwargamingpodcast@gmail.com Facebook: @theartofwargamingpodcast Instagram: @artofwargamingpodcast Check out more of The Art of Wargaming at www.taowargaming.com Check out more earVVyrm podcasts at www.earvvyrm.com
The Roman legions are the most famous fighting force of the ancient world. In this part of the podcast, we will examine how the legions of the Punic Wars were raised, organized, trained and armed. Above all, we will see how they fought. In doing so, we shall catch a glimpse of the fierce face of Roman battle.
We invited Amir Askari Yahyavi back for the epilogue of epic Rome vs Parthia battle of Carrhae: Did Roman POW end up in China? for previous episodes on battle of Carrhae with Amir EP2: Rome vs Parthia Battle of Carrhae-The Prelude with Amir Askari EP#10-Battle of Carrhae with Amir Askari Part 1 EP#11-Battle of Carrhae with Amir Askari Part 2
In Ancient Warfare Answers, Jasper (editor of Ancient Warfare Magazine) and Murray (deputy editor) tackle your questions on ancient military topics. In this episode Murray answers a question from patron Disco Shootout, if the Roman Legion was superior to the phalanx and tribal warfare like the Gauls, how could Hannibal use such inferior methods and defeat the Romans for years? If you have any questions email Jasper at editor@ancient-warfare.com
Why were the Roman Legions dominant in the western world for centuries? Why did they beat out the Greek Phalanx? What do a porcupine, a tortoise, and a greased pig have to do with any of this? Find out with Dave, Shiloh, and special guest Mike Smith for this bonus episode spanning centuries of history of the Roman Legions.
The Gallic Wars, waged between the Gallic tribes living in present-day France and Belgium and the Roman Legions under Julius Caesar, took place between the years 58 BC to 50 BC. These wars are what ultimately gave Caesar the upper hand over the Senate and his former political ally Pompey the Great, leading in turn to a civil war; the outcome of which made Caesar “dictator in perpetuity” over the entire Roman Republic. But like most conflicts throughout the ages, the Gallic Wars weren’t as straightforward as they may first appear.
This episode is brought to you by Unexplained Mysteries, a Parcast Original. For more episodes like this one, subscribe to Unexplained Mysteries on Spotify, or wherever you listen to podcasts. Julius Caesar's prized army known as the Ninth Roman Legion fought valiantly for nearly three centuries between 89 B.C.E. and 120 C.E. But after coming face to face with the Celtic tribes in Northern Britain, the Ninth took a massive hit.
This episode is brought to you by Unexplained Mysteries, a Parcast Original. For more episodes like this one, subscribe to Unexplained Mysteries on Spotify, or wherever you listen to podcasts. After the Ninth Roman Legion vanished from history sometime around 120 C.E., historians began dedicating their lives to finding out what happened to the mysterious disappearing army. But recent archeological evidence suggests that the Ninth Roman Legion appeared to live on...
Show Notes: James F. Dunnigan - https://tinyurl.com/HowToMakeWarJFD - https://tinyurl.com/ShootingBlanksJFD - https://tinyurl.com/DirtyLittleSecretsJFD Roots/Strat 1 & 4 (2&3) - https://tinyurl.com/RootsOfStrategyVol1 - https://tinyurl.com/RootsOfStrategyVol4 Field & Tech Manuals: -Hyperwar: https://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/ref/FM/index.html -BITS (https://www.bits.de/NRANEU/others/amd-us-army.htm) Units - Squad: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squad - Platoon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platoon - Company: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_(military_unit) - Battalion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battalion - Brigade: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigade - Division: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_(military) - Corps: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corps - Field Army: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_army - Roman Legion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_legion HESCO - HESCO Bastion, Ltd., 2016, Pt. 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCTnafXNGT4 - HESCO Bastion, Ltd., 2016, Pt. 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7v8do64Es4 - HESCO Assembly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1RVuGImIww - HESCO RAID 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGqIpUXJijQ - HESCO RAID 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R16lvnKBipM Marshal Vauban - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A9bastien_Le_Prestre_de_Vauban - Bastion forts/'trace italienne': https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bastion_fort --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/dark-drop-podcast/support
After the Ninth Roman Legion vanished from history sometime around 120 C.E., historians began dedicating their lives to finding out what happened to the mysterious disappearing army. But recent archeological evidence suggests that the Ninth Roman Legion appeared to live on...
Julius Caesar's prized army known as the Ninth Roman Legion fought valiantly for nearly three centuries between 89 B.C.E. and 120 C.E. But after coming face to face with the Celtic tribes in Northern Britain, the Ninth took a massive hit.
The Ninth Roman Legion existed in some form from the first century BCE until at least 120 CE. At this point, they all but disappeared from history without a trace? What happened to them? We'll tell you in this episode.
Xena and Gabby run across Caesar and Xena puts Gabby in charge of a rag tag band of troops in Xena Ep 73: A Good Day. Gabby has to manage to not kill anyone while fighting the Roman Legion and Xena sets up what is clearly a multi-hour sword fight. This weeks food fight is about stuffed peppers and rice. Mount Olympus is a product of Retrograde Orbit Radio, and is brought to you by the following Retrograde Orbit Radio players: Our Own Hercules of Radio: Brian His Faithful Sidekick: Producer Mark The Xena of Podcasts: Meg Her Devoted Partner: Lucas Find us on Facebook or Twitter @MountOlympusPod Email the show: MountOlympusPod@gmail.com Check out our website: www.retrogradeorbitradio.com
For nearly one thousand years, the world quaked at their footsteps, and the very sound of their name: The Legions. The elite troops of Rome’s formidable army, which would carve up an empire that stretched from the Highlands of Scotland to the scorching deserts of the Arabian Peninsula. They would kill and enslave millions, pillage and raze cities to the ground, and transform the mighty Mediterranean Sea into the Empire’s own private lake. The only time in human history when the whole of the Mediterranean would be under one single government was under Roman rule. The Roman Legions were such a mighty force in the world, even their own Emperors were afraid of them.
In this, the fourth podcast of the Marching With Caesar series, Ron Peake talks about the value he derived from spending time in some of the locations that feature in the Marching With Caesar series, and how he used technology to conduct a virtual reconnaissance of several key battle sites those places he couldn't visit personally. He also discusses the value of a personal guide, and some of the things he learned from his extensive time spent in Rome and Croatia.
In this episode, R.W. Peake talks about both Marching With Caesar and Caesar Ascending, where it's been and where they're headed, both in the near term and in his long term ambitions for both series. In addition, he will talk about some of the inspirations and influences for his work.
Ultimately, we’ve come to a point when we have lived at the limit of a good enough life in a broken society.We feel like I have reached the edge of the “minimum” life. People are searching for something more in every possible idea, belief, self-help book, television show, and celebrity spokespersons but we know only God can take us to the next stage in our lives.Jesus Triumphal Entry – Matthew 21When Jesus entered the city on Sunday, Palm Sunday, he was greeted by cheering crowds proclaiming Him king much to the dismay of the religious leaders, Pontius Pilot, and the 10th Roman Legion, who had taken up residence in the Antonia Fortress to control the enormous crowds that swelled the city during Passover. A time where the normal population of Jerusalem grew from 100,000 to over a million people in a matter of days. Jewish unrest was rampant during the time of Jesus with numerous radical rebellions and uprising occurring all throughout Palestine. The northern territory of Galilee, Jesus’s home, was a fountain of radical thought and revolutionary movements during this time, around 32 A.D. Jesus entering the city, on Passover, with a million frustrated Jews, and the crowds loudly proclaiming him King was more than volatileThe Jewish leaders would have been shocked and outraged at Jesus’s behavior at the temple, chasing out the money changers and the Romans were on high alert because of the events surrounding Jesus in the city.The Delegation Confronts Jesus – Matthew 21 and 22The Parable of the Wedding Feast – Matthew 22:1-14“And again Jesus spoke to them in parables, saying, 2 “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who gave a wedding feast for his son, 3 and sent his servants to call those who were invited to the wedding feast, but they would not come. 4 Again he sent other servants, saying, ‘Tell those who are invited, “See, I have prepared my dinner, my oxen and my fat calves have been slaughtered, and everything is ready. Come to the wedding feast.”’ 5 But they paid no attention and went off, one to his farm, another to his business, 6 while the rest seized his servants, treated them shamefully, and killed them. 7 The king was angry, and he sent his troops and destroyed those murderers and burned their city. 8 Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding feast is ready, but those invited were not worthy. 9 Go therefore to the main roads and invite to the wedding feast as many as you find.’ 10 And those servants went out into the roads and gathered all whom they found, both bad and good. So the wedding hall was filled with guests. 11 “But when the king came in to look at the guests, he saw there a man who had no wedding garment. 12 And he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you get in here without a wedding garment?’ And he was speechless. 13 Then the king said to the attendants, ‘Bind him hand and foot and cast him into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ 14 For many are called, but few are chosen.”The warning in these two parables is if we do not continue to cultivate Christians in the correct way based on biblical truths, the Kingdom of God will be taken away from us and given to someone else. This is regardless of how big our church may be, how many members we have, how famous we are on tv, how many books we sell, or speaking engagements we book.We are all equal in the eyes of God and the Holy Spirit and we can just as easily grieve the Holy Spirit in ways potentially detrimental to our relationship with Christ, which we will go into more detail in later discussions.Just because we stand and say, “I believe” during a church service doesn’t insure we will inherit the Kingdom of God. It is so much more in the relationship, the way we live out our lives for Christ and being present in the Holy Spirit than it is just to say a couple words and join a bible study.Why is this important as we come to the next stage in life in partnership with the Holy Spirit? We’ve discussed “where” we are. Before we discuss “how” to get there, I believe it’s important we talk about “why” first. Why Now?Revelation 7:9 (ESV)A Great Multitude from Every Nation: “After this I looked, and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands,”There are 85 verses in the Bible stating Jesus will not return again until the Word of God has reach:a) All the peoplesb) The whole worldc) Every tribe and language and people and nationd) Every kneee) Every tongueWhat is a people group?“An ethno-linguistic group with a common self-identity that is shared by the various members. For strategic purposes it is the largest group within which the Gospel can spread without encountering barriers of understanding or acceptance.”11,757 people groups (7.6 billion people)How many are unreached?7.088 unreached people groups (4.5 billion people)“A people group is considered unreached (UPG) when there is no indigenous community of believing Christians able to engage this people group with church planting. Technically speaking, the percentage of evangelical Christians in this people group is less than 2 percent.”How many are unreached unengaged?3,159 unengaged unreached people groups (238 million people)“Unreached people groups are unengaged (UUPG) when there is no church planting strategy, consistent with evangelical faith and practice, under way. Gathering believers and planting churches are the keys to establishing an effective and multiplying presence among these people groups.”Table 71 – YWAM Group. 25 ministries bringing the gospel to the remaining tongues and people group of the World. Reaching every Unengaged Unreached People Group (UUPG). The goal is to establish a strong and viable church within each of the UPGs, so that the number of UPGs is reduced to zero. By 2020, Onestory.org, will be initiating such work in more than 5,500 UPGs (unreached people groups) by the year 2020. By 2025, all of the plans to reach the UUPG’s will be submitted by the teams we saw in the video. By 2026, all of the plans will be approved and will begin implementation. Again, we ask, why now?Because the minimum requirements for the second coming will have been met, completing the prophecy that before Christ will come again every tongue and people group will have heard the word of God.Now, let me be clear, I am not prophesying that I know when and where the second coming will take place. “But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only.” – Matthew 24:36. What I am saying is boxes will all be checked, and the stage will be set for the second coming. God could choose not to come for another 500 years but the urgency remains the same.Matthew 25:14-3019 “After a long time their master returned from his trip and called them to give an account of how they had used his money.” We cannot know when but we know we have to be prepared to give an account. We can’t waste anytime in performing our duties now for when God comes again. The time is now. The urgency is now.Urgency and Immediacy just Like When John wrote the Book of Revelations“However, if we were to canvass the prophetic utterances of the Hebrew Bible and the phenomenon of prophecy within the New Testament and early Christian worship, we might instead arrive at the conclusion that, while prophecy could include a predictive element, it was primarily a declaration of God’s action in the present. In these cases, prophecy served as an announcement of God’s evaluation of the present actions of God’s people, diagnosing problems and calling for realignment with God’s values.” – https://blog.logos.com/2016/08/3-mistakes-people-make-reading-revelation/We will never know for certain if the book of Revelations actually comes true unless we are around for the events to occur or we are in heaven. What we can know for certain was the expressed urgency of the writing that mirrored the cultural context of where John was and the events that happened, precluding him to write the text with the assistance of the Holy Spirit.The sense of immediacy with which John writes made it sound like the events would occur within the current generation of peoples. However, when it did not occur because the prophecy of Revelations 7:9, which we previously discussed, had not come to pass, the Christians of the day made written copies of the manuscripts; in order to, disseminate them throughout the nations. This brings up a concept which we will talk more about in later sessions having to do with the two forms of God’s will we see in the Bible relating to The Hidden will of God and the Revealed Will of God.How do we get to the next stage in life in partnership with the Holy Spirit? Now that we’ve discussed the current cultural climate and why it’s important that we begin now, we can now discuss the how and introduce the ministry in our discussion on what we need to do.“There is the right way and then there is everything else which is inferior. Everything can be backed up and documented. You cannot do something that is new.” – Dave Berke,Dave is a retired U.S. Marine Corps officer, fighter pilot, ground combat leader. He was an F/A-18 pilot deployed twice from the USS John C Stennis in support of combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. He spent three years as an Instructor Pilot at TOPGUN where he served as the Training Officer, the senior staff pilot responsible for conduct of the TOPGUN course.We are at a pivotal moment in our world history where nearly every possible idea or iteration of an idea has already been developed or created. The same can be said about God’s word. The bible in its latest canon, is the living word of God and it is infallible. Therefore, every possible way of sharing God’s word has been conceived and performed. All of the moments in its rich history tie beautifully into the dynamics of our human history.History is commonly referred to as, God’s Story because after all, we were all created by God and I believe that all wisdom and understanding comes from Him, therefore it is His Story to us so that we may learn everything we need to know to be better men and better followers for His Kingdom.What do we have to believe?1. We believe God is the King above all kings2. We believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God3. We believe in the Holy Spirit, its power and its presence in us4. We believe in Jesus’ crucifixion on the cross5. We believe in the resurrection and that Jesus conquered death6. We believe in the Holy Spirits calling for us7. We believe He is coming back againWhat we have to avoid:We are always competing for money and market share. Enough! We aren’t competing and we are not separate. We are all part of one body of Christ. I would prefer not to use secular media as a quote for a scripture-based training program, however, in this case I found it quite fitting: “Winter is coming. We stand together or we all die” – Tyrion Lannister, Game of ThronesThe objective is to take back territory from the darkness not to squabble and fight amongst ourselves for donor bases. The sooner we all wake up to that the more equipped to tackle the real enemy we will be.We cannot be naïve to the enemy’s tacticsThree Questions:1. How do we improve the Kingdom?2. How do we improve the lives of others?3. How do we improve our own lives?When we can search for answer to these three foundational questions, we then begin to understand what is truly at stake.
In this episode, author R.W. Peake discusses the tactics and training of the Roman Legions, the sources he used for research and those maneuvers and tactics that are conjecture on his part, and how he arrived at his conclusions.
This is the first podcast by R.W. Peake, the author of the international bestselling Roman historical fiction series Marching With Caesar, and the alternative history series Caesar Ascending. In this episode, the author answers the most common questions he gets from readers concerning his research into the Legions of Rome, how his experiences as a retired Marine impacts and colors his stories, and when he makes assumptions, such as the measurement of time, how he arrived at his conclusions. He also offers a brief insight into how he made the transition from a burned out software executive to bestselling author, including the mistakes and happy accidents that happened along the way.
In this second of three special episodes, we take an in-depth look at the Roman army which fought the majority of the Punic Wars - its equipment, formations, and most importantly, the fighting ethos which animated the men within it. What was the key to the Roman's success? Superior discipline? A flexible fighting style? Not so. Although these things contributed to Roman success, it was Roman virtus balanced by disciplina which gave the legionary his edge. Want to see what the Triplex Acies looked like? Click Here for the Layman's Historian Example with 28mm Miniatures! Recommended further reading: Soldiers and Ghosts by J.E. Lendon The Complete Roman Army by Adrian Goldsworthy Legionary: The Roman Soldier's Unoffical Manual by Philip Matyszak Link to my Map of the Mediterranean World Circa 300 BC Link to the Episode 31 page on the Layman's Historian website Subscribe or leave a review on iTunes Leave a like or comment on the Facebook page Follow on Twitter. Contact me directly through email
It is well documented in history and archaeology that in AD 70 the Roman Legions under Titus & Vespasian laid siege to Jerusalem and destroyed it along with the gleaming Jewish Temple that Herod I had built on the expanded Temple Mount. In 1948 the Dead Sea scrolls were discovered in the Judean desert at Wadi Qumran near the ancient archaeological site of Qumran (believed to be the home of the Jewish sect of the Essenes). In 1952 two rolled up copper scrolls were discovered in Cave 3 at Qumran. In this episode Ted interviews Shelley Neese, a journalist who has lived and worked in Israel and is also the author of the book, "The Copper Scroll Project." Don't miss this fascinating interview to learn what the Copper Scroll is and the possibility that amazing artifacts from the Second Temple Period may be buried in the ground right at the site Qumran itself! Be sure to get Shelley's book and check out here website at http://www.shelleyneese.com/
We’re back to Butcher with Cursor’s Fury. This time it’s Roman Legions with super powers versus giant wolf-men! Will the book be as awesome as this sounds? Or will it all fall apart?
Once upon a time, there was a moment in history filled with perilous and excruciating tension as soldiers from the thirteenth Roman Legion stood massed in the bitter dark. It was as if time was starting to stand still. As just in front of them flowed a narrow stream that marked two worlds. On one side, their side, was the province of Gaul and eight years of bloody campaigning. And on the other side, the road that led to Rome. To cross it meant civil war but to not cross it meant certain death. For those were the terms handed down to their general. When we first learn how to use the I-Ching, we are advised to ask only certain questions in a particular way with a strong reverence to the divine. Because of these limitations the I-Ching rarely gets used as a tool for everyday concerns. In this way we become instruments of enlightenment but without a useful purpose. For those needing a more easily understood example: Jesus could turn water into wine, but wine does not pay a bill wanting it paid in cash. Today, when once upon a time, became the reality that is now, my earthly Chinese wife looked upon a way to get through to me because nagging doesn't work, and asked, "This government business tax that must get paid, what I-Ching hexagram does it remind you of?" I answered, "Hexagram fourty-seven." "Good! And what hexagram do you want it to be?" "I want it either to be hexagram seven or hexagram fifty. And for both having changing lines five or six, but changing line six is better." We both knew that the next question would be, "What am I going to do about it to change what I don't want to what I do want?" So I took a pen and paper and marked down the hexagrams with arrows leading from one leading to the other. And I drew a long vertical dividing line between the two: The arrows showed I had crossed my Rubicon. A new way of consulting the I-Ching revealed itself to me. A threshold had been breached. I saw the two lines that needed changing to get me what I wanted and my world of the Qian (heaven) gua quantum shifted over to the Kun (earth) gua.
The Ninth Roman Legion and its 5000 soldiers was famous across Rome in the 1st century BCE. But by 200 CE, the Ninth had vanished from nearly all historical records, and to this day no one has ever confirmed what really happened to all those men. Sponsors! Gabi - Take two minutes and see if you can save up to $865 a year on car insurance at Gabi.com/GONE. There are NO fees, NO forms, and NO spam. Grove Collaborative - Go to Grove.co/GONE to get a FREE FIVE PIECE Spring Cleaning Set from Mrs. Meyer’s and Grove!
The Roman Legion and U.S. military are compared through the act of conquest, use and organization of professional armies, and the ability to rise to power through military success
Today, we will follow two significant battles of the ancient world, Red Cliffs, fought on the Yangtze River and the Battle of Teutoburg Forest, fought between Germanic tribes and three Roman Legions. Find out who wins this fight between contestants in the Battles Bracket.Support the show (http://www.battlegroundhistory.com)
The Roman Legions in the 1st century BC. Battles of Masada and Alesia. Siege equipment. Caesar's tactics of patience and countermoves.
“What Not to Wear” Preached by William E. Green at Foundry United Methodist Church (Washington, D.C.) August 26th, 2018 Y’all! Isn’t it good to be the church this morning?! After a week of—well, the sadly routine—what a gift we have been given in this space, to come and gather and remember and celebrate and reclaim and proclaim the Gospel, the Good News, of God’s all-saving love and ever-present grace. You know, it’s good to be the church this morning, as we gather around two baptismal candidates and conclude our Art of Music Ministry series where we’ve been so blessed by our outstanding Music Department under the leadership of Stanley Thurston and, today, Paul Heins? Now, if you’ve come today for fashion forward advice for the modern Christian, as some have implied my sermon title might suggest, let me apologize now. I will never be known for my fabulous heels, like Pastor Ginger or our faithful sign-language interpreter Michael. The closest I got to well-dressed was when my mother and grandmother tricked me into a plaid sportcoat and wingtips for my fifth Easter—something for which, when I want to give my grandmother a hard time, made coming out 15 years later unavoidable. Instead, today, I want to spend my time with you today asking this question: if we are to be about the work of Kin-dom of God and to proclaim the Gospel of Christ in sustained, transformational ways—think, “Love God, Love Each Other, Change the World,”—what must we first let go of, shed, or empty out of our spiritual wardrobe? In other words, what’s NOT to wear? Let us pray: How lovely is your dwelling place, O LORD of Hosts! For indeed we are a people who wander in a weary land. We are overcome by anxiety. We are beset by stress. We are broken apart by the ever-present raging of the powers and principalities of this world. Yet here you remind us that you have not left us. Here your word is proclaimed and your Spirit made known. Here we find embodied among these with whom we gather the hope of the beloved community--from which all strength, love, and hope flows. Send your spirit then, O God, to renew the face of the earth and hearts of your people. Through the proclamation of your Word this day might we open ourselves once more the wonders of your love, be transformed in its hearing for your work in the world, and be emboldened in our witness to make known the mysteries of your Gospel. And now, O God, I am your servant. Whether through me or in spite of me, may your Word come alive in this place. Speak, O Lord, for your servants are listening. Amen. Introduction The Letter to the Ephesians, as we learned last week, is not a traditional epistle written to address a specific concern, problem, or challenge within a particular Christian context—think the Philippian, Roman, or Corinthian epistles. Rather, its more likely intention is establishing among the churches of Asia Minor a shared theological identity. An orthodoxy from which they could draw strength, understand their purpose, and collaborate in ways which furthered the Gospel. This purpose is evidenced though out the letter, who’s first chapters focus on the unity of the body of Christ and assert the universally salvific—meaning salvation for all people—nature of Christ’s action in the world, as well as the work of Christ to unite people for the common cause of the Gospel. There are astonishing assertions here, especially in an era of increased tribalism and deep economic and political division—not that we D.C. folk know anything about that, right— that the whole world, not just the Roman empire, Gentiles, or Jews, have been saved by Christ and for relationship with one another, created anew with a common purpose, and chosen by God to serve in union with Christ in the proclamation of the Gospel. But then we hit our reading from today. This passage we’ve read enjoys what prolific preacher-teacher Fred Craddock calls the power of the familiar. The armor of God. A elementary Sunday School teacher’s best friend to corral kids with an easy craft and quick connection to the Superhero du jour. Sadly, if you grew up in small-town Vacation Bible Schools like I did, that familiarity might require a trigger warning. Any skepticism you feel is not unfounded, not in a world where multi-million dollar military parades—almost, amen— the violent colonization of communities through gentrification—dressed in battle gear and carrying automatic weapons—which criminalizes color and values ones views of the city over the lives of ones neighbors, and the militarization of our borders which has resulted in the dismantling of the families—the opposite, I’d say, of protecting family values—and the deaths of millions necessarily demands our interrogation of a text which calls upon us to wear armor of any kind. Armed to What End? So before we can continue, we have to ask to what end we supposed to arm ourselves. Because to focus only on the author’s admonition to wear the “whole armor of God”[1] is to miss the point the author is trying to make. That is, that the simple assertion of the Gospel and it’s expected outcomes in the lives of the believer is not in and of itself the accomplishment of that Gospel. In other words, it’s not just enough to talk about it—it being the Gospel of Jesus Christ or its implications for the work of justice and sacred community—or for us as individuals to conform to it. Because, by virtue of its proclamation and manifestation in us, it will necessarily invite the opposition of the forces and realities which it threatens. Before we even get to the armor itself, Scripture says, “…our struggle is not against enemies of blood and flesh, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers of this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places…”[2] Thus all those amazing claims about God’s work in us in the world do not mean we’ve got it made. Indeed, the transformation of the world and the lives of the church through Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection is the very nature of sacred resistance—that is, as defined in Pastor Ginger’s book Sacred Resistance: “…any word, deed, or stance, that actively counters the forces of hatred, cruelty, selfishness, greed, dehumanization, desolation, and disintegration in God’s beloved world.”[3] and invites rebuke and retribution from that which we are resisting, in this case not individuals, but rather the systems, cycles, and injustices which pervade our lives and the world. And let’s be clear, this is not about getting shouted at during a protest. It IS about the systematic ways that evil functions in our society—both consciously through the powers of empire and economy—and subconsciously through our own privilege to tear down and tear apart any perceived threat to its reign. These are the cosmic powers of institutional racism that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. sacrificed his life to challenge and on whose altar we are still sacrificing black and brown bodies every day. The spiritual forces of that evil called homophobia that faithful folk must still fight daily in our own United Methodist Churches. Forces which have locked our denomination in a 40 year battle questioning the call of Christ on the lives of faithful queer folxs to faithful participate in the church—an question, by the way, answered by Jesus’s matchless grace and love long before we even thought to ask it. This is the tyranny of the rulers of this age who foster war between us—battles of identity politics and partisan saber rattling—dividing us from one another because they know when we’re divided from one another we lack the strength to stand up against them. To this end, then, faithful discipleship—in addition to God’s faithfulness and work in our lives and our faithful response through transformed living—is for the author of the Ephesians means being prepared for and ready to participate in what Pierre Teilhard de Chardin called “the slow work of God.”[4] The work of showing up and sustaining our witness against the ranting and raving of empirical powers and tyrannical tweets which would erase our witness and con us into believing that truth is not always truth. The command to take up the whole armor of God is reminder that discipleship means being in it for the long-haul, and that God gives us what we need to sustain us in our witness and strengthen us in our resolve. More importantly, it’s a call to shed ourselves of any lingering savior complexes which plague us so that we might be free for joy even in the face of adversity. Those things against which we fight—spiritual forces and cosmic powers—have already been conquered through the loving action of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection. As we read earlier in Ephesians: “But God, who is rich in mercy, out of the great love with which God loved us… made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved—so that in the ages to come God might show the immeasurable riches of God’s grace.”[5] This is an important reminder, perhaps the most important for us that we have not be saved for ourselves OR called to action only in a particular moment—be it one of political turmoil or denominational dis-ease—but are rather together caught up in the ways that God is daily saving us and the world. III. We Are What We Wear… So, about this armor, huh? So let’s pause here for a second and turn to the field of social psychology. A little lighter fare for a hot minute. While I was researching my sermon and trying NOT to use it as an excuse to watch Queer Eye—a new Netflix re-make of the similarly named Queer Eye for the Straight Guy—I ran across a theory developed by two Northwestern professors called “en-clothed cognition.” They argue that the clothes we wear distinctly impact not just OTHER’S perceptions of us, but our own psychology and sense of self. And that doesn’t seem too crazy, does it? Think about it for a moment. Those ‘magical’ lucky jeans that give us the extra boldness we’re lacking. A particular tie or set of heels we wear because we feel just that much more confident when we see ourselves in the mirror. That comfortable, well-worn hoodie who’s warm embrace calms our most anxious moments. Science actually suggests that these things we wear make a difference and that our awareness of that opens up a whole new way for us to to be our best and most true selves. In a manner, then, it’s true that we are not only what we imbibe but what we wear. I can’t help but wonder if the author of Ephesians knew a thing or two en-clothed cognition. The appeal to military garb common among the Roman Legions makes a lot of sense. Generally speaking, the reader would have associated someone wearing armor with a well-organized, unified and prepared body of people prepared to confront any onslaught—like the author says Christians must be. In a sense, they were forerunners of peace, associated with the spread and defense of the Pax Romana, the Roman Peace, that was associated with the growth of the empire (neveryoumind such peace was mostly reserved for Roman citizens in good standing). Proclaimers of a different kind of peace, let’s say. It’s actually a quite beautiful metaphor. It simultaneously draws on images that embody the author’s call for early Christians to maintain unity amid diversity, admonitions to stand firm in their conviction and belief, and responsibility for proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ—-while also subtly co-opting weapons of war that were used to subjugate anyone who dared anger empire and to defend a false—i.e. Caesar’s—peace. However, it’s quickly clear that the armor of God ain’t the armor of Caesar. It’s parts are for the protection of the body as they together—the repeated directives, though using the word “you” would be better read “y’all”—proclaim of Gospel of REAL peace through which God desire to heal and unify a broken world. A gospel in which all have a place and because of which transformation of heart and life is possible. What’s important here, of course, is not that we imagine putting on breastplates and helmets before venturing into the world—no matter what VBS might have told you—but rather that if we are to be sustained and faithful in our witness we must have in our spiritual wardrobe the kinds of “armor”—practices, communities, commitments, and values—which keep us rooted in our identity as those whom God calls beloved, sustained in our knowledge that God’s got our back and that it’s in God’s strength we live, and move, and have our being, and grounded in what matters so that we can lay down and let go of what does not. Putting on the “whole armor of God” has never then been so much about going to war, there’s no “onward Christian soldiers” here. But so that we might, as the author says “be strong in the Lord and the strength of God’s power…,”[6] so that we might “stand” and “withstand” the inevitably weariness and jadedness and unbelief that comes from doing the work day in and day out and feeling like nothing’s going to change. So that we can continue to show up, engaging in that ministry of presence that T.C. so often talks about and faithfully lives, a reminder that our work in the world, our witness to God’s goodness and light is often less about what our protest signs say or which rally we attend or what legislation we write or pass and much more, much more about the ways our personal relationships and faithfulness under fire point to the inevitable triumph of Gods grace, mercy, and light. A more modern “armor,” then, might include the raised fist of resistance and the open hand of peace modeled in our new “Sacred Resistance banner—a sign of solidarity and a commitment to the radical hospitality through which all people find their place at God’s table. Perhaps the silenced cellphone of real presence, a commitment made to not simply show up but to be fully present to those we encounter. Possibly holy habit of weekly sabbath—something with which I still daily struggle—in which we take in the beauty of the world and give thanks to God, as we began our time today doing, for the wonders of God’s love and grace even in the midst of a messy world. Whether the armor you need for the living of these days involves some old school Roman armaments or a comfortable pair shoes and an on-point printed tee (FILL IN HERE) What’s in YOUR Wardrobe? But of course, putting something on requires, at the least, choosing not to wear something else, if not taking something off. Several weeks ago Jack and I traveled with two of our friends to Vancouver, British Columbia. During a stretch of switchbacks on a 12 mile hike, I was surprised that while we’d donned hiking shorts and opted for a small bag with bottles of water, we passed scores of folks carrying what looked like mini-fridges complete with bluetooth speakers and all other manner of electronic accoutrement worn precariously via backpacks and straps to their person, even someone pushing a kayak on a wheelbarrow. What became abundantly clear is that there were plenty of people who were unable to see the beauty unfolding them—or to be present to their experience with others—because they hadn’t first to ask what NOT to wear. So then, I return to the question I asked at the beginning of my time with you. What have we been wearing on this journey of discipleship, need to change out of so we can change into the armor of God, that is the practices, values, relationships, and commitments which ground us in God’s love and help us to stand firm as we proclaim the Gospel? Where have we wrapped ourselves in self-righteousness, not only protecting ourselves from the people and things that cause us pain, but keeping out the experiences, stories, and relations with those that—though we might not agree with—are nonetheless as much a part of God’s beloved family as you or I? Where have donned our anger and frustration like a Sunday church hat, proudly proclaiming to all who will hear it the point of our discontent without care for who it will hurt or how it will affect the communities we call our own? Where have we shod our feet with the clunky-soled weight of our fear, allowing ourselves to grow comfortable in our complacency rather than daring to dream bigger dreams? When have we allowed our relationships, worn threadbare by old wounds and long-held grudges, to wither and fade rather than confront our complicity in their brokenness and work toward healing? Perhaps, perhaps, the invitation to take upon ourselves the whole armor of God is also the invitation to take off, put down, free ourselves from the attitudes, places, and relationships that have bound our confidence, drained our energy, and kept us from living fully in to the life God has created us for. Conclusion Helmet of righteousness or silenced cellphone of real presence, we conclude any encounter with this text certain of two things. First, how we prepare ourselves for this journey we’ve been called to matters. For the living of these days and in the face of all that lies ahead of us—called General Conferences and mid-term elections and the weight of another year with it’s uncertainties and unknowns—we cannot expect the proclaim “with boldness the mystery of Gospel” without the proper wardrobe. So, then, knowing the journey isn’t over take the time to get some shopping done now. Pick out a pair of spiritual practices or two that keep you grounded every day. Try a bible study or small group on for size and build the kind of intentional community through which we find strength and accountability for our faith journeys. Slip into a new volunteer opportunity and see how it feels—whether it’s youth week or Great Day of Service or our growing opportunities for pastoral care and visitation. And most importantly of all, this work we’re called to, and for which we’ve been thus equipped, is one we do not labor in alone. Remember, we do this thing in community. No resistance undertaken on our own is sustainable, and we need one another for the living of these days. And God is faithful. God is faithful, friends! ………………… (AD LIB) [1] Ephesians 6:11; 6:13 [2] Ephesians 6:12 [3] Ginger Gaines-Cirelli, Sacred Resistance, pg. 1 [4] Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Patient Trust [5]Ephesians 2:4, 8 [6] Ephesians 6:10
A Crystal Message about the Healing Properties of Golden Tiger's Eye: "I am motivated by my divine purpose and I manifest your vision with ease." Common Healing Properties of Golden Tiger's Eye: Enhances grounding Increases psychic skills Encourages the rising of the kundalini through the chakras Promotes energetic protection Stimulates compassion Aids you in sorting through details and completing tedious tasks Helps you pull together many details in order to make sense of a whole Aids in removing negative habits Instills self-confidence and inner-strength - a personal empowerment stone Promotes equality and integrity Stabilizes energy Banishes depression Heals the eyes Balances disorders of the reproductive system Aids in the energetic healing of broken bones Helps you succeed on tests and exams Encourages success in business meetings Colors: Bands of shimmering gold, brown, bronze, and gray/black Associated Chakras: 2nd (Sacral Chakra) or 3rd (Solar Plexus Chakra) Zodiac Signs: Virgo, Leo Elements: Air, Earth Companion Flowers: Yellow Coneflower Companion Essential Oil: Sunflower Companion Stone: Rainforest Jasper Common Origins: South Africa, Australia Wanna’ Get Science-y? Click Here to get information about the chemical composition, hardness, streak, etc. of this crystal from one of my favorite sites! /* More About Golden Tiger's Eye: Tiger’s eye is a form of quartz in which the SiO2 crystals have grown together with asbestos fibers, giving it a distinctive silky sheen. We’ll talk here about the basic golden form, but there are several related stones: Tiger’s eye is a great stone for putting “pedal to the metal,” taking charge of what you want and bringing it into reality. It’s also a traditional stone for warding off the evil eye. Since it contains asbestos, please don’t use it for elixirs. Tiger's Eye Lore: The association between “The Eye of the Tiger” and bravery didn’t start with Survivor’s song or Stallone’s movies. It goes back at least as far as the Roman Legion, where soldiers wore tiger’s eye jewelry into battle for protection and courage. But this wasn’t its only use, even then. Divination was very popular in Rome, and soldiers in the field could use tiger’s eye as a quick method to gain insight and clarity — and, of course, a soldier often doesn’t have time to wait. Military men also used this stone as an early warning to detect potential deception. Tiger’s eye contains luminous layers of asbestos within a quartz matrix, forming complex but regular patterns, making it excellent for scrying. The directionality of these pieces has a magic to it as well; the pyramid pictured here would be great for channeling universal energy! There’s much more to tiger’s eye than just “the thrill of the fight.” (And now I’m going to have that song in my head for the rest of the day…). Learn to use crystals with POWERFUL Crystal Affirmations! YES PLEASE! SIGN ME UP
George Washington needed good news. After the failure of the Harmar and St. Clair expeditions, Anthony Wayne was convinced to return to the Army. A veteran of the American Revolution, for two years Wayne recruited and drilled a unique formation - the American Legion. Inspired by the Roman Legions of old, this combined arms unit was seen as the Washington administration's best hope for success. This episode introduces Wayne's labors in building a force that could secure the Northwest Frontier for the new Republic. Have a question, comment, or compliment, contact us at americawarpodcast@gmail.com. You can also leave comments and your questions on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/americaatwarpodcast/. Leave your questions on voicemail at (253) 642-6535. Thanks for listening!
The Roman Legion used the sword, shield and discipline to turn the roman farmer into perhaps the best soldier of the ancient world
Jason and Paul stayed a few seconds too long in the mysterious time portal, but are finally back to discuss the episode "The Eaters of Light." The Doctor, Bill, and Nardole have gone back in time to discover what really happened to the 9th Roman Legion, but something alien is waiting for them! In this episode, get ready to grow up, fight monsters, make popcorn, and avoid death by Scotland!
As Jason and Paul gear up for their Master story reviews, they make one last stop with Patrick Troughton's Second Doctor! (Okay, so this is technically a two part visit.) "The War Games" is the long and dense final story of the Second Doctor's run and it features a dastardly evil Time Lord known as the War Chief. (Although they like to believe that he has a hidden name we've all heard before.) Join your hosts for the first part of the second Doctor's swan song and make sure you aren't being chased by any Roman Legions!
Essentially there are 3 main ways in which finances can be raised with which to use for war: Taxation, raising debt, or simply printing and creating new money. The Romans (among others of course) took a taxation route. It was from around 100 BCE that Roman Legions divided into 10 cohorts of around 400-500 men each. That's 4,000 to 5,000 men in a Legion. Let's assume it was the upper 5,000 figure as there were also some legions with 5,500 men, so we'll average at 5000. In 167 BCE there were 8 of these legions, but by 50 BCE this had almost doubled to 15 - a total of around 75,000 men... Dur: 21mins File: .mp3
This is Bags of Action. The podcast devoted to action movies, both old and new, but all of them are awesome! In this episode Steve and Pete wrap up their Cusack-attack, their trilogy dedicated to John Cusack. You, faithful listeners, voted for this choice on the Facebook group, so we picked Dragon Blade. This is a martial arts, action film, starring Jackie Chan, John Cusack and Adrian Brody. It's a story set in 50Bc featuring a missing Roman Legion and many tribes from the East. Next month we start a whole new trilogy, but you'll have to listen to the end to find out who is the star. To talk about this episode and any other episode you can visit the Bags of Action Facebook group here - Facebook Group . If you would like to get in touch with the show you can follow us on Twitter @BagsofAction or you can email us at bagsofaction [at] gmail [dot] com or you could leave us a review on iTunes. If you enjoy this podcast or any of the others on the Geek Syndicate network then you can support the show by contributing to Geek Syndicate on Patreon
When you need to impress people with the size and power of your empire, the easiest way to do it is to organize your forces along the lines of a Roman Legion. In this episode of GM Word of the Week you’ll find out a bit about the history of Rome, how the legion developed and one or two other uses of the word. Afterwards, feel free to unleash your own legions on your players.
Somewhere between 100 to 120 AD the 9th Roman legion disappeared from the record books. Were they disbanded, defeated in a fierce battle (if so which one), or absorbed into another legion?
After a party of Roman soldiers devastated her family the Iceni Queen Boudica staged the largest rebellion in the history of the empire. With vengeance in her heart and a nation at her back Boudica ransacked, pillaged, and plundered her way to victory in Roman Britain. Although there were four Roman Legions nearby, Boudica and her British warriors reduced Caesar’s occupation of Britain to ashes. Just as suddenly as it began however Boudica’s rebellion collapsed when the Roman General Paulinus defeated her army of over 200,000 warriors at the Battle of Watling Street. On this episode we discuss Boudica, Warrior Queen of Britain.
Astronomer Alan Smale spends his days at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center exploring celestial objects, but he's also the author of Clash of Eagles, an alternate-history novel in which a Roman Legion invades North America
7 years ago when Beijing staged the Opening Ceremony of the 29th Olympic Games, I was moved to tears thinking this grand event could be an opportunity for the world to understand the friendly Chinese people and their culture. Now seven years later, Chinese historical action film "Dragon Blade" also calls for understanding and friendship in the same spirit, it made my eyes moist again, but failed to create the same emotional ripples that resonated in my heart 7 years ago.Hong Kong director Daniel Lee's "Dragon Blade" stars Jackie Chan and tells the story of a Roman Legion that found its way to the northwest border region of the Han Empire. Roman general Lucius, played by John Cusack, clashes with Jackie Chan's character Huo An, a commander of a Silk Road Protection Squad. Circumstances push the two sides to a truce, before both sides face annihilation by the usurping Roman Emperor Tiberius and his overwhelming expedition troops.Director Daniel Lee is most commonly known for the chic, UFO-shaped helmets in his historical films. According to some Chinese critics, this excess of originality amounts to a lack of respect for history. The mistake regarding the location of Yumenguan, or the Wild Geese Gate, in "Dragon Blade" suggests he is not very well informed about China, although he does show some knowledge regarding Western culture. His 2011 movie "White Vengeance" was a Gothic retelling about the life of first Han Dynasty Emperor Liu Bang, which bore much resemblance to the Shakespearean story of King Lear. In "Dragon Blade", he's done a good job highlighting the engineering prowess of the Roman Legionaries and offers remarkable display of the Roman shield wall technique.The visual aspect of "Dragon Blade" exceeds the standard of a Chinese blockbuster production, and the story would have developed smoothly, had Daniel Lee been able to rein in the ill-placed enthusiasm of producer Jackie Chan. Over his entire career, the Hong Kong martial artist has built and maintained an upright profile with consistency and resolve, and lately he has developed a habit of using movies as a venue for expression. Of course movies, like other art forms, are a body of expression by nature, but among all the media available to filmmakers' discretion, putting ideas in an actor's mouth is perhaps the laziest and most awkward choice, albeit the most explicit.In "Dragon Blade", Jackie Chan takes upon his character to voice his longings for peace and mutual understanding. His wishes are not unwelcome in the wake of recent unrest in Northwest China where the story is set. But time and time again, he interrupts the pace of the film with empty speeches without actually reaching the audience. In fact, the 7-year-old actor Jozef Waite has better chance of winning people's heart with a touching song than Chan's sincere words.So, now comparing the similar emotional encounters, I recognise the changes in my own thinking over the years. No longer the innocent idealist who thought the simplest manifest of good will was enough to deserve a good turn, now I've realised that action speaks louder than words and nothing promotes mutual understanding better than common interest. The most effective way to foster understanding and promote stability in the border region is to bring prosperity to the locals, and to achieve that we'll have to rely more on investment in the "Silk Road Economic Belt" project than on Jackie Chan's honourable persistence in the movie industry. Anyone can be a willing member of the Silk Road Protection Squad if they have a stake in the joint venture.
Week 6 at the Barn in our series on the Full Armor of God (Ephesians 6:10-20). This week: Faith and Friendship, two things that "go great together." Have you taken up the shield of faith? Are you a friend, and do you have friends that shield one another? "Testudo!" the Roman Legion's call for a tightly compacted, shoulder to shoulder, shield to shield formation to provide "group defense" against flaming arrows is something we should pray for AND work for in our lives.
The story of the Ninth Legion is a favorite among history fans who love a good mystery. But is there really any mystery here, or is the story of their fate more mundane? Read the show notes here. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://news.iheart.com/podcast-advertisers
A day late and a dollar short, but here’s the return of Andrew for another fantasy series run-down. In this case: Codex Alera by Jim Butcher. This one comes with its very own drinking game: whenever we mention another franchise...Read more
Introduction In so many ways, I am in awe of Jesus Christ, He just takes my breath away. The things that He does are astonishing, and we know of his mighty miracles. We know He spoke to the wind and the waves, and they were completely still, and we know how He raised his friend Lazarus from the dead, dead though he was four days, yet that word of power that he was able to speak. But what takes my breath away in this passage is the perfection of his teaching. He's the greatest teacher that ever lived. John Calvin in his commentary, the preface to his commentary to Romans, said that what he was seeking was loosed brevity, in other words, clarity and brief-ness, to coin a phrase, that everything should be made as Albert Einstein said, as simple as possible, and not simpler. Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg address was able, somehow, to capture what was being fought over in the Civil War better than anyone that had ever seen it up to that point, and he did it in 271 words. He was able to capture what was going on, that there was a test of our governmental system going on and that was what was at stake. The apostle Paul in his preaching asked the Colossians church to pray that he would make it clear as he should. But none of these teachers have compared to Jesus Christ who, in 17 words in the Greek language encapsulates all of human history in a homely, home-maker parable in which a woman is baking bread. Seventeen words, and He gets all of human history together. Not only that, but He gets my history as well, what's happened in my life since the time I heard and believed the gospel. He's got the two together, both the individual and the global in one little homely kitchen parable. Only Jesus could do that. "The Kingdom of Heaven is like yeast that a woman took and hid in a large amount of flour until it permeated the whole lump." There it is. There's human history. It doesn't sound like it to me. We must come like spiritual beggars and humble ourselves and say, "Lord, Jesus what does it mean?" The parable of the mustard seed, the parable of the yeast, how can we understand these things? Once the spirit has come and has opened our eyes, we are in a great position to understand better than any generation that has ever lived because we have seen the fulfillment of these two parables over the last 2000 years, then at last we can wonder and be amazed at the teacher who sits before us, and instructs us on world history. The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and planted in his garden, though it is the smallest of all your seeds, yet, when it grows, it becomes the largest of garden plants and the birds of the air, come and nest in its branches. The kingdom of heaven is like a little amount of yeast that a woman took and mixed or hid into a large amount of flour until it worked all through the dough. All of human history and my personal history too, wrapped up in these two little parables. Two Parables: One Message: The Kingdom Grows The one message of the two parables is that the Kingdom starts small, and grows huge, as a matter of fact, dominates in the end. That's what they mean together. The mustard seed is a proverb. The Jewish people knew that the mustard seed was proverbial for something small. "If you have faith as small as a mustard seed," Jesus said, "You can say to this mountain, move from here to there, and it'll move." Jesus Himself said, "Though, it is the smallest of all your seeds." The point is, it was the smallest of the seeds that they used to plant in the garden; all the others were larger, significantly larger, and yet, this one grows to dominate in an impressive way. Within that seed is the genetic code for explosive growth. God ordained seeds from the very beginning in Genesis 1, there would be seed-bearing trees, fruit with seed in it, animals would have seed, we would have seed, there was an explosion of growth. “Fill the earth, subdue it, rule over it, populate it.” All of it built into the seed, the genetic code only recently being understood, and we'll never finally understand it. So, it was with Jesus, what they call this one solitary life, within his life, within his example, and within his teaching and even more, in His sacrificial bloody death on the cross, and His resurrection, there in seed form is the Kingdom of Heaven. With the proclamation of that life and that death and that resurrection comes a kingdom which will someday conquer the world. In the end, it's the largest of all your garden plants, and it becomes a tree so that the birds of the air can come and take rest in its branches. The Kingdom starts small, seemingly from nothing and grows to an imposing height. Now, the leaven. The leaven starts small in one corner and it comes to final and total complete permeation. Leaven, or yeast, is frequently seen to be a symbol of evil. Jesus said in Matthew 16:6, "Be careful, be on your guard against the Yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” By that He meant their bad teaching, their false teachings, be careful about it. But actually yeast is not necessarily a symbol of evil, it's really a symbol of permeation, a symbol of spreading, many times, connected to something evil as Paul does in Galatians 5:9, "A little yeast works through the whole batch of dough," meaning you get this bad idea, of legalism and circumcision, it's going to affect your whole faith, it's going to affect everything. It really is a picture of permeation. In the Old Testament, bread with yeast included in it was part of the Levitical offering in Leviticus 7. Yeast is not intrinsically evil. To me, the parable proves it, the Kingdom of Heaven, is like yeast, therefore it can't be evil because the king heaven is good, and therefore, if it's like yeast, then the yeast is not intrinsically evil. The issue is spreading, it's permeation really in a kind of a hidden sort of way. Yeast is a one-celled fungus that connects and bumps into other things and starts to generate carbon dioxide gas and ultimately alcohol if it's left long enough. That's fermentation and it just spreads through one side of the lump. Jesus is lavish in his picture here. The housewife took and mixed this little amount of yeast, just hid it in the corner and just let it do its work. How much is 40 liters? Imagine 22 liters bottles of flour poured into a big vat and mixed up, and a pinch of yeast from the last leaven lump put it in and pretty soon the entire lump has risen, it's permeated. It's a picture of permeation. The central lesson of both these parables, is growth from small and insignificant to imposing and dominant. Why two parables? What's going on? What does the one teach that is different than the other? I think that one teaches a showy display of constant progress. You can look and see it growing. You can come in the garden and you can look and it's six inches tall, then it's a foot tall and pretty soon it's five feet tall and it just keeps growing. You can see its progress. In the end, it's very big and imposing all over the place. The other is a hidden internal mysterious growth. A permeation really that just kind of spreads. You don't really know what's going on and the true story is really quite hidden, and you can't see much evidence of the permeation. The two parables together give the whole picture of the growth of the kingdom of heaven. In one sense, it can be marked and measured. We can see milestones along the way. In another sense its internal, hidden and mysterious and will only be fully understood at the end. That's how I understand in a big picture these two parables. Let's try to get in and see what's really going on. The parables would have been in their key message a shock to the Jews. Why? They were expecting a big glorious kingdom. They just didn't expect to have to wait for it like this. They didn't expect a humble, despicable, lowly start to that kingdom, and they didn't expect that it would be internal and spiritual. They will really be kind of shocked and stunned at the kingdom that Jesus is preaching here. They expected world domination, and they had reasons for it. There were prophecies, for example, like the one in the book of Daniel. There's a huge statue that represents all these Gentile kingdoms — the head of gold, and the chest and arms of silver, and the belly and the thighs of bronze, and legs of iron and then the feet of partly iron, partly clay. The whole statute that Nebuchadnezzar dreamed about represents human history; it represents all of these Gentile kingdoms. Suddenly there's a stone cut out, but not by human hands, and it flies through the air and strikes the statue at the feet and they crumble. They just chaff on the threshing floor, and a wind blows them away, but the stone cut out but not by human hands grows until it becomes an impressive kingdom that takes over everything. "In the time of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed nor will it be left to another people, it will crush all those kingdoms [all those Gentile kingdoms]. We understand clearly, "It will crush all those kingdoms, and bring them to an end but it will itself endure forever.” This is the meaning of the vision of the rock cut out of the mountain but not by human hands." They expected a Jewish world-wide kingdom in which the Son of David would sit on the throne and all of the Gentile enemies would come and basically lick the dust at their feet. That's going to be exciting and enjoyable when you are a first-century Jew and you're licking the dust of the Roman Centurions feet and hating every minute: You feel like you're in your Promised Land, why should you have to pay taxes? Why should you have to bow down to these tax collectors? Why should you have to follow rules and regulations made by an emperor who's never been here. This was their land, given to them by God. But there are prophecies that someday the Gentiles will come and lick the dust at the feet of the Son of David. It said, “lick the dust.” It was a big theme in Jewish prophecy. For example, in Psalm 72 written by King Solomon, speaking of the Son of David, this king, this Messiah, "In his day, the righteous will flourish, prosperity will bound till the moon is no more. He will rule from sea to sea and from the river to the ends of the earth. The desert tribes will bow before Him and His enemies will lick the dust." There it is, Psalm 72:9, "The kings of Tarshish and of distant shores will bring tribute to him, the kings of Sheba and Seba will present him gifts, all kings will bow down to him and all nations will serve him." They were ready for that; they were ready for an impressive worldwide dominating kingdom in which the Gentiles would come and lick the dust. They were ready for another prophecy too. Zechariah 8:23, "This is what the Lord Almighty says, in those days, ten men from all languages, and nations will take firm hold, of one Jew, by the hem of His robe and say, ‘Let us go with you because we've heard that God is with you.’” Oh, they were looking forward to that, too. They were looking forward to being part of that Messianic Kingdom and it was going to be impressive with world domination. They were so weary of the Assyrians, and the Babylonians and the Persians, and the Medes, and the Greeks and the Romans whoever comes next, weary of it, they wanted a king. They were ready of a king, but they weren’t ready for the kingdom that He was living and proclaiming, they weren't ready for that. They were wondering when Jesus began to preach, "Repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand," wondered if the time had come, especially intrigued by his miracles. Now, that was never really, I think, in their mind, that the King would be a miracle worker for David and Solomon never did that. So that's an enhancement. But we're troubled by the way He's living His life; we're troubled by the Kingdom. It's so quiet, it's so humble, He gets along too well with the Romans. This is not what we had in mind. He was even healing one of their centurion servants, what is going on here? He's not quarreling and crying out in the street and rabble-rousing and getting an army together, he's not doing what they expected. He spoke of redeeming Gentiles, not of destroying them. Because of the mysteries of the kingdom, that's why He told these parables, that they would understand the kingdom isn't like what they thought. It's going to start small, and even contemptible, in some ways it's going to be repugnant. Christ was born of humble origins, born as a baby, raised in a rejected part of Israel in Nazareth: "Can anything good come from Nazareth?" said the Jews. He wasn't trained in the halls of power; He wasn't instructed in Jerusalem by the Pharisees and the best teachers. He was of a humble origin and He carried on a confusing ministry. He challenged people, "Follow me and let the dead bury their own dead, follow me and you may not know where you're going to lay your head tonight, follow me and your parents will reject you or your children and you may die." They didn't understand this, this didn't make any sense. Even worse He was clearly on the outs with the Jewish leaders, rejected by them. They hated him, and they it seemed were plotting against him. They had already decreed that anybody who claimed that he was the Messiah, would be thrown out of the Synagogue. This isn't what they had in mind. “Why are you dividing our people? We're supposed to be united, and then taking on the Gentiles.” They didn't understand. Look at your followers, Jesus, a motley band of ignoramuses, of what we would call blue collar workers. Galilean fishermen who don't even know the simple basics of biblical instruction. They're workers and even worse look who is following you: tax collectors, prostitutes, sinners. This is not what they had in mind. It's going to get worse. He gets rejected and scourged and nailed to a Roman cross, with the ultimate insult, "This is Jesus, the King of the Jews," over his head as He bleeds to death, as an executed criminal. The Jews cannot understand, they can't accept it. Ugly, ugly, ugly the beginning of this kingdom, not what they had in mind. A small band of women, John standing there at the foot of the cross, that's it. A very, very tough way to leave the world, a very ugly picture. "Who has believed our message," said Isaiah, "And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed? He grew up before Him like a tender shoot and like a root out of dry ground. He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in His appearance that we should desire Him. He was despised and rejected, a man of sorrows and familiar with suffering, like one from whom men hide their faces, He was despised. And we esteemed Him not.” That means we rejected him. We thought nothing of him, he was low and despised, this tender root out of dry ground. So, the kingdom was going to start from despicable origins, lowly and despised, and it wasn't just the Jews who despised him. When Christianity began to make its progress and they began to preach a dead Jewish Messiah on the cross, the message made no sense. It was foolishness to the Gentiles, and they didn't understand. Celsus, who Origen wrote against in the third century, a bitter foe of the Gospel, attacked the very concept that God would send His son in such a low in contemptible way to the despised Jews in one corner of the world. This is what he wrote, "God is good and beautiful and blessed and that in the best and most beautiful degree. But if he come down among men, He must undergo a change and a change from good to evil, from virtue to vice, from happiness to misery, and from best to worst. Who then would make choice of such a change? It is the nature of a mortal indeed to undergo change and re-molding, but of an immortal to remain the same and unaltered. God then would not admit of such a change. God would never become a man and if he did, just for a joke," that's what he said. "If he's like Jupiter coming to the Athenians he sure wouldn't come to the Jews in that corner of the world," so said Celsus. His ways are not understandable to us, His ways, are not our ways. For the kingdom to start like a tiny seed stuck in the ground, or like a little amount of yeast off in the edge makes no sense. To me this is great encouragement for every generation, especially for ours, that God delights in small things. He delights in humble beginnings; He delights in just a conversation sparking at all. Just a thought that popped in someone's head and then look where it's gone. God delights in small things and doing great things with small things. We forget that the universe is made up of atoms and they're really small. God delights in small things, in putting them in order, and building a history out of it. And so, Zechariah 4:10, "Who despises the day of small things?" Yet we need constant encouragement because the Kingdom of Heaven never seems equal to the task, does it? It always seems overwhelmed by the obstacles and the odds. We have to hear 1 Corinthians 15:58, "Therefore my dear brothers stand firm, let nothing move you, always give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord because you know that your labor in the Lord is not in vain.” You need to be told that, don't you? Do you ever get discouraged in the Christian life? I need to be told my labor in the Lord is not in vain, because it sure seems like it, sometimes. All of us as Christians, we need to hear that. Hebrews 12:12 says, "Therefore, strengthen your feeble arms and your weak knees," because the kingdom doesn't seem to match up. We're wasting our time here. In one 24-hour period almost a quarter million people in one day are added to the world population. People think, "We're losing ground. There's a sense of urgency. Is the kingdom up to the task?" What do these parables tell you? Yes, the Kingdom of Heaven will permeate the entire dough. The Gospel of the Kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come. Lesson of the Mustard Seed The lesson of the mustard seed is outward invisible growth. Jesus said in Matthew 5:14, "You are the light of the world, you're a city on a hill which cannot be hidden. The growth of the Kingdom can't be hidden, it's going to leave markers along the way in history. It's going to start small, but we're going to see marks of its progress along the way. It started with 120 believers in the upper room. That's a small church. 120 believers in the upper room and then the Spirit poured out and in one day, 3000 were added to their number that day, just like that. Now that's outward, visible change. Suddenly boom, 3000. Pretty soon the number grew to 5000 men, it kept growing and growing. Soon the call came to send missionaries to Gentile regions. The Gospel spread along Asia Minor. Back up the roads of conquest where Alexander the Great and the Roman Legions had marched down to conquer Palestine. The Gospel went back up those pipelines across to the man from Macedonia who said, "Come over and help us.” The Gospel was preached there, in Philippi, and Thessalonica. It starts to spread, it starts to move, it starts to conquer. So that by the time Paul writes in Romans, he says, "It's always been my ambition to preach where nobody's heard of Christ, but I'm having trouble finding that place these days," because the gospel had come from Jerusalem all the way around to what is modern Yugoslavia, right across from Rome. Soon the gospel would be there. Within two and half to three centuries, the Gospel would have so permeated and so dominated in the Roman Empire that Constantine would declare himself to be a Christian. Incredible. What a marker in history. The progress that this Galilean carpenter, executed on a Roman cross, has made. If you had told Pontius Pilate, what was going to happen in the next three centuries, "The man you're about to kill will someday be the God worshipped by the Emperor of Rome," what do you think he would have said to you? "You're insane." It didn't stop there. It continued to grow and to explode. Missionaries traveling. The Norsemen coming down, the Vikings coming to faith in Christ. It continued to spread, clear markers of progress. They left behind physical remnants: cathedrals built, art, hospitals, works of theology and writings. Clear markers of the progress of the gospel. The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed that just explodes, and everyone can see where it's heading, a visible legacy of Christianity. Lesson of the Yeast But the kingdom of heaven is also like yeast which a woman took and hid, it says, in a large amount of flour until it worked all through the dough. So yes, there's an outward invisible marker of the progress, but there's an internal mysterious transformation. It says, "The Kingdom of Heaven is like yeast which a woman took and hid.” The Greek word is “enkrupto”, from which we get “to encrypt”. A hidden thing, a mysterious thing. So, there's this hidden nature of the kingdom. You can't see what it's doing, but it's making progress all the way through. I think this individually describes your own salvation if you're a Christian, doesn't it? You hear the Gospel, maybe John 3:16 something as simple as that. You read a tract, and all of a sudden it takes hold in your life. Little by little, it starts to conquer everything. It conquers the way you talk, it conquers the way you dress, it conquers the way you think, the way you make your living, the way you pray, what you hope for, what you dream, it conquers everything. It just starts to permeate within. Jesus said in John Chapter 3, that the wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound, but you can't tell where it comes from and where it is going. So is everyone who's born by the spirit, that internal transformation changing everything, if anyone is in Christ, he's a new creation. The old is gone, everything has become new. All things have changed, and so that from the inside out, it permeates and conquers. The biggest grief of your life is that it hasn't conquered everything yet. But it will someday. Isn't that glorious? It's going to permeate everything, and there'll be no sin left: no wickedness, no violence, no temptation, no pull toward evil. No, as it says in Romans 7, "sin living in me that does it," all gone. The Gospel will have permeated everything, and you will be glorious and perfect. Amen and amen, the glory of the internal transformation, but you can't see it from the outside. You look like the same person but there's something different about you, an internal transformation that conquers everything. Jesus was also talking about the world, wasn't he? He had his eyes not just on the individual, but on the whole world. It would be down in the catacombs, under the streets of Rome where nobody could see it. Celsus was frustrated. He said, "You know something, they won't talk about this, when the masters and better learned people are around. But when everyone's gone, they'll start to talk to your children and then kind of take on the weak and the lowly and share with them." The gospel spreads through the slaves, and the weak, and the despised and the lowly, and it just takes over, permeates, influences, just by hearing. Sometimes, the gospel is gossiped almost like news. I love the story of John Bunyan's conversion. John Bunyan was a tinker by trade, went around sharpening knives and fixing pots and pans which was obviously not a lucrative employment. But he went around, and he was in a kitchen, sharpening some knives, fixing some pots and pans one day when he heard three or four women. This is what he says, he overheard, "Three or four poor women sitting at a door in the room and talking about the things of God." And later he said, "I thought they spoke as if joy did make them speak." Like they couldn't hold it in. Christ had so filled their hearts they couldn't help themselves. They're just filled with the gospel and with Christ, and they're just talking, gossiping Jesus. They never knew that Bunyan was overhearing, unconverted but listening. Later he gave his life to Christ and wrote Pilgrim's Progress, and so, from just a little affect, a little permeation, it spreads to the whole world. I love the story that my Mission's Professor Christy Wilson, told of what's happened in China. The same thing. I love this story because it shows the power of the gospel, how the Gospel was opposed by Mao Zedong. It was attacked and Christians were murdered and slaughtered down to a certain level and finally he stopped and said, "I can't continue, I've got to denounce the idea of Christianity, not just kill Christians. I've got to take these few Christians that are left who are gaining strength and get them out of being together. I think what I'll do is I'll scatter them all over China so that they're alone, and lonely, and they'll die disgraced." Christy Wilson said that the communist party in China is the greatest mission sending agency of the 20th century. Mao Zedong said, "What I'll do is I'll humble them further, I'll give them jobs like garbage collector, where they go from house to house every day, collecting garbage." You're in a new town, never been anywhere. You've got Christ inside you and you're going from house to house. What do you think you're going to do? Could it be that you're going to share the Gospel, and could it be that there are over 100 million Christians in China today? And could it be that Mao Zedong is dead? Kingdom of heaven is like yeast. Hidden in a little corner, it permeates the whole thing. You can't stop it. But it's hidden. It never made the headlines in The New York Times. But it is the story of China, just like it is the story of the entire world which the gospel is conquering and advancing, and the gospel is winning. The kingdom is immense but it's unfinished. We live in a great time, brothers and sisters, a time in which the gospel is accelerating, a time in with a local church like ours can send out our own people across to the ends of the world, and they can influence, they can share the Gospel with some student who's studying English. That study of English becomes a bridge that the Gospel could get across into their minds, and they could believe and be saved. This is a great time, and we can look back over 2000 years and say, "Lord, you've done it, it's not finished yet, but I see it, I can connect the dots. We're 95% there but I see what you're doing. The Kingdom of Heaven is like a small mustard seed, which has grown to imposing size, yes, Lord, the Kingdom of Heaven is like yeast, which is tucked in a little corner, Jerusalem, upper room, and then spreads through the whole world. And yes, Lord, the kingdom of Heaven has conquered my heart and it's taking over everything inside me. Oh, let your work be finished in the world and in me, let your kingdom come.” We never despise the days of small beginnings. I think about, for example, the haystack prayer meeting. It was a sultry Saturday afternoon, in August 1806. Samuel J. Mills and four other students at Williams College in Massachusetts were talking and discussing the things of God, when suddenly the skies broke overhead, thunder and lightning and they ran and found protection kind of in the back side of a haystack. They just started to pray about world evangelization, they prayed that they would be used in a mighty way by God to spread the influence of Christ to the unreached people, what they called the heathens. This was just a short time after William Carey, but there were no mission-sending agencies in America at the time. It wasn't long after that, two years later, that they met a student from Brown named Adoniram Judson. He got involved, caught their vision, and he and his wife and a number of others set sail for Calcutta to join up with William Carey. En route, of course, they became Baptist. En route, they realized that they needed some financial support because the Congregationalists were not going to support them anymore, and so they sent Luther Rice back. Luther Rice went from Baptist church, to Baptist church, saying, "You guys have missionaries in the field, and you're obligated to support them financially." That was the beginning of the Southern Baptist Convention. That's how it started, from a prayer meeting in a haystack. Do not ever despise the day of small beginnings. God loves to do this kind of thing, again, and again, and again. To advance the kingdom with just a little mustard seed of faith, to see what God can do. Application What kind of applications can we take? First of all, can I say to you come to Christ, if you're not a Christian? The things I'm saying to you make no sense whatsoever, if you don't trust Christ. If you don't know Him as your Lord and Savior, if you don't see Jesus bloody and dead on the cross as your substitute for sin, Jesus your sin bearer, and put your trust in your faith in him because he didn't stay dead. God raised Him from the dead on the third day. Is he your life? Is he your righteousness? Is he your hope? If not come to Christ today. But for you who are Christians, first of all, could you worship Christ for His sovereignty and fulfilling his prophecy? These were prophecies, weren't they? The kingdom of heaven is going to take over and it has. Worship Him. He got it right. It's not finished yet, but you see what He's doing, worship him for what he's doing. Secondly, never be discouraged over the seemingly slow progress of the kingdom. Never be discouraged about what He's doing here, in this church. As long as we are faithful to teach and live obey His word, He will bless this church. Even if the progress seems slow. Thirdly, expect great things from small beginnings. God does this again and again. Fourth, put priority on internal spiritual transformation, that comes first. The outward shows and the markers along the way come from a genuine internal transformation. Put the yeast ahead of the mustard seed. The internal transformation happens first, and out of that, comes the fruit that we've been talking about. Influence your surrounding world. Be yeast in your world, let there be lots of Christ about you. Lots of tracts handed to people if you only have a minute, invitations to church, going this afternoon to witness. Take a chance, I don't think you're going to get killed, but even if you do, you'll rejoice and be glad and have the resurrection of a martyr. Rejoice, be an influencer for Christ, pray for an unreached people group. Adopt one and pray for it for the rest of the year for six months. I prayed for Nepal for eight years, and I have personal stock in the company that God set up there, of over 100,000 Nepali Christians. There were almost none when I began praying. So, pray for them. Start a lunch time Bible study and rejoice if one person shows up. I saw a Bible study like that, start from one person and grew to 23 people. That's how it all started. Start a lunchtime Bible study, be an influencer for Christ. The kingdom of heaven in the end will conquer all things. Be faithful and serve Him.
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
