Podcasts about Timaeus

Ryan and Alex journey through the Gnostic scriptures, Plato's Timaeus, mystery religions, the symbolism of the stars, the teachings of Zoroaster, and the enigmatic Gospel of Judas Iscariot.

Discover the real Atlantis in this deep dive into Plato's Timaeus and Critias. Jason Quitt unveils how the fall of the Pole Star in 9,600 BCE matches the "destruction" of the lost city.Video Episode: https://youtu.be/qahzHZ5JG_oFor thousands of years people have searched for the lost city of Atlantis, scouring the ocean floor and the far corners of the earth for a sunken continent, but what if Atlantis was never a place at all? In this episode, returning guest Jason Quitt joins Chance to unveil the central thesis of his brand new book, The Shining Island, in the very first long-form conversation recorded about it. Together they walk through Plato's two Atlantis dialogues, the Timaeus and the Critias, and make the case that the entire story is a celestial allegory, a creation myth written in the stars. The destruction of Atlantis, dated by Plato to 9,600 BCE, lines up with a moment when there was no pole star to guide humanity. This is a deep, dense, and genuinely mind-expanding conversation about the oldest story ever told, the story of the stars.Remote Biofield Tuning sessions with Chance are available via Zoom. Learn more and book at https://www.innerversepodcast.com/biofield-tuningFull archives, extended episodes, and member community at https://www.innerversepodcast.com/plusWatch the extended episode of this podcasthttps://www.innerversepodcast.com/plus/jason-quitt-atlantisPatreon: https://www.patreon.com/innerverse/posts/real-atlantis-of-161284133Substack: https://innerversepodcast.substack.com/p/jason-quitt-shining-islandYoutube: https://youtu.be/zpysvZRJogsLINKSJason Quitt: https://thecrystalsun.com/https://www.innerversepodcast.com/episodes/jason-quitt-shining-islandSUPPORT INNERVERSE WITH AFFILIATESKyle Denton's Potent Plant Medicines – Tippecanoe Herbs (use coupon code 'innerverse'): https://www.tippecanoeherbs.comThe World's Best Tuning Fork: https://biofieldtuningstore.com/collections/the-sonic-slider-collection?ref=innerverseFlower Elixirs by LotusWei: https://www.lotuswei.com/innerverse Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Alignment is not on track Artificial superintelligence (ASI) may be developed in the next few years. It is unclear whether alignment is on track to be ready on the same timeframe. At a minimum, the empirical programs at AI labs are unlikely to deliver a priori confidence, before training ASI, that things will go well. We are starting a large nonprofit research organization, Sequent, that aims to clear a higher bar: We are aiming at higher confidence via a portfolio of theory and empirics bets, all of which could fail, such that if any succeed, they would give us more a priori confidence in aligned outcomes.We are investing heavily in automation to accelerate progress on these bets.We believe that theory unlocks higher automation. Taking a more principled approach offers better filters for deciding which directions of automated research are promising (a proof is worth a thousand experiments, and even a pseudo-proof is worth hundreds). Who[1]: researchers from the UK AISI's Alignment Team and Timaeus, with more to come. We're aiming at 40-80 FTE two years from now. The Alignment Team ran the £30m Alignment Project, and Timaeus has pioneered applying singular learning theory (SLT) to alignment. [...] ---Outline:(00:21) Alignment is not on track(02:40) Aiming at higher confidence(05:30) Why a new big organization(07:35) Different lines of research will interact(11:35) Amortizing security and funding(12:47) Automated alignment is possible, if not necessarily in time(17:39) Federated structure to preserve research diversity(18:38) Field building and broader alignment scale-up(21:07) Independence is important(22:40) Join us! The original text contained 1 footnote which was omitted from this narration. --- First published: June 10th, 2026 Source: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/AP7YDke5jjY4v3X9Z/sequent-scale-and-automation-for-higher-confidence-in-1 --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. ---Images from the article:Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

What a lot of fun I had talking to Zena Hitz about Gulliver's Travels. As well as discussing Swift, slavery, genocide, rationality, Christianity, and science, Zena told me that good philosophy is like a box of cake mix and that a liberal education requires you to be freed of false expertise. I also took Zena on a detour to discuss Iris Murdoch, the Catherine Project, and modern philosophy. TRANSCRIPTHENRY OLIVER: Today I am talking to Zena Hitz. Zena is a tutor at St. John's College. She is a philosopher, the author of Lost in Thought. She runs the Catherine Project. She's famous on Twitter. We don't know how she does it all. Zena, welcome.ZENA HITZ: Thank you, Henry. It's great to be here.OLIVER: And we're talking about Gulliver's Travels because it is 300 years since it was published, and it's a book that you love.HITZ: A book that I've loved for a long time.First Encounter with Gulliver's TravelsOLIVER: So tell me, when did you first read it?HITZ: Well, it was an important moment for me. I was in high school, and I was admitted to a scholarship summer program which offered college courses at different campuses. There were some normal-looking college courses at normal-looking colleges. And then there was this course at St. John's called Science as Literature, Literature as Science. [laughs] It had this description that was just unbelievable. And I thought to myself, “This is the one, obviously the one to go to.”So I went, and we read books that no one in their right mind would assign to high school students now, and maybe not then. The fragments of Parmenides, Plato's Timaeus, selections from Aristotle's Physics, Gulliver's Travels. After reading a number of—preface to Ptolemy's Almagest, geocentric astronomy. And we read Gulliver's Travels after reading selections from Hooke's Micrographia, so the inventor of the microscope, and Galileo's Starry Messenger, which is one of the great first uses of the telescope to discover the nature of the moon and the satellites of Jupiter.So then we read Gulliver's Travels. We also read Emma and Flannery O'Connor and various other things. And one of the faculty who was running it said at one point, “Well, we thought we'd throw a bunch of things together and see what you could do, what you could make of it. We didn't actually have an idea of how these all fit together,” which I think was probably true.At any rate, I think I came to Gulliver's Travels thinking about these scientists who were looking at very large things and very small things, and thinking in general about the follies of human perception, whether that was shown in literature or philosophy or what have you, the ways in which human perception and knowledge don't work very well. And I think Swift is still one of the best people to—Gulliver's Travels is still one of the best books about that because it's in the mode of a travel diary, an eyewitness account.Gulliver is trained as a surgeon, by his own account. He at one point says he was a bit of a projector in his younger days, someone who undertook scientific projects. And he's a terrible observer, the worst imaginable observer, and Swift so brilliantly lets us see through his eyes, lets us see all the things he doesn't see. And I think it's not just about seeing and knowing. It has a very profound, I think, moral and political set of commitments. So it's a very humane book. It's social criticism, but from a point of view of a very deep humanity. So I've always loved the book for these reasons since then.I came back to it more recently because it is part of the curriculum at St. John's. So when I came back to teach there, I began to reread it. The other experience I had was that I wrote a long essay on it when I was an undergraduate. So those are my—I'm not any kind of expert. My knowledge of the historical context of the book is limited. It's not zero, but it's limited. But I have always loved it as an account of human understanding and its failures and the way that might impact how we live and how happy we can be.The Houyhnhnm ProblemOLIVER: Have you changed how you think about it as you've taught it?HITZ: I have not really changed the way I think about it. It gets more—like all of these books, the more you read them, the more comes out of them, the more details come up. Hilarious. The more jokes you get, the more . . .I think the one more recent insight I had was, I hadn't understood the full horror of the Houyhnhnms in the last book until relatively recently. I think that took me some time to really take on. It's one of the cases where Gulliver's misperceptions are a bit harder to see, and I think many readers just assume that Swift is endorsing the praise of the Houyhnhnms in some sense or other.OLIVER: There are some very serious critics in the past who have called them Swift's ideal beings. Which at this point in history seems unthinkable, but it has been a belief among serious readers.HITZ: Yes, yes. And also common among students. Yes, it's absolutely one of the wrongest opinions you could have about anything, I think.OLIVER: Why does Swift allow us to make that mistake? Are we bad readers out of the context, or has he made too good a job of his diversions and concealments and ironies?HITZ: That's a great question, and I'll just take a stab at it. I think that he has hit on a mode of misperception which is very deep to us, and it's something that we're much more guilty of. We could imagine that if we were in a place where everyone was small or everyone was large, we might make mistakes like Gulliver makes. But we all live, I think, in communities that are a bit like the Houyhnhnms. And so we are all very subject to these kinds of deceptions, and I think that's how he gets us.That's not to really excuse the bad readings because, you know, Gulliver does leave the land of the Houyhnhnms with a boat made out of human skin, which should—I think that moment should make you realize, if you haven't yet, that something is very seriously wrong with Gulliver. Gulliver has been kind of destroyed as a person by his travels, and especially by this last trip. But if you pass over that little detail, maybe you think, “Oh, wow, he found some very simple beings.”OLIVER: Well, there's also the great council where they debate the genocide of the Yahoos.HITZ: [laughs] Yes.OLIVER: And it directly contradicts several things Gulliver has come to believe about the Houyhnhnms, about the Yahoos, and about himself. And he's completely unaware of these contradictions and so in awe of the Houyhnhnms that he doesn't quite understand, I think, that he's accounting a genocide.HITZ: That's right. That's right.OLIVER: Even though he uses a phrase from Genesis that's very unmistakable. It's a sort of remarkable moment of—particularly to us, having had the 20th century. I think that's why Swift came back into favor in a way, because people used to say, Swift's unbearable view of human nature . . .This is a great bit in Boswell's Life of Johnson where, when they're traveling through Scotland, they're with a lady, and she says to Johnson, “Is any man naturally good?” And Johnson says, “No, no more than a wolf.” And Boswell says, “Well, sir, what about ladies?” And Johnson says, “God, no, absolutely not.” And this woman says, “Oh my God, this is worse than Swift,” utterly horrific view of human nature.But of course, we can actually say, did he go far enough? [laughter] I mean, Swift clearly understands something very real and deep. The council of genocide is horrifyingly familiar to us. And I think that's much to Swift's credit that he can see that, and to show that Gulliver would blind himself to it. And people still blind themselves to it, right?HITZ: That's right. And I wonder—you would know more about this than me because it is a bit of a historical question, but my understanding is that quite a lot of the savagery, the worst parts of rule over men that we see in Gulliver's Travels are pictures of Ireland in the 17th, 18th centuries. And I wonder if that took some time to reveal itself to the British, and in some ways it's still not really as known as it might be. We think of the colonial project as being something that was directed at India and Africa—OLIVER: Faraway countries.HITZ: —faraway countries where people looked really different. And we're not as familiar with the kinds of things that were done to the cuddly Irish with their nice music, and who we don't think of as being people that you would savagely oppress like that. So I think—OLIVER: So, I think partly the English are not interested in their own history in the way that they are expected to be. And partly the English interest in Irish history has become very focused on the more recent events. And it's very hard to get back past that. And it all becomes very complicated, and it's a sort of different country. So there's some of that, but I think generally we don't want to know what we did, yes.HITZ: Well, and I think in anglophone countries in general, there's going to be a history of something like that. To attribute it to the British is not to say that—I mean, Americans have chattel slavery and the genocide of the natives, and the Australians have their own situation. All of the anglophone countries have something like this on their conscience.I think that obscures the meaning of that final book. I think we don't recognize—and that's really to Swift's credit, to have a social critique that is so real and so deep that you may not even recognize yourself in the picture.Slavery in Gulliver's TravelsOLIVER: Yes. When I read it again—I read it as an undergraduate, but I really was actually more interested in the other parts of Swift's work. And I thought it was brilliant, and then I read it again. And it was more recently that—I didn't understand how I couldn't have seen it, but it's basically a book about slavery, as I come back to it.And in each of the books there is enslavement of a different sort. So, to begin with, Gulliver is the one being kept in a box or kept in a house, or he's chained up by the Lilliputians or Glumdalclitch.HITZ: Right. That's right.OLIVER: She's a very nice sort of master, as it were, [laughter] but he has that box that can be sealed, and the dwarf has him swiping at the wasps. And then the enslavement that the flying island has of the country below is like England and Ireland. And then in the final book, you know, the Houyhnhnms are whipping the Yahoos.HITZ: That's right.OLIVER: The slavery thing gets worse and worse as the book goes on. And one of the things that's clever is that it's funny when Gulliver is enslaved, right? When the wasps are let out and he has to—and Swift sort of does that clever thing where he undermines things by making it a joke at the end. By the book of the Houyhnhnms, there is really very little humor. And the twist at the end is always dark.Gulliver can't see that—he can see that he's a bit like the Yahoos. But he can't see that they've been enslaved in the way that he—the farmer wanted to take him around the kingdom and show him off, and he says, “I couldn't possibly have had children in that condition because I couldn't have it on my conscience that I had begotten a slave, someone born into slavery. I couldn't do that.”HITZ: Right.OLIVER: Then he's in the Houyhnhnms and he can't—it's quite remarkable.HITZ: [laughs] Yes. I don't think it's quite true that in the end there's no humor. I read it with some Catherine Project group a couple of years ago, and one of the readers pointed out that it's not obvious Gulliver isn't leaving his home and sitting out in the ocean and always landing on England every single time; just every time, he lands there.And there's something hilarious about an Englishman that discovers a place where there's all horses, [laughter] and his love of horses overwhelms him, and he becomes persuaded that they're the only rational beings that there are. I mean, that is funny.OLIVER: Yes, I agree. There's a lot of irony and stuff. But I think it's in Lilliput when he describes their manner of writing. And he says they don't write from left to right as we do in England, or from right to left, or up-down like the Chinese, but from one corner to the other, as the ladies do in England. This is very funny, dry humor, and that sort of thing is gone. And the things that surprise you at the end of a sentence or a paragraph are more like, “Oh, and of course I used Yahoo skin to cover the boat.” And you're like, oh my God, this is not a joke anymore.You know, in A Modest Proposal, he makes real humor out of those kind of horrors. And with the Houyhnhnms, I think he actually refuses the joke to make you feel the disgust, in a way.HITZ: Yes, that might be right. That might be right.Swift and PhilosophyOLIVER: What do you think about the idea that the Houyhnhnms are drawn from the Phaedrus and Socrates's idea of the soul with the two horses? And there's the good, rational horse and the vulgar, passionate horse, and the Yahoos are the other horse. You see what I mean?HITZ: Yes, yes.OLIVER: Is Swift showing us the two sides, and Gulliver's mistake is to prefer the one and not the—HITZ: Right, I think I have heard something like this before. I'm a bit skeptical. Swift doesn't strike me as someone who uses philosophy in quite that way. I think he's much more interested in Gulliver's—the Houyhnhnms' self-deception about the kinds of beings they are. They do not say “the thing which is not,” yet Gulliver's master hides from him this conversation about the genocide for quite some time. And maybe we don't know if he tells him quite the whole truth about it. So there's—OLIVER: And he also conceals the fact that the others don't like Gulliver because he's a partial—a reasonable Yahoo, as it were.HITZ: Right. So their self-deception, Gulliver's being taken in by their self-deception, the ways in which they—this is one of the ways that I think it's profound about the nature of slavery. And to cheer us all up, I'll make a Holocaust analogy, as you also did.When I was traveling in Germany some years ago, in one of their Holocaust museums, there was an image from a Nazi-era German newspaper of Jewish people living in complete squalor in the ghetto. And of course, they had forced them into squalor. But somehow they forced them into squalor, and then this reinforces the sense that they're these rat-like beings.And there's something very similar that the Houyhnhnms do to the Yahoos. They force them into this animal state, and then they say, “Oh God, look, these people are disgusting. They just don't know how to act.” That seems to me the kind of level at which Swift is working. He is interested in the nature of a human being, but not in the abstract Platonic sense, I don't think.He strikes me as someone who believes in common sense, common decency, basic freedom, and basic use of reason. And he finds in his time that there's distorting teachings, distorting ways of behavior that have gotten people far off track. To me, that's what it feels like it comes from. It doesn't feel like Plato is in the background to me.OLIVER: Is there an extent to which, though, it's a work of sort of anti-philosophy? As you say, Swift, he likes common sense. He likes ordinary reason, and he likes what he would call the revealed truth of Christianity. So he talks, in his sermons about people, it comes to you from God like a light. It's revealed to you. And he doesn't like this idea that the philosophers can work it all out.And in a way, that's the same sort of mistake that the scientists think they can discover all this stuff, and they go in these crazy ways. And the Houyhnhnms are a bit like that. If you had philosopher-kings, they would end up being perverted examples of rationality because they're ignoring the—so do you think it's anti-philosophy in a way? The book is saying, “No, no, I don't want philosophers”?Criticizing Elite Intellectual CultureHITZ: That's definitely a plausible reading. But it's hard to tell whether it's anti-philosophy or anti a particular style of thinking. It's worth pointing out, in that light, that Gulliver, when he arrives in the land of the Houyhnhnms, before he even meets a horse, he sees a Yahoo who, from what I can tell from the text, is trying to wave at him and say hello, who recognizes him. And he's horrified. He sees him instantly as a monster.So I think immediately upon landing, he sees the Yahoos as monstrous, and that tells me that he must already be off kilter. So he's not just corrupted by the Houyhnhnms; he's been somehow led off track, away from the capacity to recognize fellow human beings before that.And he's come from this—the third book is all about various kinds of inquiry, scientific endeavors, practical endeavors, talking to the greats of the past, necromancy, and various kinds of inquiry into wisdom or things like wisdom. And somehow that's the thing that seems to push him to the point where he can no longer tell what a human being is.OLIVER: One of my favorite parts is when he's with the wizards, and he asks to be shown Homer and Aristotle and all their commentators. And he says that there were vast rooms full of these commentators, endless numbers of them. But Homer and Aristotle didn't recognize any of them because they were all so ashamed of the terrible things they'd said about these great men's works that they kept themselves forever in a different part of the underworld. They couldn't bear the shame of being revealed to having told lies and said second-rate things.It's very, very funny. And I think that's another sort of angle on which the book says, “You're so tempted to make a comment and have an idea and be a philosopher, and you should just accept the revealed truth of what is known. Just stop it. Just stop it.” [laughter]HITZ: Well, I suppose maybe I would also put it this way, that Swift sees the condition of 18th-century Ireland, which is quite poor, very bad. And it's ruled in a savage way by the English, who have a quite flourishing intellectual culture, as it happens, at this time.So I think what he might be is not a critic of philosophy so much as a critic of intellectual culture. Because intellectual culture seems to not only not help with existential concerns like slavery and oppression and savage poverty, but even serves to mask and hide and create illusions behind it.So that's, I guess, how it strikes me, as a book that's hostile to what you'd now call elite intellectual culture. And I don't know how fundamental that critique is, in light of its inability to solve problems for real human beings or to obscure the causes of what's going on with real human beings.OLIVER: I think it's quite fundamental because outside of Gulliver's—I think this comes into Gulliver's Travels, but what he might have said more explicitly elsewhere is, there are people starving in the streets of Dublin. And we've got corrupt politicians and intellectuals saying all these things, but you know, here she is starving. You don't need to work that out. [laughter] There's no question—the reveal—just be a Christian and, like, for goodness' sake . . .HITZ: Yes.OLIVER: And when, for example, he talks to the king of Brobdingnag, and there's that wonderful satire of the English government and everything. And he says, “Those people understood mathematics and poetry and whatever, but I could never drive into their head any sense of the abstract or any of these speculative—they simply didn't know what that was. They didn't know what I was saying.” [laughter]And so in a way, his ideal government is anti-philosophical because it would just look at the human problem in front of it. It wouldn't do speculative science. It wouldn't think of itself as rational, all this Platonic stuff. It would just—she's in rags, she has bare feet, you know?HITZ: Yes, that's right.OLIVER: What do we need a philosopher-king? Like, what are you talking about?HITZ: Exactly.OLIVER: The priest understands this because he's there in the city doing it. And is there something of that in the book, that constant resistance of the cleverness of people who cannot see daily life?HITZ: I think that's absolutely true, and I think it's probably one of the things I love about the book, because I think this somehow gets to something in my own heart. Even though I'm a professional intellectual—I have been my whole life—the distance between the concerns of professional intellectuals and the concerns of living, real people in various parts of the world is very large.And it's even worse when, as it was when I was coming up in grad school, there's a ton of explicit concern and various operations underway to improve life for others, which have zero connection with anything that anyone actually does. So I think the Laputans, which is the beginning of the third book, when Gulliver—OLIVER: The flying island.HITZ: Yes, when Gulliver visits the people on the flying island, who have one eye towards the heavens and one eye pointed inward. And they study music and mathematics, and they live in a giant flying saucer, which has the—OLIVER: And the flappers.HITZ: That's right. [laughter] When someone needs to talk to them, someone flaps their ears so that they pay attention. And their wives all run off with working people because they can't bear to be treated the way they are by men like this. And the flying saucer is not just distant. It also has the power to crush the towns underneath it if it judges them to be rebellious.This image will stick with you for the rest of your life. I mean, it's absolutely perfect, and the perfect image of bad government of a kind when intellectual culture is prized. And it's hinted early on in the book in Lilliput, when the rulers in Lilliput have to do these elaborate dances with ropes.OLIVER: Oh, with the king and the chief minister hold the pole, funny angles, and if you get under it, you get a green ribbon or a red ribbon.HITZ: Exactly. [laughter] And they have these athletic contests of grace and various colored ribbons, and that determine how far you get in the halls of power.OLIVER: Yes. Are you a cabinet minister or a junior minister? Yes, yes.HITZ: Exactly. So there, it's all just a funny joke. But it develops, I think, into the Laputans, people who have kinds of expertise that are actually hostile to them doing any kind of humane governing. So yes, that seems right to me.Christianity in GulliverOLIVER: To what extent is it a Christian book?HITZ: That's an interesting question. I've never found a strong Christian element in it myself. There are satires of religious wars, both in Lilliput, where Lilliput's at war with its neighboring city. Oh, wait a second, there's two different disputes in Lilliput. One is about what side you cut your egg on.OLIVER: There are the Little-Endians and the Big-Endians,HITZ: Right. And then there's also one about heel size. So there's two different kinds of disputes.OLIVER: With the marvelous image that the king is a Short-Heeler. But they think that the heir to the throne might be favorable to the High-Heelers because he has one heel slightly higher than the other, and he walks with a wobbly gait.HITZ: [laughs] That's right. This, again, in Lilliput is just utterly hilarious, outrageous, very silly, obviously a parody of religious wars between different kinds of Christians. But it resurfaces towards the end. It's the Houyhnhnms, where he talks to the Master Horse—OLIVER: And the horse sort of pretends to this great rationality, simply can't understand that men would kill each other over the question of whether flesh is bread or bread is flesh.HITZ: That's right. That's right. That's right. So there's definitely disparaging remarks about religious wars. And as you're talking about it, where along with Swift's praise of common sense, there's a kind of basic Christian morality, which is that the poor and the suffering need attention. That all strikes me as Christian. Apart from that, I'm not sure. If you have a religious take, I'd be interested to hear it.OLIVER: I find it very interesting that Swift had quite strict beliefs. He was not in favor of Catholics. He thought Dissenters should be tolerated, but he wanted the Test Act. He was very particular about all these things. And in his other works, he's quite direct about that. But in this book, he achieves a kind of high ambivalence. And he's not a Little-Ender or a Big-Ender.HITZ: That's right.OLIVER: And he says the religious text on which this is based simply says that you must break the egg at the most convenient end.HITZ: [laughs] That's right.OLIVER: Now, of course, in reality, he's a Little-Ender, and he's very committed to the Reformation, and he thinks it's all terrible that they're not. And it's interesting that someone with such angry, insistent beliefs on the Anglican Church would take this ambivalent position.And he satirizes so much. But the anti-slavery stuff, the description of the Laputans bringing the island down, and then he says, “I've never seen so much want and misery, and there's a wild look in their eyes, and they're wearing rags.” I mean, this is Dublin, right? This is just, along with the slavery, this basic Christian concern for the oppressed, the poor, the suffering.HITZ: Yes, that's right.OLIVER: And so I don't quite know. It's almost like the book is saying, again with this anti-intellectual thing, all these doctrinal disputes and which church this and who believes that. And here we have slaves and poor people and beggars and starving people.HITZ: Right.OLIVER: Christianity should deal with that first. So is the implicit criticism of his fellow Christians, in a way, that they're more interested in these disputes than in the fact that there are enslaved people and suffering people and—you see what I mean?HITZ: Yes, that's right.OLIVER: And Gulliver—the Houyhnhnms are highly rational but not Christian, which is a significant omission. And by the end, are you supposed to wonder if Gulliver actually isn't very much of a Christian? Because he can see this suffering and not respond to it at all.HITZ: Right, when maybe the—is the best person in the book the King of Brobdingnag? Does that seem right? The person with the—at least who says the best things?OLIVER: He says the best things. I think the best person is Glumdalclitch. She shows real charity and real love towards him.HITZ: What about the Houyhnhnm, the one who likes him, who says, “Fare thee well, gentle Yahoo”? It's tear-jerking—OLIVER: Oh, the sorrel nag.HITZ: The sorrel nag. I can literally weep at that moment when she says, “Fare thee well, gentle Yahoo.”OLIVER: That's true. That's true. She and Glumdalclitch are maybe more similar characters. Yes, yes, yes.HITZ: They're similar characters. Okay.OLIVER: And they have that basic, you don't need to call it Christian. You don't need—it doesn't need theology.HITZ: Humane. I would call it humane. Yes.OLIVER: They have that basic love of their fellow. You know, Glumdalclitch doesn't say, “Oh, how amusing this little man is, or how entertaining, or I can make—” She says, “He must be cared for. He looks a bit like me. He must be cared for.”HITZ: Right.OLIVER: And the sorrel nag, again, has the love of the fellow creature.HITZ: That's right. That's right.OLIVER: So I think Swift might be bringing in this, what he thinks of as the revealed truth of Christianity. Like, you shouldn't need telling, you shouldn't need to argue. It's there.HITZ: Right. This is just me making things up, which is what I'm here for. We're podcasting. Yes.OLIVER: Yes, of course. Also, is that not what the philosophers would do? That's what Swift would say.HITZ: But if I was going to make something up, what I would say is something like this: that Swift to me, from the testimony of Gulliver's Travels, which is the book of his I really know the best. I don't know much about the rest of it. He has a level of self-awareness and sophistication. So, he knows that that religious difference is being used as a pretext. He knows that it is obscuring the suffering of these people. So, for the purposes of the book, he says, “Look, if you're a smart person, if you're a smart ruler, if you're an actually humane, intelligent, commonsensical ruler, you know that the fact that they have the wrong religious views is not a reason for them to be enslaved and oppressed and starved.” So that would be my suspicion.And that's why I think, to me, the religion is so light, because it's not really a religious problem. It's actually just a human problem and a political problem that is, how do you run your country so that these subject peoples are allowed to be free and develop themselves and be full human beings? That would be my made-up guess.Students' Views of GulliverOLIVER: What do undergraduates think? What is it that they find interesting in the book, and what do they like or dislike?HITZ: It's been a couple of years. I think they like this idea that—we all think travel is very broadening, a great way to think about the world. You know, you can learn so much about one's fellow human beings. And whatever else is going on in Gulliver's Travels, travel does not necessarily produce enlightenment.So I think they like the attention to the ways in which, even when we are trying to learn, we fail to learn. And the ways in which structures of learning, like traveling or studying science, might actually make you worse and not better, things like that. But it's not a book—I think it's fair to say it's not one of the favorite books of the undergraduates.OLIVER: Okay.HITZ: I think they find it a little bit distant, and I'm not sure why that is.OLIVER: Is it because it sort of looks like a novel, but it's not what we have come to expect a novel to be? And it sort of has that—HITZ: I think that's right.OLIVER: The pre–Jane Austen novel is kind of weird to us now.HITZ: Well, they love Don Quixote.OLIVER: Okay.HITZ: And that is a challenge of a similar kind. It's a novel which doesn't quite read like a novel, and the humor is kind of old. I mean, it's also true—undergraduates, in my experience, in general—I hope they'll forgive me for saying this on a podcast—they're not always good at comedy. They tend to think that serious things must be tragic.OLIVER: You can't get an A by making a joke.HITZ: Well, more that they have a sense that an intellectual life is something serious. It's serious.OLIVER: Oh, yes. Okay. And the syllabus slightly reinforces that, doesn't it?HITZ: Well, it's sort of self-reinforcing because we used to read more Aristophanes. We used to read Rabelais.OLIVER: If you do Shakespeare, it'll be the tragedies.HITZ: No, no, we do Shakespeare comedies.OLIVER: Oh, you do? Okay.HITZ: Yes. We have As You Like It and The Tempest. And do we have more tragedies? Maybe one more tragedy than comedy, but not a terrible imbalance.OLIVER: Well, that's good.HITZ: It's not Shakespeare-type comedy that's—maybe, correct me if I'm wrong, a Shakespeare comedy is something that ends in a marriage, more or less.OLIVER: More or less.HITZ: It's things that are funny—they don't necessarily think that humor is a way of thinking.OLIVER: Do they struggle with irony?HITZ: No, not usually. As long as it's serious irony, Anyway, I'm not sure why. I think I'm making things—I'm going too far out of the grounds for drawing conclusions.Favorite Parts of the BookOLIVER: Sure. Do you have a favorite passage?HITZ: One of my favorites is the part—is it Balnibarbi where they have people who try to speak with objects?OLIVER: Oh, yes, yes, yes.HITZ: And they have to carry around wagons full of things because they never know what you might want to talk about. [laughter] That's so weird. Because I think I spent a lot of time studying with philosophers, there's a bit of—something's on the nose about this.OLIVER: Yes.HITZ: You know, it's like, “No, you've got to say exactly—no, that's too imprecise. You have to say exactly what you mean.” Bernard Williams, the great philosopher, has something complaining about how contemporary philosophers are very controlling of their readers. They don't want anyone to make the slightest mistake about what they mean by a particular word. That's how the people who speak by objects strike me.OLIVER: Do you think that is a problem of contemporary philosophy?HITZ: Oh, sure. Yes, absolutely. Yes. The way Williams puts it is that when you write something, it should be like a cake mix, and the reader should be able to put their own egg and bake the cake themselves.OLIVER: Oh, I see. You mean like a box of mix, yes.HITZ: Yes, yes, exactly. It's like a box of cake mix. Whereas making the cake painstakingly and force-feeding it bite by bite to the reader is not actually an—OLIVER: Telling them how it tastes.HITZ: Telling them how it tastes is not an educational endeavor.OLIVER: When does this become too dominant in philosophy?HITZ: It's a feature of 20th-century analytic philosophy to be very careful with the meanings of words. And it's by no means universal; it's just a natural vice to the territory.Iris MurdochOLIVER: Is this a problem for someone like Iris Murdoch, or is it more the A. J. Ayer type?HITZ: No, it's the A. J. Ayer type, not Iris Murdoch. No, Iris Murdoch is heterodox outside of the—OLIVER: Do you like her philosophy?HITZ: I do, yes.OLIVER: What do you like about it? Platonic?HITZ: Now, see, I came here to talk about Swift. [laughter]OLIVER: I know, but you made such a good point about the satire of philosophers.HITZ: I like her writing for a more general educated audience, her not making assumptions about the philosophical training of her readers, and her use of Plato for sure, which is quite interesting and creative. She sort of ingests Plato and does something with it that I think is very interesting.OLIVER: Is she properly appreciated as a Platonist, or do you think there's more attention to be paid?HITZ: There's probably more attention to be paid, but she gets some attention. She gets some attention. I also don't think it was particularly helpful, these two books that came out a couple of years ago about Murdoch, Foot, Midgley, and Anscombe.OLIVER: Oh, yes, yes, yes. I only read one of those. It was quite good.HITZ: It might be quite good, but those four women are quite different from one another. So it's an example of where attention to identity could obscure as much as it—OLIVER: Well, one of the books was more about the ideas—they were both obviously about the ideas—and one of them was more about the fact that they were together in Oxford. And that they benefited from hanging out, talking, doing different sorts of work, sleeping with each other's husbands, et cetera.HITZ: Yes, all the good stuff.OLIVER: And from the more sociological point of view, it was very interesting to see that, actually, a lot of what Murdoch did was bound up with her friendships and relationships, in that the argument basically is, A. J. Ayer and the others get sent away because of the war. So these four women are actually—they've been banned from this seminar and told they're not allowed.Well, now they can sit around and do what they want to do. And it worked, and they all produced very interesting things. So from that point of view, I think it was—but I agree with you, Elizabeth Anscombe and Iris Murdoch are not the same. [laughter]HITZ: Not even particularly similar. I also feel like I've read enough of Murdoch's novels to have a sense of what the sociological situation was like.OLIVER: You like the novels?HITZ: I do like them, yes.OLIVER: Do you have favorites?HITZ: I can't remember the name of my favorite because I haven't read them for years. It's one of the things I read years ago, the one—I'd remember it if I saw the title. There's an LSD trip at the beginning of it.OLIVER: Oh, The Good Apprentice. I love that book.HITZ: The Good Apprentice, yes. I think that was my favorite. But I never fell in love with it. I just liked it, and I found it interesting, and I found the sociology interesting. Okay, this is what academics at this time period were doing.What to Pair with SwiftOLIVER: We got diverted.HITZ: “We” got diverted. [laughs]OLIVER: We did. If Swift is on a great books syllabus, what is it good to pair him with? If people are reading Swift, on or off a syllabus, do you think there are other—Hooker, you said, which I think would be interesting.HITZ: No, Hooke. It's Hooke.OLIVER: Hooke. Hooke. That's a very good point.HITZ: The guy who wrote Micrographia, who has the enormous picture of the flea.OLIVER: Yes, yes, yes. So that would be good. But any other? Is it worth reading Plato alongside him?HITZ: Well, I like to—he's on the list for something we called Life of the Mind Seminar at Catherine Project, which is our introduction to the life of the mind.OLIVER: And just to tell people, the Catherine Project—this is not a university. Anyone can join a seminar.HITZ: That's right. It's an open online readers community. Consists of small, high-quality conversations, mostly on Zoom, some in person.OLIVER: You could be some kid, an accountant, a dentist, whatever, and you come and do a—you've got a PhD running a seminar, and you get that experience.HITZ: Right. Some of them are peer led, so they're not necessarily PhDs running them. The reading groups are not necessarily run by PhDs. But the core program in which the Life of the Mind Seminar is—either a PhD or an ABD [all but degree] or someone with some academic experience is usually leading that. We have it there, and we have it there with a set of books that are meant to disorient rather than to orient.So one of the difficulties with reading great books with more or less random selections of adults is that people feel uncertain, out of place. And they bring expertise, real or fake, to the table, which makes it very difficult to have a conversation. It's usually fake expertise, for what it's worth.OLIVER: Give us an example of what you mean by fake expertise.HITZ: Well, so someone will have—we'll be, say, reading Hamlet. Someone will have taken a class on Shakespeare in college, and they'll say, “Actually, we're asking this question. But what I learned, my professor told me, is that Hamlet actually symbolizes—he has an Oedipus complex and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, and then this is what this means, and this is what that means.” And then your conversation's over, because you need to focus just on the text that's shared between the—OLIVER: It's not a crossword puzzle.HITZ: Exactly. It's not a crossword puzzle, and it's not something where—or the other—people often, again, they feel a bit on their back feet. So they'll google a bunch of stuff about the author, and they'll start tossing out random facts about the book or about the author, about the context. And again, you don't get really into the meat of the book that way.So, Gulliver's Travels is there to help us think about ways in which we might not be expert in things we're expert. Ways in which we might think we understand something and not understand it. And ways in which people who, with every appearance of seriousness and scientific principle, can just say unbelievably stupid things.So it's a very, very good book for that, where in that sense, it's I think very good for any liberal education program. It's liberating that way. One of the things we need to be liberated from is false expertise.OLIVER: You're talking really about these secondhand opinions that you haven't interrogated and come to understand yourself.HITZ: Exactly. Exactly, exactly, exactly.OLIVER: This is what Mill says. Everything is new to someone, and the real genius is that you find it out.HITZ: Exactly.OLIVER: You don't get taught it. Yes, yes.HITZ: Exactly, exactly. So real learning is things you find for yourself. Anyway, that's what I like it with. As for pairing it, yes, I think it would just depend on what you were—I don't have a clear thought about that. I think it'd be good to pair it with Galileo's Starry Messenger and preface to Hooke's Micrographia.But you could also pair it with Emma. Be quite good, actually, because Emma is also about someone who really doesn't know what they're doing and has no idea. Thinks they know what's going on; they really have no idea what's going on.OLIVER: Yes. Hamlet as well, in fact.HITZ: I guess so. Does he not know what's going on?OLIVER: Who's diverting now? [laughter] Well, there's an interesting question, isn't there, about whether Hamlet has legitimate doubts. So he says, “This ghost could be a demon. I should be careful. I don't know what I'm doing. I'm going to pretend to be mad. I'm going to find out.” Or whether he just doesn't want to see the truth in front of him, and he quote-unquote “delays” because of that. I don't know if you have a view.HITZ: I don't think he's deluded. I think the problem is something different, but I haven't thought enough about it recently to know what his volitional obstacle is. But I don't think he's deluded. I think he sees what's going on, but there's something about acting that doesn't work for him.OLIVER: An internal—HITZ: Something internal. Something internal. In a way, I find the play very hard. I don't know what, for instance, what does that obstacle have to do with Ophelia? What's going on with that? Anyway, he's very mysterious, but I don't—yes, that'd be my sense, is that he's not—OLIVER: Do you buy this idea that he's a nihilist?HITZ: No, although he's definitely faced with something like nihilism. He has to look at it. And of course, the play does end with everyone dead, [laughs] so it's not obvious that he's wrong.Sympathy for GulliverOLIVER: This question hangs over Gulliver as well. Is the problem by the end that he's basically become a nihilist? His response to the Yahoos is to deny meaning, deny the possibility of meaning, to shut himself away.HITZ: He is a true misanthrope. He hates human beings and refuses to interact with them and in that sense, in some way, removes himself from any further mistakes. In another way, the mistake that he's in is so massive that that hardly seems like a consolation. But yes, he's definitely stuck, and he's stuck in a place where who he is—because he's a human being. We have to remember that.So he's in a place of total self-hatred and the hatred of his neighbor, what you'd call from the Christian perspective a total loss of charity. Is that nihilist? I don't know, but it's definitely bad. It's not a good state to be in. Maybe I don't know what you mean by nihilism exactly.OLIVER: Are we supposed to disapprove of him at the end or sympathize with him?HITZ: Disapprove, I think.OLIVER: Yes? You don't feel sorry for him?HITZ: I do a bit.OLIVER: But not much.HITZ: Well, should I?OLIVER: I have come to believe—yes, this is what I've come to feel in subsequent readings, is that Gulliver, as you say, is very mistaken. He thinks he understands things that he does not understand. He has the sort of pretense of rationality, but he lacks any sort of meta rationality to see what his limits are.And he becomes, therefore—he doesn't advocate genocide, and he doesn't take any pleasure in using Yahoo skin, but he's just completely null to it. There's a sort of void there where human feeling ought to be. And it's tragic for him. It's a tragic ending that he is so isolated. And we can't sympathize with him, as it were, but we can feel sort of awful that he's shriveled into this state rather than judging or blame.I think one of the persistent themes of the book is, as I say, this kind of basic love of fellow creature, the Glumdalclitch or the sorrel. And if you take that from the book, you will wish you could bring Gulliver back.HITZ: Right. What you're saying reminds me that there is an interesting parallel in Plato's dialogues that I hadn't thought of before, Plato's Parmenides, which is perhaps the most difficult Plato's dialogue. So it's a conversation between young Socrates and the philosopher Parmenides. The first third of it is relatively clear, some arguments against what people think of as Plato's theory of forms.Then there's an extensive, insane dialectical process where various theses about the connection between being and oneness are both argued for and then refuted, and argued for and then refuted, pages and pages and pages and pages of it. So this seems to be—it's Parmenides and Zeno who are running Socrates through this ringer.And the person at the very beginning of the dialogue who they have to go find, to tell him the story of how Socrates met Parmenides, used to study philosophy. But now he just trains horses. [laughs] One of my teachers pointed this out to me, and I've never been able to get over it, that he spent this time doing philosophy, and he's like, “You know what? I'm going to work with horses for the rest of my life. If I never hear another human voice, that's fine with me.”So I think that is an interesting parallel. And I think it is not really that uncommon to see people who are totally disillusioned with relating to humans, who then relate to animals instead, like they devote themselves to animals.OLIVER: But on that reading, it might be a disillusionment with philosophical humanity. It might be philosophy that's killed Gulliver's human feeling.HITZ: That's right. Well, I think that's one possibility, one very strong possibility. That's why I think the Houyhnhnms come after the Laputans. Going to the furthest reaches of his intellectual interests just destroys his humanity.But it doesn't seem like exhaustion in the same way that whoever, I can't remember his name, the character who relates the Parmenides, where you just think he must be exhausted from having heard more than one conversation like this. [laughter] And just in the stable with the horses eating oats, I mean, it's just delightful. It's just so peaceful, you know?OLIVER: Bucolic, pastoral, yes.HITZ: Yes, exactly. Exactly. Maybe you're right that we should be more sympathetic to someone in that situation.OLIVER: Well, next time you read it, you can tell me if you change your mind.HITZ: All right. I will tell you if I change my mind.OLIVER: Very good. Zena Hitz, thank you very much.HITZ: Thank you very much, Henry Oliver. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.commonreader.co.uk

MAY 31 | Who Is This King? | Mark 10:46-52 ...Then they came to Jericho. As Jesus and his disciples, together with a large crowd, were leaving the city, a blind man, Bartimaeus (which means “son of Timaeus”), was sitting by the roadside begging. When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!”Many rebuked him and told him to be quiet, but he shouted all the more, “Son of David, have mercy on me!”Jesus stopped and said, “Call him.”So they called to the blind man, “Cheer up! On your feet! He's calling you.” Throwing his cloak aside, he jumped to his feet and came to Jesus.“What do you want me to do for you?” Jesus asked him.The blind man said, “Rabbi, I want to see.”“Go,” said Jesus, “your faith has healed you.” Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.

MAY 31 | Who Is This King? | Mark 10:46-52 ...Then they came to Jericho. As Jesus and his disciples, together with a large crowd, were leaving the city, a blind man, Bartimaeus (which means “son of Timaeus”), was sitting by the roadside begging. When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!”Many rebuked him and told him to be quiet, but he shouted all the more, “Son of David, have mercy on me!”Jesus stopped and said, “Call him.”So they called to the blind man, “Cheer up! On your feet! He's calling you.” Throwing his cloak aside, he jumped to his feet and came to Jesus.“What do you want me to do for you?” Jesus asked him.The blind man said, “Rabbi, I want to see.”“Go,” said Jesus, “your faith has healed you.” Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.

MAY 31 | Who Is This King? | Mark 10:46-52 ...Then they came to Jericho. As Jesus and his disciples, together with a large crowd, were leaving the city, a blind man, Bartimaeus (which means “son of Timaeus”), was sitting by the roadside begging. When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!”Many rebuked him and told him to be quiet, but he shouted all the more, “Son of David, have mercy on me!”Jesus stopped and said, “Call him.”So they called to the blind man, “Cheer up! On your feet! He's calling you.” Throwing his cloak aside, he jumped to his feet and came to Jesus.“What do you want me to do for you?” Jesus asked him.The blind man said, “Rabbi, I want to see.”“Go,” said Jesus, “your faith has healed you.” Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.

MAY 31 | Who Is This King? | Mark 10:46-52 ...Then they came to Jericho. As Jesus and his disciples, together with a large crowd, were leaving the city, a blind man, Bartimaeus (which means “son of Timaeus”), was sitting by the roadside begging. When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!”Many rebuked him and told him to be quiet, but he shouted all the more, “Son of David, have mercy on me!”Jesus stopped and said, “Call him.”So they called to the blind man, “Cheer up! On your feet! He's calling you.” Throwing his cloak aside, he jumped to his feet and came to Jesus.“What do you want me to do for you?” Jesus asked him.The blind man said, “Rabbi, I want to see.”“Go,” said Jesus, “your faith has healed you.” Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.

MAY 31 | Who Is This King? | Mark 10:46-52 ...Then they came to Jericho. As Jesus and his disciples, together with a large crowd, were leaving the city, a blind man, Bartimaeus (which means “son of Timaeus”), was sitting by the roadside begging. When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!”Many rebuked him and told him to be quiet, but he shouted all the more, “Son of David, have mercy on me!”Jesus stopped and said, “Call him.”So they called to the blind man, “Cheer up! On your feet! He's calling you.” Throwing his cloak aside, he jumped to his feet and came to Jesus.“What do you want me to do for you?” Jesus asked him.The blind man said, “Rabbi, I want to see.”“Go,” said Jesus, “your faith has healed you.” Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.

MAY 31 | Who Is This King? | Mark 10:46-52 ...Then they came to Jericho. As Jesus and his disciples, together with a large crowd, were leaving the city, a blind man, Bartimaeus (which means “son of Timaeus”), was sitting by the roadside begging. When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!”Many rebuked him and told him to be quiet, but he shouted all the more, “Son of David, have mercy on me!”Jesus stopped and said, “Call him.”So they called to the blind man, “Cheer up! On your feet! He's calling you.” Throwing his cloak aside, he jumped to his feet and came to Jesus.“What do you want me to do for you?” Jesus asked him.The blind man said, “Rabbi, I want to see.”“Go,” said Jesus, “your faith has healed you.” Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.

MAY 31 | Who Is This King? | Mark 10:46-52 ...Then they came to Jericho. As Jesus and his disciples, together with a large crowd, were leaving the city, a blind man, Bartimaeus (which means “son of Timaeus”), was sitting by the roadside begging. When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!”Many rebuked him and told him to be quiet, but he shouted all the more, “Son of David, have mercy on me!”Jesus stopped and said, “Call him.”So they called to the blind man, “Cheer up! On your feet! He's calling you.” Throwing his cloak aside, he jumped to his feet and came to Jesus.“What do you want me to do for you?” Jesus asked him.The blind man said, “Rabbi, I want to see.”“Go,” said Jesus, “your faith has healed you.” Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.

MAY 31 | Who Is This King? | Mark 10:46-52 ...Then they came to Jericho. As Jesus and his disciples, together with a large crowd, were leaving the city, a blind man, Bartimaeus (which means “son of Timaeus”), was sitting by the roadside begging. When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!”Many rebuked him and told him to be quiet, but he shouted all the more, “Son of David, have mercy on me!”Jesus stopped and said, “Call him.”So they called to the blind man, “Cheer up! On your feet! He's calling you.” Throwing his cloak aside, he jumped to his feet and came to Jesus.“What do you want me to do for you?” Jesus asked him.The blind man said, “Rabbi, I want to see.”“Go,” said Jesus, “your faith has healed you.” Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.

Today’s Topics: 1, 2, 3, 4) Gospel – Mark 10:46-52 – As Jesus was leaving Jericho with His disciples and a sizable crowd, Bartimaeus, a blind man, the son of Timaeus, sat by the roadside begging. On hearing that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out and say, “Jesus, son of David, have pity on me.”  And many rebuked him, telling him to be silent. But he kept calling out all the more, “Son of David, have pity on me.” Jesus stopped and said, “Call him.” So they called the blind man, saying to him, “Take courage; get up, Jesus is calling you.” He threw aside his cloak, sprang up, and came to Jesus. Jesus said to him in reply, “What do you want me to do for you?” The blind man replied to Him, “Master, I want to see.” Jesus told him, “Go your way; your faith has saved you.” Immediately he received his sight and followed Him on the way. Bishop Sheen quote of the day

Original Post Date: May 30, 2024 === Gospel Mark 10:46-52 As Jesus was leaving Jericho with his disciples and a sizable crowd, Bartimaeus, a blind man, the son of Timaeus, sat by the roadside begging. On hearing that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out and say, “Jesus, son of David, have pity on me.” And many rebuked him, telling him to be silent. But he kept calling out all the more, “Son of David, have pity on me.” Jesus stopped and said, “Call him.” So they called the blind man, saying to him, “Take courage; get up, Jesus is calling you.” He threw aside his cloak, sprang up, and came to Jesus. Jesus said to him in reply, “What do you want me to do for you?” The blind man replied to him, “Master, I want to see.” Jesus told him, “Go your way; your faith has saved you.” Immediately he received his sight and followed him on the way. Reflection The request of Bartimaeus is radically different than the disciples, who often asked, Lord, give us a position of authority. Let us sit at your right, and another one will say, let me sit at your left and what Jesus is not calling us to is not a worldly authority over people, but he's calling us to an insight to see and understand who we really are, the beauty that we have, the dignity that we have, and to encourage others to see it for themselves. Nothing is easier for God, in Jesus, to give you what you ask for when you ask for sight. I want to see. I want to know. I want to experience your love. Closing Prayer Father, we often find ourselves in a kind of dark place where we're confused. It's a perfect time to turn to you in that darkness and say, Please give me the light that I miss. Give me the understanding I don't see. Open my eyes to a way that I've never thought of before. And that is always answered, because it's what he longs to give to the world. And we ask this in Jesus' name, Amen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

+ Holy Gospel according to St. Mark 10: 46 – 52As Jesus was leaving Jericho with his disciples and a sizable crowd, Bartimaeus, a blind man, the son of Timaeus, sat by the roadside begging. On hearing that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out and say, "Jesus, son of David, have pity on me." And many rebuked him, telling him to be silent. But he kept calling out all the more, "Son of David, have pity on me." Jesus stopped and said, "Call him." So they called the blind man, saying to him, "Take courage; get up, he is calling you." He threw aside his cloak, sprang up, and came to Jesus. Jesus said to him in reply, "What do you want me to do for you?" The blind man replied to him, "Master, I want to see." Jesus told him, "Go your way; your faith has saved you." Immediately he received his sight and followed him on the way.”The Gospel of the Lord.

Read OnlineAs Jesus was leaving Jericho with his disciples and a sizable crowd, Bartimaeus, a blind man, the son of Timaeus, sat by the roadside begging. On hearing that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out and say, “Jesus, son of David, have pity on me.” And many rebuked him, telling him to be silent. But he kept calling out all the more, “Son of David, have pity on me.” Mark 10:46–48Though the Torah commanded kindness and justice toward the blind, they were often treated poorly by the wider community. Unable to work or provide for themselves, the blind were typically reduced to begging. They also bore the stigma of being seen as suffering God's judgment, whether for their own sins or the sins of their parents. While today's story about Bartimaeus vividly illustrates the pitiful social and economic position of the blind at that time, it even more powerfully presents him as an ideal model to imitate.First, we should humbly see ourselves in Bartimaeus. On a spiritual level, we are all blind and in need of God's mercy. Like Bartimaeus, we must identify as people who are poor, ostracized, and incapable of seeing all that God wants to reveal to us. Pride gives us a false sense of who we are and blinds us to the truth of our spiritual poverty. Humility, on the other hand, opens the eyes of faith, enabling us to recognize our need for God's mercy and His healing grace so that we may see and understand life as He wishes to reveal it.Bartimaeus is not only a model of the humility we need; he is also a model of faith and prayer. In his humility, as soon as he heard that Jesus of Nazareth was passing by, he cried out in a twofold way. First, he called Jesus the “Son of David.” This was a profession of faith in Jesus as the Messiah. “Son of David” was a messianic title rooted in Nathan's prophecy, in which God promised King David that his descendant would establish an everlasting kingdom (cf. 2 Samuel 7:12–16). By calling Jesus the “Son of David,” Bartimaeus professed his belief that Jesus was the fulfillment of that prophecy.With his profession of faith, Bartimaeus also prayed the ideal prayer: “Have pity on me.” The word “pity” is a translation of the Greek eleison, which is also rendered as “have mercy.” For example, at Mass, we pray in Greek, “Kyrie eleison,” or “Lord, have mercy.” This prayer is ideal because every gift from God is an act of mercy. We do not earn or deserve His grace; it is a freely bestowed gift, and our prayer should reflect this profound truth.As Bartimaeus prayed, many people told him to be silent. Despite their rebukes, Bartimaeus intensified his prayer, “calling out all the more.” This persistence serves as another model for the ideals of prayer. The “many” who rebuked him and tried to silence him symbolize the numerous obstacles we face in our pursuit of God's mercy.Though the greatest obstacles we face are our own sins, which discourage us from approaching God in prayer, we also encounter challenges in the form of temptations. These temptations, like the “many” who sought to silence Bartimaeus, try to lead us away from prayer. They urge us to give up, doubt God's care for us, or remain complacent in our spiritual lives. Bartimaeus' response—to pray even louder and more fervently—teaches us the importance of perseverance in prayer, even in the face of discouragement or opposition.Reflect today on this poor blind man, Bartimaeus, sitting on the roadside. With him, profess your faith in Jesus as the Messiah and cry out for mercy. When sin hinders you, have the courage to admit it, confess it, and plead for forgiveness. When temptations try to silence you, resist them and cry out all the louder. In the end, Jesus called Bartimaeus to Himself and healed him. Jesus desires to do the same for us. He will, if we humbly identify with Bartimaeus, see ourselves in his condition, and imitate his unwavering faith and persistent prayer.Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me! With Bartimaeus, I profess my belief in You as the Messiah, the Savior of the world. With him, I also plead for Your mercy in my life and in the world around me. You alone are the source of all grace and mercy, and though I am unworthy, You freely bestow it upon the humble. Lord, I want to see. Open the eyes of my heart and grant me the reward of Your mercy. Jesus, I trust in You.Image via Adobe StockSource: Free RSS feed from catholic-daily-reflections.com — Copyright © 2026 My Catholic Life! Inc. All rights reserved. This content is provided solely for personal, non-commercial use. Redistribution, republication, or commercial use — including use within apps with advertising — is strictly prohibited without written permission.

This episode was a particular joy for me. I had the honor to talk with Jacob Howland. We start with LSD—talking about it, that is — go back to the steam engine in ancient Greece to return to the 20th century's nuclear bomb and today's artificial intelligence. What is the interplay of the human condition with ever more potent technology? What constitutes progress, education, and how can we deal with the challenges of our time? Jacob Howland served as Provost and Dean of the Intellectual Foundations Program at the University of Austin from 2022 to 2025, and before that, as McFarlin Professor of Philosophy at the University of Tulsa. He is the author of five books on Plato, Kierkegaard, and the Talmud, and over sixty articles on literature, politics, and the academy for general readers. He will be a Distinguished Visiting Professor in the School of Civic Leadership at the University of Texas during the academic year 2026-27. I was intrigued by a conversation Jacob had with Jordan Peterson talking about the CIA gets its hands on LSD. Jacob described the situation as “This is potent stuff, what can we do with it?” Was this a special case or is this our general approach to innovation? Is innovation thus simply reasoning backwards? What is technology? Since when do we speak of technology? “The marshalling or harnessing of significant social resources for the explicit purpose of advancing and applying science.” Mastering and possession of nature, as Descartes put it, is a core aspect of that. During that process, is the focus put too much on the means, while the ends might get lost? “The means justify the end? […] We can do this, therefore we should do it.” Innovation and the mindset of the time — do people even understand what was just invented? Example: the steam engine in antiquity. How does the world appear to people in antiquity, in the Christian tradition, and later in the modern age? Or in other words: when did transforming the world become an objective? Descartes already understands that: “Desire is implicitly infinite.” This shifts the relationship between man and world. In what way specifically? “When we take away the limits of desire, we open up an infinite and unlimited desire for wealth, an unlimited desire for new devices, conveniences and so forth.” Descartes already expresses that if we become the masters of nature, we might be able to find a way to limit the infirmities of old age and to extend life. What was the role of Francis Bacon in The New Atlantis? What role did he play for science? Contemplating the history of technology and science, it appears we are treating new inventions and innovations like children — even those with extraordinary potential. How could we have survived this attitude? “Technology contains its own fatality.” What changed between the nuclear bomb and the advent of artificial intelligence? “We are going to have to trust AI more and more, but we don't actually know if it is trustworthy.” What can we learn from Greek mythology about these complexities of technology? What is Pandora's box? “We exchange one kind of fatality for another.” Technology can be transgressive and totalising. How? “If the idea is to remove all limits, which would be a way of being like God, then, because we are human beings, we will just descend into chaos. […] You can take human beings out of chaos, but you cannot take the chaos out of human beings.” Is it true that interesting things happen at the edge of chaos, as Stuart Kauffman expressed it? “When you just have order without the vitality that comes from transgression, you have decay, you have fossilised formalism.” Henry Adams stated, about 100 years ago: Can the speed of change become too fast for human societies and thus fundamentally destabilising? “We have a hard time holding two opposing thoughts in our mind.” But this seems to be increasingly important — a fundamental human skill, in fact. How is this important to assess progress? What changed in the attitude towards progress, especially with young people? “Moderns and late moderns (us) believe that we can solve problems.” The way we address complex problems was discussed in other episodes. Noteworthy seems a quotation by Thomas Sowell: “There are no solutions, only trade-offs” Can we actually solve a problem in a complex “wicked” environment? How does this help us to understand how technology works? Why is maintenance at the centre of a complex techno-social society? What does that mean specifically? How does politics work, and why will we never arrive at morally perfect situations? Why is impatience rising and creating unreasonable expectations? Why is humility of huge importance in dealing with complex problems, for instance in science? On the other hand, why is it a bad idea to be afraid of your own shadow? “I am more concerned by what the bomb is doing already to young people,” C. S. Lewis. So, how do we go along, surrounded by radical uncertainty? What does this mean for science? “Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts,” Richard Feynman. “You are dealing with a real scientist when that scientist says: here is what we don't know.” In contrast to this, remember Anthony Fauci: “I am Science.” What is the role of generalists versus specialists to resolve or manage some of these issues? What about different perspectives of time? “The emphasis in our lives today is on the present. What is happening right now.” Where is expertise, what is the interplay between specialist knowledge and generalist “connecting tissue”? “I have never let my ignorance interfere with anything I wanted to study.” How is this relevant to living a decent and flourishing human life? But to make it even bolder: Do we have such stagnation in science and society because we have so few generalists? As a closing question: If the mission is to save (American) education, what are we supposed to do, and do we even have a chance still? “Harvard College taught little, and that little, ill. But it left the mind open, supple, and ready to receive knowledge,” Henry Adams. Could we at least get back to this situation again? “How many universities can we say that about? We have not succeeded in that. […] At the end of the day, we are suffering from a crisis of meaning. Any way we give people more meaning is significant.” How can we do that? In company with other people, ideally. There is hope, as Jacob states at the end of the conversation. We are at the start of a reconstruction, as Douglas Murray put it: “We should be the reconstructionists. The deconstructionists knew something about how to take things apart but, like children with bicycles, had no idea how to put them back together. […] We have the choice either to live in the wastelands or to rebuild them.” Other Episodes Episode 148: Künstliche Vernunft? Ein Gespräch mit Jan Juhani Steinmann Episode 145: Reflexion und Rekonstruktion! Episode 137: Alles Leben ist Problemlösen Episode 134: Das Werdende, das ewig wirkt und lebt? Transzendent oder Transient Episode 129: Rules, A Conversation with Prof. Lorraine Daston Episode 125: Ist Fortschritt möglich? Ideen als Widergänger über Generationen Episode 118: Science and Decision Making under Uncertainty, A Conversation with Prof. John Ioannidis Episode 116: Science and Politics, A Conversation with Prof. Jessica Weinkle Episode 110: The Shock of the Old, a conversation with David Edgerton Episode 107: How to Organise Complex Societies? A Conversation with Johan Norberg Episode 74: Apocalype Always References Homepage of Jacob Howland Jordan Peterson & Jacob Howland, Ancient Stories That Bridge The Heavens & The Earth (2025) René Descartes, Discourse on the Method of Rightly Conducting One's Reason and of Seeking Truth in the Sciences (1637) Francis Bacon, The New Atlantis (1627, posthum) Stuart Kauffman, At Home in the Universe: The Search for the Laws of Self-Organization and Complexity(Oxford University Press, 1995) Henry Adams, The Education of Henry Adams (1918) Thomas Sowell, A Conflict of Visions: Ideological Origins of Political Struggles (1987) F. A. Hayek, The Use of Knowledge in Society (1945) Horst Rittel, Melvin Webber, Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning, Policy Sciences 4 (1973) Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics (ca. 350 BC) C. S. Lewis, “Is Progress Possible? Willing Slaves of the Welfare State” (Essay, 1958) Richard Feynman, “What is Science?” (presentation 1966, published inThe Physics Teacher, 1969) Erwin Schrödinger, What is Life? The Physical Aspect of the Living Cell (Cambridge University Press, 1944) Plato, Timaeus (ca. 360 BC) H. J. Paton, The Good Will: A Study in the Coherence Theory of Goodness (1927) Bryan Caplan, The Case Against Education: Why the Education System Is a Waste of Time and Money (Princeton University Press, 2018) Douglas Murray - "The Age of Reconstruction Has Begun!" | ARC 2025

Bartimaeus was blind, broke, and sitting on the side of the road. His desperation led him to shout past the crowd—who were telling him to shut up—and to get the attention of the one who could do something. This Sunday we're talking about the kind of bold, persistent, holy-hustle faith that refuses to stay seated and discovers that Jesus is already waiting, already asking, already wanting to hear all about how he can answer your deepest needs. Check out the weekly sermon here or on our SRBC podcast on Apple Podcast and Spotify. This Sunday we're exploring:Why faith is not passive and what bold, persistent faith actually looks like in practiceThe question Jesus asks twice in Mark 10, and why he answers it differently each time — What do you want?Why the version of Christianity that tells you to want nothing and need nothing is unbiblical and antithetical to the Jesus wayHow sacred striving and holy hustle are not opposed to grace but the key that unlocks the grace that awaits youHow the mature follower of Jesus knows who they are, knows what they need, and is satisfied with the God's answers to their requests Like what you hear? We'd love to know.At South Run, we read every message personally. Whether you have a question, want to share how God is moving in your life, or are thinking about visiting in person, this is the place to start. If you click the link below, Pastor Eric will personally reach out to you. Listening online? Let us know. Sermon Transcript What Do You Want? — Sermon TranscriptSouth Run Baptist Church | Springfield, VAPastor Eric GilchrestMark 10:46–52This is a full sermon transcript from South Run Baptist Church in Springfield, Virginia. In this message, Pastor Eric Gilchrest preaches on the healing of blind Bartimaeus from Mark 10:46–52. This sermon is part of the ongoing "The Jesus Way" transformation series and addresses the question Jesus asks Bartimaeus — "What do you want me to do for you?" — exploring what it means to bring our deepest desires to God, why active faith matters, and how to pursue the abundant life with what Pastor Eric calls "holy hustle."Opening Prayer: The Hope and Possibility That Children RepresentHeavenly Father, I thank you for these children, for the life that they represent, the energy, the possibility, the hope of their future. They are a reminder to us all, the adults in the room, of just what is possible when we give our lives over to you. And so, Lord, today we do so again, and we ask that you speak to us right here, right now. We pray this in Jesus' name. Amen.What Do You Desire from God? A Question That Broke a Pastor's BrainA few years ago, I was part of a small group of pastors. We met about once a month, and it was over Zoom, and in the first meeting that we had together, it was in person, and it was for a full day. And during this full day session, we really got to know each other well. We hadn't really met each other prior to this, and so there was just a lot of sharing, a lot of honesty, and then periodically in the meeting, we would be given a prompt that we would then have to go journal about for about 30 minutes or so.The very first prompt that we were given and we were supposed to go journal about was really quite simple. And it's a question, which is: what do you desire from God? What do you desire from God? And I remember I took the question, and I still have the journal, and I went off to my own little place, and I wrote the question at the top of the journal, and I sat there, and I felt like my brain was breaking, because despite 40 years of living on this earth at that point, I had never really asked that question. Like, I was always tuned to ask, what does God want, right? What does God desire from me? And I think this is a very good question, too, but they were asking me to think about, what do I desire? Like, what do I want in this life?And this is the question Jesus asks to Bartimaeus today — what do you want from me, is what he asks him. And it's the question I think you should be asking of yourself. And the truth is this, right? Even if you say, well, I don't have a desire, or I'm not supposed to have one — it's always there. It's lurking underneath. You're just kind of squashing it down. There are things sitting in your heart right now. You just simply need to be honest about them, and you need to bring them to God, and you need to see, like, God, is this what you desire? And then we tune our desires with the desires of God. And God may say, as he said to Bartimaeus, a big yes, be healed. And he may say no. And we must learn what it means to receive both of these answers.But with this sermon, my hope for you today is that as we continue down this path together of the Jesus way, the abundant life way, we get serious about what it is that we actually want ourselves in this life, but then we do something about it — that we don't just sit still and we don't wait for the thing to happen and we sit on our hands and do nothing. We actually then pursue and we proceed to go somewhere.Mark 10:46–52: Blind Bartimaeus on the Road to JerichoJesus is asking Bartimaeus today, what is it that you want me to do for you? And I actually think God is asking this same question of each of us. What do you want me to do for you? The truth is this: it's obvious that only you can live your life. No one's going to live it for you. God's not even going to live your life for you. And so part of being a follower of Jesus and finding our way down that path toward abundance is walking with an active kind of faith — moving and doing, pursuing, working in the world. And as we do so, coming back to God regularly, daily, asking God, is this what I should be doing in the world? Use me today for your ends.Let's go ahead and pick up Mark. If you've got your scriptures, we're in Mark 10:46 to 52. If you don't have a Bible with you, there's definitely one in the pew back, and I would encourage you to pull that out right now.Jesus is nearing the end of his life. He's heading out of Jericho and actually into Jerusalem for the very last time, and this is where we pick him up. It says:"They came to Jericho, and as he was leaving Jericho with his disciples and a great crowd, Bartimaeus, a blind beggar, the son of Timaeus, was sitting by the roadside."I really want you to envision this scene. I want you to put yourself into it. I want you to be Bartimaeus. I want you to sit there blinded for decades. I want you to be the beggar on the side of the road who is desperate. And then you know who Jesus is, and he's walking by. I want you to ask yourself what you would do in this situation.We continue in verse 47: "When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out and say, Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me. Have mercy on me." And he cries out. Oh, you might do this too, right? You might cry out and you know this is your one shot. You're going to shoot your shot and you are going to find that man that can actually do something.But then there's probably some of you in the room who might think, well, he's a very important person and he's got other big things that he needs to do. He's on his way to save the world, in fact, and probably doesn't want to be bothered by my petty needs. And so maybe I'll just continue to sit here and do nothing. But this is not what Bartimaeus does, right? Bartimaeus shouts out, and he says, Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me. Help me out. I'm in a desperate place.And he goes on. "Many rebuked him, and they told him to be silent. But he cried out all the more, Son of David, have mercy on me." Second time around, he is told by the crowds, be silent. Stop speaking up. And what does he do? Does he listen to the crowds and say, yeah, they're right, I probably should just sit here and be quiet? No, he shouts out all the more. And he says, Jesus, help me.Bartimaeus as the Opposite of Vanity: Seeking Jesus Above the Crowd's OpinionNow, if you were here last week, we talked about vanity, right? And if you remember what vanity is, it's being more worried about the crowds and what they think than about the one audience you should be seeking. Bartimaeus is a beautiful example of the opposite of vanity. He cares nothing about what the crowds think. He is not worried at all if they think he is immoral, if they think he is not worthy of Jesus' attention, if they think whatever they might think of him. He's a nuisance on the side of the road. He does not care about them. He cares about the only one in the room who needs to care for him. And so he shouts out all the more. Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me.Jesus hears him and stops, says, call him to me. And they called the blind man, and they said to him, take heart, get up, he's calling you. And what does he do? He throws off his cloak, he sprang up, and he came to Jesus. And Jesus says the question of the day: "What do you want me to do for you?" And the blind man said, "Rabbi, teacher, let me recover my sight." And Jesus says, "Go your way. Your faith has made you well." And immediately he recovered his sight and followed him on the way.Holy Hustle: The Active, Pursuing Faith of BartimaeusA couple key pieces of this that I want to draw out — really just one big one — is the nature of his faith, Bartimaeus. It is an active faith. He is pursuing Jesus. He is shouting out, not once but twice. He is not allowing the crowds to stop him. He is not allowing people to say, no, no, no, go over here and do this other thing. He is going to pursue Jesus actively, and he's going to go after the one who can indeed help him. And then when he gets the call, what does he do? He doesn't sit there in the dust. He throws it all off. The cloak, by the way, is everything he owns. And he leaves it all behind, unlike the rich man who appears just prior to this. He gives it all up, and he begins to follow Jesus in this moment.This is what Bartimaeus does, and he represents what I'm calling this morning holy hustle. Holy hustle. He is somebody who in a holy kind of way is hustling and doing something to reach the ends that not only he desires, but it turns out God desires these ends for him as well.The Persistent Widow of Luke 18: Another Portrait of Holy HustleLuke tells the same story about Bartimaeus. Luke tells it slightly differently. This will appear, if you want to look it up at some other point, in Luke chapter 18. But what Luke does in 18 is he pairs it with what happens in Luke 1 to, I want to say, 6 or 8. And in that little passage, Jesus tells a parable. And this parable is about a widow. And it's a widow who has been treated unjustly — something has been done to her that is unjust. And if you recall this parable, what does she do? Middle of the night, she goes and she finds the judge, the one who is supposed to mete out justice in the world, and she goes and she knocks on his door.It turns out he is an unjust judge. He doesn't really care about her at all. But what does she do? She knocks again, and then she goes again, and then she goes again, and she is persistent. She doesn't stop. She too has this holy hustle. And then finally, what happens in this parable? Well, this unjust judge who the passage says is evil and unrighteous, well, he finally relents and he gives her what she wants because he's just tired of her asking.And then it says, but if that's an unjust person, if that's somebody who is evil, imagine what a good God does when he hears our needs, our desires, and our prayers. What does that God do? Well, he looks upon us, as Bartimaeus asks for, with mercy.The Plastic Lawnmower: What Grace Actually Looks Like in PracticeThere is a holy hustle about the persistent widow. There is a holy hustle about Bartimaeus this morning. Now, all of this, by the way, gets at the nature of maybe one of the Bible's biggest topics, which is grace and how grace works. And I'm going to guess that at this point, some of you might be a little uncomfortable with the notion that you are somehow doing something to affect God's grace in your life. Because many of us have grown up in a Protestant tradition where we recite good Protestant phrases like sola gratia, by grace alone, and it's all God's doing and it's none of our doing. I'm not going to necessarily take aim directly at that, just close to it.Because what I think about how grace works is there is a part that you and I must play in it. Bartimaeus, for example, he could have sat there and said nothing, done nothing, waited, watched Jesus walk by, and then he would have remained blind for the rest of his life. But this is not what he does, is it? He shouts out. He is active. His faith pushes him to do something.I want you to think of it this way. I meant to bring a prop, by the way. I don't bring props often, and I was really happy about this one, and now I'm very sad that I didn't. So I want you to imagine, up on this stage is one of those plastic lawnmowers that kids have. Do you know these? We have one at our house still. A child who is five years old says to his dad, I want to help you mow the lawn. Now the dad chooses to give him the fake plastic lawnmower that does very little real good, but the fake plastic lawnmower is still something. And then the dad goes out and grabs his real metal lawnmower, one that is quite dangerous, but very effective. And he begins to mow. Well, alongside him is this five-year-old with the plastic mower, thinking that he is mowing the grass very well alongside his father.This is not a perfect analogy, but that little boy is doing something — something very important. He is showing up. He is engaging with the father. He is participating alongside of him. It looks like he's mowing, even though he's clearly not. If someone walked by to see this scene, they would know immediately that the father is doing all of the mowing out there. But when the grass is finally cut, and the father and the son walk inside, sweating profusely, and grab a drink, both of them have had a hard day's work together, and no doubt, the five-year-old son will look at the dad and be proud of what they did together. Did the son do anything? Yes, he did. Did the father do everything? Yes, he did.But you can also imagine a very different scene in which the five-year-old does not ask to mow with the dad. He just stayed inside and he watched. He wasn't part of it at all. He didn't ask the father for a mower, and he didn't walk alongside the father every step of the way. When the grass is cut and the father is inside getting the long drink, will that son look at the yard and say to the dad, look what we've done together, dad? No, he will not.This is what grace looks like. It is God who is doing it all. Obviously, it is Jesus who heals Bartimaeus. Jesus effectuates the grace. Jesus does the work of healing that blind man. Jesus does what Bartimaeus cannot. Bartimaeus sat there for decades, blind, begging, and could do nothing about it. And Jesus comes along, and he does what Bartimaeus simply cannot do — much like the five-year-old cannot do anything about really mowing that lawn. But he can show up. And he can be with his dad. And he can choose not to stay indoors, but to go outdoors and to mow with the father.I think the showing up is what Jesus rewards here. It's not that Bartimaeus has done anything, and yet he's done something — something very important. He has opened himself to the grace that God offers. That is what Jesus is asking of you right now. He is walking by and he wants you to call out. Maybe to be obnoxious and to forget about what the crowds are saying and to seek his grace.Two Traps to Avoid: The Genie Lamp and the Bootstraps TrapNow I will warn you, there are two traps that we should talk about. I don't want you to be confused. The first has to do with the play that I saw last night, Aladdin, in which there is a genie that pops out, and you rub the lamp, and you simply ask for your wish, and the genie says, your wish is my command, and he gives it to you. This is not how God works. Not at all, in fact. And we know this with certainty, because if you turn with me back to Mark chapter 10, I'll show you something that would be easily missed.You see, if you go to the passage right before this one, it's a passage about two men, James and John, the brothers, and they come to Jesus, and they have a request themselves. And so in verse 35, James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came up to him and they said to him, teacher, we want you to do something for us, whatever we ask of you. We want to rub the lamp, right? And we want our wish to be your command. And so he says to them, interestingly, what do you want me to do for you? This is the precise question — like word for word — what he says to Bartimaeus, right? What do you want me to do for you? And they proceed to say, well, we want to sit at your right hand and your left hand in glory, right? We are self-seeking in this moment, they may as well say out loud. And Jesus says, you don't know what you're asking. Sometimes this is God's answer to us. We might be in prayer and rubbing what we think is the God lamp and saying, God, we want you to give me this thing. And sometimes God says back to us, you don't know what you're asking for.But sometimes it's actually a little deeper than that. I don't know if you caught the 60 Minutes this week, but there's a former senator from Nebraska named Ben Sasse. He's in his mid-50s. And in December of last year, he was given a cancer diagnosis, and he should not and probably will not make it to the end of this year. He is an honorable man. He is, in terms of politicians, we'll say he's one of the good ones. And he is a man of deep faith. And it is interesting to watch him because he has certainly asked God to take this cancer away from me. And God's answer has been to this point, no. No, I am not going to take that away from you. And this is sometimes the answer we get from God. Our desire, our will, our hopes, our dreams are much like Bartimaeus' — and we want to be healed of the blindness or whatever it is that's besetting us. But sometimes God says, no, I have other plans.And then Ben Sasse shows us a way forward. Because he will stand there and he will say, I trust the God of the universe to have a plan that is in all of our best interests. And so I am going to use the rest of my life, the life that I have left, that God has given me, and I am going to pour life into this world as long as I have breath in my lungs. And so this is what he has set out to do for however many months he has left.The second trap we might fall into — I was struggling to find a name for it — it might be like the bootstraps trap or the entitlement trap or the ownership trap, which is to say that that little boy that goes out there and mows the lawn with his father might turn around and then tell one of his friends, hey, look what I did, right? I am the keeper of this lawn. This is my domain. I own all of this. Look at how great I am. The holy hustle only remains holy if you don't fall into the bootstraps trap, which is to say that when the success comes, if the success comes, you always recognize that it's grace. From top to bottom, it's grace. And so you always point back to the one giving the grace, and you give him thanks for the successes that you have in life.Three More Traps: Suppressing Desire, Dying to the Wrong Things, and the Trap of InactivityBut there are some traps that this whole sermon has been trying to keep you out of, and I want to make sure you catch those as well. One of those traps says that we have or are supposed to have no desires or wants or needs. But as I started with, this is just silly. Of course, you will always have desires, so I think it's better to simply name them and to start working on them and to try to figure out if they are holy or not, if they are God's desires or not.Another trap says something along the lines of, we're supposed to die to ourselves, right? And this is true. The scriptures talk about this all the time. But sometimes we end up dying to the wrong things. We are supposed to die to that which makes us unholy, that which works against the grace of God working in us and through us. But instead, some in this room, and myself included, have fallen into the trap where we die to noble things and good things, things that actually give us life — maybe even desires that God himself has planted deep in your soul. And we say, we're not allowed to have those desires. I'm supposed to die to that old self. And to you, I would simply say, it's quite possible God has planted that seed in you and is really trying to grow it and is trying to nourish it and wants you to nourish it because that part of you might be the very thing that is going to change the world that is all around you. But this requires wisdom, knowing what parts of yourself to die to and what parts of yourself to live into — this is a life's journey. And it requires wise guides and people in your life, being discipled by someone else or others, coming to church on Sundays.Finally, there is this other trap. And this other trap is the trap of inactivity. It's just sitting there, waiting for God to move or to do something. It's as if Bartimaeus had not called out to Jesus, or the persistent widow had not walked next door to the judge's home and knocked on it ten times. The trap of inactivity says, well, God will do what God will do when God wants to do it. And I would encourage you, maybe the right thing to do is to get up, and to shout out, and to be a little obnoxious, and to go knock on somebody's door, and to do something about what God is trying to do in your life.This walking with Jesus on the narrow road to life requires a tremendous amount of wisdom. And here's why. The scriptures tell us routinely to wait on God. And so one might mistake what Bartimaeus is doing as not waiting on God. Bartimaeus is maybe being too active. And so it requires wisdom to know when I lean in and when I wait. This again requires good friends and wise counsel and people who are helping you discern what to do with your life.Easter Morning, the Amphitheater, and the Shout That Surprised a PastorOn Easter morning this year, in that early service, many of us gathered outside at the amphitheater down there, and something remarkable happened, for me at least. I don't know if you remember this, but for me it was a moment. You see, I didn't think it was going to work, and then it did work. I said to the congregation, I want you to be thinking of something that you're hoping for this year, something that you're dreaming about, something that you want, a desire that's deep down in you, and I'm going to ask you to shout it out. We're not doing this again this morning, by the way. And then I thought, well, no one's gonna do it, or they're just gonna whisper it. And so I kind of prompted it, and then we got to the point where I asked, okay, shout it out now — and like everybody shouted at the same time. And I was shocked because you clearly had some strong desires deep down in your hearts that you want, that you hope for.And I want you this morning to name those again. Not out loud this time. But I want you to name them in your heart and in your head. Because the first step toward living a faithful life is to name what we desire, to start walking toward it, and then allowing God to course correct along the way. To hustle, but to make sure it's a holy hustle.What Is Your Deep Desire? God Is Asking You the Same Question He Asked BartimaeusAnd so this morning, just to kind of prompt you and pump the well a little bit, you might be hoping or longing or desiring for one of these things. To be a present, engaged father. To find a spouse. To leave the job that is killing you and find the courage to do what you were made for. You might be desiring to find freedom from that thing that you've never told anyone about. To get sober. To get into the right school or the right grad program. To experience the real and living God rather than just study about him. To find a community where you actually belong, where someone knows you and you know them. To have one real friend. To eat right and to lose weight. To see a family member come to faith. To leave something behind that outlasts you.I don't know what your deep desire is. But God wants to know. And God is coming to you this morning and asking you the same question he asked Bartimaeus. What do you want? It starts with honesty. And God's answer may be no. But God's answer may be yes. And he's just waiting for you to say it out loud and to start walking toward him.Because there's this other part of the story that would be easily missed again, but I don't want us to miss it. Because right at the end of all of this, Bartimaeus comes forward, and he tells Jesus what he wants, and Jesus heals him. And then it says he followed him on the way. Which is everything that Jesus is trying to get us to do this morning — to follow him along the road. And our hopes and our dreams and our desires, it should all be aiming for that road of life, for that way of Jesus that he wants to walk us down.But God is not going to live this life for you. And yet, paradoxically, he is the one who will enable all the work you are supposed to be doing. He's got his mower out and he's ready. You just have to pick up your plastic mower, head outside, and walk where Jesus walks the path ahead of you, following where he has prepared a way. A path that is intended for your good and for the good of all around you.Let us pray together. Jesus, we come this morning and we hear echoing in our ears, what do you want me to do for you? What do you want me to do for you? God, sometimes we don't answer that question out of fear. Fear that we actually don't have faith, that we don't trust you enough to give it over, that you might disappoint us, that maybe you're not even really there. And so God, this morning, give us that faith to trust you enough, to hand over our life's deepest desires to you. And God, whatever answer that is that comes back, whether it's that resounding yes or a quiet no or a I want to make you holy — God, I pray this morning that we trust you, that we have the faith of Bartimaeus to leap up and to ask you for exactly what we want and then to follow you along the way. We pray this in Christ's holy name. Amen.South Run Baptist Church | 8712 Selger Drive, Springfield, VA 22153 | Sunday Worship at 11amServing Springfield, Burke, West Springfield, Lorton, Alexandria, Fort Belvoir, and Franconia, Virginia.Listen on Apple Podcasts or Spotify

Here in the Gospel of Mark, this lessonbegins in chapter 10 verses 45 thru 52After Jesus spoke of Himself as one who came to minister and to give His life a ransom for many, in fact for all, He now ministers once again near Jericho.A blind man by the name of Bartimaeus which means son of Timaeus asked Jesus to give his eye sight back to him. This blind man was initially rebuked by the crowd standing along the way.But Jesus heard him calling out to Him as Jesus, Son of David. This blind man recognized Jesus as the coming Messiah, the Messiah who was born in the city of David as Christ the Lord - the Savior, to save His people.Here is Dr. Mitchell in Mark 10:45-52 with Jesus our savior on the Unchanging Word Bible Broadcast.

In their second episode featuring the works of modern Platonist Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947), James Myers and Michael Fitzpatrick brought Plato into the 21st century through Whitehead's perspectives as a mathematician and philosopher. The discussion relates Whitehead's perspectives to many of Plato's dialogues, including The Sophist, The Timaeus, The Republic, The Parmenides, and The Philebus.Writing his landmark work Process and Reality during the years when quantum mechanics and general relativity were discovered, Whitehead's philosophy of organism treats the universe as a web of interconnected processes and changes. Whitehead applied the logic of Plato's writing from 2,400 years ago to identify crucial connections in the web and, by following their paths, he related concepts in general relativity and quantum mechanics to the universe as an organism. From Whitehead's perspective, there was clear logic for an eternal co-dependency of the infinite universe and the finite connections within its web.The mathematician had much to say about the nature of time, which was a prominent in the episode's discussion. To Whitehead, time was not linear but circular, and likewise Plato's character Timaeus described the universe as spherical. Timaeus also stated that the changes we see everywhere around us are in a “moving image of eternity, moving according to number, of eternity remaining in unity.” The appeal of Timaeus' perspective to a mathematician becomes even more obvious in the character's next statement: “This number, of course, is what we now call 'time'.”Can science and philosophy be reunited? If ever there was a time for such unity, the time is now, and Whitehead paved the way to connecting ancient principles with the discoveries of Albert Einstein and Nils Bohr that have transformed the modern world.

Pastor Jon Verwey 46 Then they reached Jericho, and as Jesus and his disciples left town, a large crowd followed him. A blind beggar named Bartimaeus (son of Timaeus) was sitting beside the road. 47 When Bartimaeus heard that Jesus of Nazareth was nearby, he began to shout, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!” 48 “Be quiet!” many of the people yelled at him. But he only shouted louder, “Son of David, have mercy on me!” 49 When Jesus heard him, he stopped and said, “Tell him to come here.” So they called the blind man. “Cheer up,” they said. “Come on, he's calling you!” 50 Bartimaeus threw aside his coat, jumped up, and came to Jesus. 51 “What do you want me to do for you?” Jesus asked. “My Rabbi,” the blind man said, “I want to see!” 52 And Jesus said to him, “Go, for your faith has healed you.” Instantly the man could see, and he followed Jesus down the road. — Mark 10:46–52 NLT Faith is seeing and believing who Jesus is, trusting that He can and will act, and humbly coming to Him—pushing through to reach Him and following wherever He leads. …Jesus, Son of David… v. 47b …threw aside his coat, jumped up, and came to Jesus v. 50 …Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me! v. 47b “Be quiet!” many of the people yelled at him… v. 48 …he only shouted louder… v. 48 …he followed Jesus down the road v. 52b (NLT) …followed him on the way. v. 52b (ESV) …If any of you wants to be my follower, you must give up your own way, take up your cross, and follow me. — Mark 8:34 NLT Faith is seeing and believing who Jesus is, trusting that He can and will act, and humbly coming to Him—pushing through to reach Him and following wherever He leads. [NOTE: when you put these questions on the screen reveal them one at a time, but keep the previous question on the screen.] Where are you having a hard time believing who Jesus really is? Where are you not trusting Him? Where are you pulling back in fear when you know you need to press in toward Jesus? Where is life getting loud—where other voices, pressures, or circumstances are trying to silence you—and instead of crying out, you've grown quiet? Where are you choosing to sit by the road— instead of getting up and following Him where He is leading you?

This is part 5 of the recording of my talk at the Fourteenth Annual Marquette Summer Seminar on Aristotle and the Aristotelian Tradition, "The Significance of Thumos in Platonic and Aristotelian Moral Psychology". An important difference between the Platonist tradition and the Aristotelian is the status accorded to thumos in their respective moral psychologies. In very broad strokes, the Platonic tradition consistently follows and reinterprets Plato's tripartite conception of the soul, maintaining thumos one of three main parts of the soul, distinct from, in between, and interacting a rational part and the appetites. Thumos has a clear scope and proper function in Plato's texts and those of later Platonists. In Aristotle's moral psychology, thumos has a more restricted status, for the most part reinterpreted as one main mode of desire or affectivity (orexis). By contrast to other moral psychologies, e.g. that of the Stoics who treat thumos as just one emotion or passion among others, thumos in Aristotle and the Aristotelian tradition retains a distinctiveness from other, lower forms of affectivity, evidenced by discussions like that of akrasia due to thumos in N.E. 7 or that of thumos as one of the main causes for human actions in Rhet. 1. The status, function, and proper education of thumos remained a matter of contention and reinterpretation through antiquity, evidenced by discussions bearing upon thumos, for example in Plutarch, Galen, Philo, among others. My paper first outlines Plato's treatment of thumos, drawing primarily upon Republic and Timaeus. It then sets out an Aristotelian account of thumos reinterpreted as a main mode of orexis, central to anger (orge), friendship, and other affective states, drawing mainly upon the two Ethics, the Politics, and the Rhetoric. Similarities and continuities between Plato's and Aristotle's positions are stressed, particularly the need to understand, orient, and educate thumos. Both positions are briefly contrasted against other interpretations which do not accord thumos a distinctive status, including Stoic thought. The paper also briefly discusses selected later reinterpretations of and controversies about thumos in the ongoing Platonic and Aristotelian traditions. To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler

This is part 4 of the recording of my talk at the Fourteenth Annual Marquette Summer Seminar on Aristotle and the Aristotelian Tradition, "The Significance of Thumos in Platonic and Aristotelian Moral Psychology". An important difference between the Platonist tradition and the Aristotelian is the status accorded to thumos in their respective moral psychologies. In very broad strokes, the Platonic tradition consistently follows and reinterprets Plato's tripartite conception of the soul, maintaining thumos one of three main parts of the soul, distinct from, in between, and interacting a rational part and the appetites. Thumos has a clear scope and proper function in Plato's texts and those of later Platonists. In Aristotle's moral psychology, thumos has a more restricted status, for the most part reinterpreted as one main mode of desire or affectivity (orexis). By contrast to other moral psychologies, e.g. that of the Stoics who treat thumos as just one emotion or passion among others, thumos in Aristotle and the Aristotelian tradition retains a distinctiveness from other, lower forms of affectivity, evidenced by discussions like that of akrasia due to thumos in N.E. 7 or that of thumos as one of the main causes for human actions in Rhet. 1. The status, function, and proper education of thumos remained a matter of contention and reinterpretation through antiquity, evidenced by discussions bearing upon thumos, for example in Plutarch, Galen, Philo, among others. My paper first outlines Plato's treatment of thumos, drawing primarily upon Republic and Timaeus. It then sets out an Aristotelian account of thumos reinterpreted as a main mode of orexis, central to anger (orge), friendship, and other affective states, drawing mainly upon the two Ethics, the Politics, and the Rhetoric. Similarities and continuities between Plato's and Aristotle's positions are stressed, particularly the need to understand, orient, and educate thumos. Both positions are briefly contrasted against other interpretations which do not accord thumos a distinctive status, including Stoic thought. The paper also briefly discusses selected later reinterpretations of and controversies about thumos in the ongoing Platonic and Aristotelian traditions. To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler

This is part 3 of the recording of my talk at the Fourteenth Annual Marquette Summer Seminar on Aristotle and the Aristotelian Tradition, "The Significance of Thumos in Platonic and Aristotelian Moral Psychology". An important difference between the Platonist tradition and the Aristotelian is the status accorded to thumos in their respective moral psychologies. In very broad strokes, the Platonic tradition consistently follows and reinterprets Plato's tripartite conception of the soul, maintaining thumos one of three main parts of the soul, distinct from, in between, and interacting a rational part and the appetites. Thumos has a clear scope and proper function in Plato's texts and those of later Platonists. In Aristotle's moral psychology, thumos has a more restricted status, for the most part reinterpreted as one main mode of desire or affectivity (orexis). By contrast to other moral psychologies, e.g. that of the Stoics who treat thumos as just one emotion or passion among others, thumos in Aristotle and the Aristotelian tradition retains a distinctiveness from other, lower forms of affectivity, evidenced by discussions like that of akrasia due to thumos in N.E. 7 or that of thumos as one of the main causes for human actions in Rhet. 1. The status, function, and proper education of thumos remained a matter of contention and reinterpretation through antiquity, evidenced by discussions bearing upon thumos, for example in Plutarch, Galen, Philo, among others. My paper first outlines Plato's treatment of thumos, drawing primarily upon Republic and Timaeus. It then sets out an Aristotelian account of thumos reinterpreted as a main mode of orexis, central to anger (orge), friendship, and other affective states, drawing mainly upon the two Ethics, the Politics, and the Rhetoric. Similarities and continuities between Plato's and Aristotle's positions are stressed, particularly the need to understand, orient, and educate thumos. Both positions are briefly contrasted against other interpretations which do not accord thumos a distinctive status, including Stoic thought. The paper also briefly discusses selected later reinterpretations of and controversies about thumos in the ongoing Platonic and Aristotelian traditions. To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler

This is part 2 of the recording of my talk at the Fourteenth Annual Marquette Summer Seminar on Aristotle and the Aristotelian Tradition, "The Significance of Thumos in Platonic and Aristotelian Moral Psychology". An important difference between the Platonist tradition and the Aristotelian is the status accorded to thumos in their respective moral psychologies. In very broad strokes, the Platonic tradition consistently follows and reinterprets Plato's tripartite conception of the soul, maintaining thumos one of three main parts of the soul, distinct from, in between, and interacting a rational part and the appetites. Thumos has a clear scope and proper function in Plato's texts and those of later Platonists. In Aristotle's moral psychology, thumos has a more restricted status, for the most part reinterpreted as one main mode of desire or affectivity (orexis). By contrast to other moral psychologies, e.g. that of the Stoics who treat thumos as just one emotion or passion among others, thumos in Aristotle and the Aristotelian tradition retains a distinctiveness from other, lower forms of affectivity, evidenced by discussions like that of akrasia due to thumos in N.E. 7 or that of thumos as one of the main causes for human actions in Rhet. 1. The status, function, and proper education of thumos remained a matter of contention and reinterpretation through antiquity, evidenced by discussions bearing upon thumos, for example in Plutarch, Galen, Philo, among others. My paper first outlines Plato's treatment of thumos, drawing primarily upon Republic and Timaeus. It then sets out an Aristotelian account of thumos reinterpreted as a main mode of orexis, central to anger (orge), friendship, and other affective states, drawing mainly upon the two Ethics, the Politics, and the Rhetoric. Similarities and continuities between Plato's and Aristotle's positions are stressed, particularly the need to understand, orient, and educate thumos. Both positions are briefly contrasted against other interpretations which do not accord thumos a distinctive status, including Stoic thought. The paper also briefly discusses selected later reinterpretations of and controversies about thumos in the ongoing Platonic and Aristotelian traditions. To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler

This is part 1 of the recording of my talk at the Fourteenth Annual Marquette Summer Seminar on Aristotle and the Aristotelian Tradition, "The Significance of Thumos in Platonic and Aristotelian Moral Psychology". An important difference between the Platonist tradition and the Aristotelian is the status accorded to thumos in their respective moral psychologies. In very broad strokes, the Platonic tradition consistently follows and reinterprets Plato's tripartite conception of the soul, maintaining thumos one of three main parts of the soul, distinct from, in between, and interacting a rational part and the appetites. Thumos has a clear scope and proper function in Plato's texts and those of later Platonists. In Aristotle's moral psychology, thumos has a more restricted status, for the most part reinterpreted as one main mode of desire or affectivity (orexis). By contrast to other moral psychologies, e.g. that of the Stoics who treat thumos as just one emotion or passion among others, thumos in Aristotle and the Aristotelian tradition retains a distinctiveness from other, lower forms of affectivity, evidenced by discussions like that of akrasia due to thumos in N.E. 7 or that of thumos as one of the main causes for human actions in Rhet. 1. The status, function, and proper education of thumos remained a matter of contention and reinterpretation through antiquity, evidenced by discussions bearing upon thumos, for example in Plutarch, Galen, Philo, among others. My paper first outlines Plato's treatment of thumos, drawing primarily upon Republic and Timaeus. It then sets out an Aristotelian account of thumos reinterpreted as a main mode of orexis, central to anger (orge), friendship, and other affective states, drawing mainly upon the two Ethics, the Politics, and the Rhetoric. Similarities and continuities between Plato's and Aristotle's positions are stressed, particularly the need to understand, orient, and educate thumos. Both positions are briefly contrasted against other interpretations which do not accord thumos a distinctive status, including Stoic thought. The paper also briefly discusses selected later reinterpretations of and controversies about thumos in the ongoing Platonic and Aristotelian traditions. To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler

Gesprek met Piet Hein Hupsch op basis van het door Gregorius van Nyssa geschreven werk "De mens als beeld van God". Het boek is ingeleid, vertaald en van aantekeningen voorzien door Piet Hein Hupsch. Het is een uitgave van uitgeverij Damon in Eindhoven. (https://www.damon.nl/boeken/442-de-mens-als-beeld-van-god) Van hun website: Wat betekent het om de kroon op de schepping te zijn? In zijn verhandeling De mens als beeld van God (De hominis opificio) ontvouwt de Griekse kerkvader Gregorius van Nyssa (ca. 335–394) een van de eerste systematische christelijke visies op de mens. Uitgaand van Plato's Timaeus en het Bijbelse scheppingsverhaal onderzoekt hij de eenheid van lichaam en ziel, de vrijheid om in deugd te leven en de bestemming van de mens in Christus. Daarbij benadrukt hij zowel de waardigheid van het bezielde lichaam als de kracht van het menselijk intellect en de hoop op de verrijzenis en het herstel van de schepping. Deze invloedrijke tekst, nu voor het eerst in het Nederlands vertaald, verbindt klassieke filosofie met een diep theologisch mensbeeld. Ook vandaag blijft de vraag van Gregorius uitdagend: blijft de mens de kroon op de schepping – of geeft hij dat voorrecht uit handen aan kunstmatige intelligentie? Met een voorwoord van Paul van Geest

[Mark 10:46-47] Then they reached Jericho, and as Jesus and his disciples left town, a large crowd followed him. A blind beggar named Bartimaeus (son of Timaeus) was sitting beside the road. [47] When Bartimaeus heard that Jesus of Nazareth was nearby, he began to shout, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!"Our ________________ can often sense what our ________________ cannot.[2 Samuel 7:16] Your house and your kingdom will continue before me for all time, and your throne will be secure forever.'"Sometimes ________________ produces spiritual ________________.[Mark 10:48] "Be quiet!" many of the people yelled at him. But he only shouted louder, "Son of David, have mercy on me!"When ________________ is within reach, ______________ is not an option.[Mark 10:49] When Jesus heard him, he stopped and said, "Tell him to come here." So they called the blind man. "Cheer up," they said. "Come on, he's calling you!"Jesus is still ________________ for those who ___________ out to Him.[Psalm 34:18 NIV] The LORD is close to the brokenhearted and saves those who are crushed in spirit.God is ________________ far away.[Mark 10:50] Bartimaeus threw aside his coat, jumped up, and came to Jesus.Faith often requires letting go before the ________________ is guaranteed.[Mark 10:51-52] "What do you want me to do for you?" Jesus asked. "My rabbi," the blind man said, "I want to see!" [52] And Jesus said to him, "Go, for your faith has healed you." Instantly the man could see, and he followed Jesus down the road.[2 Corinthians 5:17] This means that anyone who belongs to Christ has become a new person. The old life is gone; a new life has begun!When you encounter Jesus, your ________________ changes.

This is the second episode of our series based on interviews for the documentary film, Dreamers and Doomers, about the SF Bay Area in the last days before AGI. Steve interviews Jesse Hoogland, co-founder and executive director of Timaeus, an AI safety research org working on applications of Singular Learning Theory (SLT) for AI safety. SLT establishes a connection between the geometry of the loss landscape and internal structure in models. This connection is used to develop scalable, rigorous tools for evaluating, interpreting, and aligning neural networks. Jesse is one of the leading young minds in the new generation of AI safety researchers.https://www.jessehoogland.com/(00:00) - Jesse interview at FAR Labs, Berkeley (00:54) - Introduction (01:50) - From Physics to AI Safety (08:36) - AI Is Dangerous (26:08) - Funding, P(Doom), and Futures (56:21) - Trauma and Safety Vibes (01:00:39) - Asymptotic Guarantees Debate (01:03:54) - Mapping the Safety Tribes (01:26:09) - Timelines, AI Pause, and Failure Modes –Steve Hsu is Professor of Theoretical Physics and of Computational Mathematics, Science, and Engineering at Michigan State University. Previously, he was Senior Vice President for Research and Innovation at MSU and Director of the Institute of Theoretical Science at the University of Oregon. Hsu is a startup founder (SuperFocus.ai, SafeWeb, Genomic Prediction, Othram) and advisor to venture capital and other investment firms. He was educated at Caltech and Berkeley, was a Harvard Junior Fellow, and has held faculty positions at Yale, the University of Oregon, and MSU. Please send any questions or suggestions to manifold1podcast@gmail.com or Steve on X @hsu_steve.

Then they came to Jericho. As Jesus and his disciples, together with a large crowd, were leaving the city, a blind man, Bartimaeus (which means "son of Timaeus"), was sitting by the roadside begging. 47 When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!" 48 Many rebuked him and told him to be quiet, but he shouted all the more, "Son of David, have mercy on me!" 49 Jesus stopped and said, "Call him." So they called to the blind man, "Cheer up! On your feet! He's calling you." 50 Throwing his cloak aside, he jumped to his feet and came to Jesus. 51 "What do you want me to do for you?" Jesus asked him. The blind man said, "Rabbi, I want to see." 52 "Go," said Jesus, "your faith has healed you." Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.

This is a preview - Support InnerVerse on Patreon, Substack, or Youtube to join the Inner Circle and unlock all current and future premium episodes, for just $8. Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/posts/149965181/ Substack: https://innerversepodcast.substack.com/p/sacred-centers-part-1-the-real-atlantis Youtube: https://youtu.be/IXG_AH7FroM Kicking off a new mini-series just for the Inner Circle, inspired by speaking with Jack Kelley about The Atlantis Puzzle. This series will anchor the Atlantis mythology in the larger comparative context of sacred centers in scriptures and mystery school traditions. Part 1 is focused on exploring what is actually said regarding “Atlantis” in the text of Plato's Timaeus and Critias, along with some supplemental writing from Herodotus. Together we'll learn to read between the lines and elevate our comprehension beyond the standard new agey fare of rehashing religious-minded and unhelpful literalism. LINKS Biofield Tuning with Chance: https://www.innerversepodcast.com/sound-healing Tarot Readings with Chance: https://www.innerversepodcast.com/oracle-cardsThe Elementals Gathering: https://createmore.com.au/elementals/ SUPPORT Kyle Denton's Potent Plant Medicines – Tippecanoe Herbs (use coupon code 'innerverse'): https://www.tippecanoeherbs.com Support InnerVerse by trying Melissa's Homepathic Remedies (use coupon code 'innerverse'): https://rmdycollective.com/chancegarton Flower Elixirs by LotusWei: https://www.lotuswei.com/innerverse Learn To Trade Like A Wizard: https://www.skool.com/tradingbusiness/about?ref=6043c01b48d04a20ba5e90e1dd83602d Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Thursday night saw a glitzy premiere at Windsor Castle, complete with film stars on the red carpet. But rather than a Hollywood blockbuster or homegrown movie, this was the launch of a documentary by the King. Called Finding Harmony, it will be released next week. It is being promoted as the King's vision for the planet, while the head of the king's charity, the King's Foundation, says it is about his philosophy of harmony. While the documentary explores the King's well-known love of nature and his thoughts on the future of the planet, his interest in the philosophy of harmony is perhaps not so well-known. Yet it is something that he has been mulling over for decades. A whole section of a two-volume set of his speeches is devoted to harmony, what he calls “a grammar” that underscores, art, architecture and spirituality of all the great religions. He spoke about this harmony in a speech at the UN climate change conference COP28 in late 2023. There's a moment in the documentary which shows the then Prince Charles joking that people thought his ideas were “dotty”, “It was sandals and long hair”, he said. But the idea of harmony owes its origins to ancient Greek and Christian thinking. In a speech he gave in 2015 in Louisville, Kentucky, Prince Charles urged people to develop joined-up thinking about interdependent relationships within nature. “The ancient Greek word for the process of joining things up was Harmonia”, he said, “so joined-up thinking needs to create harmony”. This idea of harmony is evident in Plato's work, The Timaeus, where he describes the cosmos as a collection of elements arranged in musical ratios and this internal harmony ensures its survival, while St Ambrose, one of the earliest Christian writers saw the creation of the world, described in the Book of Genesis, as a narrative about harmony with a balance between the elements. He saw the way voices are lifted in harmony as symbolising the greater harmony of God's creation. Someone else who, like the King, expressed concern at a lack of harmony in the way people live now, was Pope Francis. In his major work on the environment, Laudato Si, he warned that humanity's arrogance in attempting to dominate planet Earth had upset the balance of creation. “The harmony between the Creator, humanity and creation as a whole was disrupted by our presuming to take the place of God and refusing to acknowledge our creaturely limitations”, he wrote. In other words, if there is any chance of the joined-up thinking the King calls for in our relationship with one another and with nature, a starting point for harmony needs to be humility.

A handful of videos on social media depict a recent gathering, reportedly in Georgia, where a group of people were gathered to chant “Atlanta” is “Atlantis.” Supposedly they were there to create an “energy vortex” in order to summon the spirit of Atlantis and reclaim the city for black people. What exactly is this supposed to mean?Atlanta was founded in 1837 as a railroad terminus originally named "Terminus,” because the city marked the end of the Western & Atlantic Railroad. It was renamed "Marthasville" in 1843 and then changed to "Atlanta" in 1845. Some believe the city name is a shorthand for “Atlantica,” as in the Atlantic Ocean. Others believe the city was named after Atalanta, a mythologized heroin known for her speed and independence (the wild boar hunt and race against her suitors) which were qualities of the growing rail hub that is Atlanta. The mythical land and concept of Atlantis in some ways even predates Plato, though he is credited with its story. Writing in his Timaeus and Critias Plato derived the Atlantis story from Solon, an Athenian lawmaker who learned of the same from an elderly priest in the land of Egypt at the Temple of Sais. At the time, around 630-560 BC, the records were already at least 8,000 years old. Reportedly a global cataclysm destroyed Atlantis sometime between 9,600 to 11,600 years ago. Later on Francis Bacon termed his ideal city the New Atlantis or Platonopolis. The timeframe noted by Plato places the destruction within the window of the Younger Dryas, 12,900 to 11,700 years ago (10,900-9,7000 BC). It's one thing to be unaware of seemingly lost, drowned or buried history, but another to be so shockingly unaware of basic mythology and recent local history. It is understandable so many are disenfranchised by the lies and ego of mainline historical narratives, but the turn to Q-Anon, Flat Earth, Tataria, and World Fair conspiracies appears to be another layer of disinformation rather than the truth. The “Atlanta is Atlantis” video exemplifies a growing stupidity about human history. *The is the FREE archive, which includes advertisements. If you want an ad-free experience, you can subscribe below.WEBSITEFREE ARCHIVE (w. ads)SUBSCRIPTION ARCHIVE-X / TWITTERFACEBOOKINSTAGRAMYOUTUBERUMBLE-BUY ME A COFFEECashApp: $rdgable PAYPAL: rdgable1991@gmail.comRyan's Books: https://thesecretteachings.info - EMAIL: rdgable@yahoo.com / rdgable1991@gmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-secret-teachings--5328407/support.

Dr. Christopher Baron, an Associate Professor of Classics at the University of Notre Dame, joins Lexie to discuss his interest in both Roman and Greek history, particularly focusing on the historiography of Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic period, how information spread in Alexander's time, the significance of classical education, and the modern portrayal of ancient history in media. So tuck in your togas and hop aboard Trireme Transit for this week's exciting odyssey! Don't forget to follow us on Twitter, Facebook & Instagram or visit our website www.theozymandiasproject.com! Originally recorded May 5, 2025. Learn more about Dr. Baron: https://classics.nd.edu/people/christopher-baron/ Check out his publications on Academia: https://nd.academia.edu/ChristopherBaron Find his book Timaeus of Tauromenium: https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/timaeus-of-tauromenium-and-hellenistic-historiography/timaeus-of-tauromenium-and-hellenistic-historiography/99CD5F068F4278E40B9D5A59BE1F6689Support us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/TheOzymandiasProject Custom music by Brent Arehart of Arehart Sounds and edited by Dan Maday. Want a transcript of the episode? Email us at theozymandiasprojectpodcast@gmail.com and we can provide one. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Journey across 12,000 years of history, myth, and fresh discoveries to assemble the mystifying ancient puzzle that is Atlantis! Go beyond the hit documentary and dive far deeper into the history, science, and philosophy of the lost continent.Past mistranslations and bizarre fringe theories have long relegated Atlantis to the realm of fantasy. But the latest research in linguistics, climate science, and ancient Greek philology suggests that the myth's setting was real African geography during a prehistoric period called the Green Sahara.Explore the amazing truth behind the most misunderstood mystery of all time and find out exactly how the story of 9600 BCE matches up with modern archaeology.In the early twenty-first century, Greek researcher George Sarantitis re-examined everything about Atlantis written in Plato's dialogues Timaeus and Critias. In detective-story style, learn how painstaking re-translations and physical tests in West Africa seem to confirm something astounding: the lost continent described in the myth was a real place, and no, it never sank! But were the events in the tale “real,” or a complex interweaving of myth, history, and profound philosophy? You'll find the answer here in The Atlantis Puzzle!Jack Kelley (1980- ) studied ancient history, philosophy, literature, language, and architecture at Yale, completing the Directed Studies program there. He is the writer and producer of Solver (2018) and the creator of the award-winning documentary The Atlantis Puzzle (2024).https://www.empirebuilderproductions.com/the-atlantis-puzzleBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/earth-ancients--2790919/support.

FOLLOW RICHARD Website: https://www.strangeplanet.ca YouTube: @strangeplanetradio Instagram: @richardsyrettstrangeplanet TikTok: @therealstrangeplanet EP. # 1285 Atlantis Discovery: The Mistranslated Continent For 2,400 years we've searched the wrong ocean. Filmmaker Jack Kelley reveals that Plato's Atlantis never sank beneath the Atlantic; deliberate mistranslations turned an inland African metropolis into a maritime myth. Working from the original Greek of Timaeus and Critias, Kelley and engineer George Sarantitis relocate the lost capital to the prehistoric Green Sahara, when lakes were seas and deserts bloomed. Half-million-year-old Zambian beams, 130,000-year-old Cretan seafaring, transcontinental Stone Age trade routes: the evidence is overwhelming. Atlantis wasn't fantasy. It was history—hidden in plain text, waiting for someone brave enough to read Plato correctly. GUEST: Jack Kelley is the Yale-educated filmmaker and author of The Atlantis Puzzle documentary and book. By partnering with Greek engineer George Sarantitis and returning to Plato's unfiltered Greek, he overturned two millennia of scholarly error, proving Atlantis was a real Bronze-Age power drowned by climate shift in North Africa, not by Poseidon's wrath. Methodical, unflinching, and allergic to mysticism, Kelley doesn't chase legends—he corrects the record. WEBSITE: https://www.empirebuilderproductions.com BOOK: The Atlantis Puzzle: A True Story of Ancient Greece, Africa, And Climate Change Across Deep Time SUPPORT OUR SPONSORS!!! FOUND – Smarter banking for your business Take back control of your business today. Open a Found account for FREE at Found dot com. That's F-O-U-N-D dot com. Found is a financial technology company, not a bank. Banking services are provided by Lead Bank, Member FDIC. Join the hundreds of thousands who've already streamlined their finances with Found. HIMS - Making Healthy and Happy Easy to Achieve Sexual Health, Hair Loss, Mental Health, Weight Management START YOUR FREE ONLINE VISIT TODAY - ⁠HIMS dot com slash STRANGE⁠ ⁠https://www.HIMS.com/strange⁠ MINT MOBILE Premium Wireless - $15 per month. No Stores. No Salespeople. JUST SAVINGS Ready to say yes to saying no? Make the switch at MINT MOBILE dot com slash STRANGEPLANET. That's MINT MOBILE dot com slash STRANGEPLANET BECOME A PREMIUM SUBSCRIBER!!!⁠ ⁠https://strangeplanet.supportingcast.fm⁠ Three monthly subscriptions to choose from. Commercial Free Listening, Bonus Episodes and a Subscription to my monthly newsletter, InnerSanctum. Visit ⁠https://strangeplanet.supportingcast.fm⁠ Use the discount code "Planet" to receive $5 OFF off any subscription. We and our partners use cookies to personalize your experience, to show you ads based on your interests, and for measurement and analytics purposes. By using our website and services, you agree to our use of cookies as described in our Cookie Policy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit ⁠megaphone.fm/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://strangeplanet.supportingcast.fm/

Matthew Week 118     2 Corinthians 4:5 ESV   5 For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants for Jesus' sake.       Matthew 20:29-34 ESV   29 And as they went out of Jericho, a great crowd followed him. 30 And behold, there were two blind men sitting by the roadside, and when they heard that Jesus was passing by, they cried out, "Lord, have mercy on us, Son of David!" 31 The crowd rebuked them, telling them to be silent, but they cried out all the more, "Lord, have mercy on us, Son of David!" 32 And stopping, Jesus called them and said, "What do you want me to do for you?" 33 They said to him, "Lord, let our eyes be opened." 34 And Jesus in pity touched their eyes, and immediately they recovered their sight and followed him.                       Mark 10:46-52 ESV   46 Then they came to Jericho. As Jesus and his disciples, together with a large crowd, were leaving the city, a blind man, Bartimaeus (which means "son of Timaeus"), was sitting by the roadside begging. 47 When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!"   48 Many rebuked him and told him to be quiet, but he shouted all the more, "Son of David, have mercy on me!"   49 Jesus stopped and said, "Call him."   So they called to the blind man, "Cheer up! On your feet! He's calling you." 50 Throwing his cloak aside, he jumped to his feet and came to Jesus. 51 "What do you want me to do for you?" Jesus asked him.   The blind man said, "Rabbi, I want to see."   52 "Go," said Jesus, "your faith has healed you." Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.       Luke 18:35-43 ESV   35 As he drew near to Jericho, a blind man was sitting by the roadside begging. 36 And hearing a crowd going by, he inquired what this meant.37 They told him, "Jesus of Nazareth is passing by." 38 And he cried out, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!" 39 And those who were in front rebuked him, telling him to be silent. But he cried out all the more, "Son of David, have mercy on me!" 40 And Jesus stopped and commanded him to be brought to him. And when he came near, he asked him, 41 "What do you want me to do for you?" He said, "Lord, let me recover my sight."42 And Jesus said to him, "Recover your sight; your faith has made you well." 43 And immediately he recovered his sight and followed him, glorifying God. And all the people, when they saw it, gave praise to God.       Matthew 8:28 ESV   28 And when he came to the other side, to the country of the Gadarenes, two demon-possessed men met him, coming out of the tombs, so fierce that no one could pass that way.       Philippians 4:4-7 NIV   4 Rejoice in the Lord always. I will say it again: Rejoice! 5 Let your gentleness be evident to all. The Lord is near. 6 Do not be anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. 7 And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.       Luke 4:17-19 ESV   17 And the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written,   18 "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,   because he has anointed me   to proclaim good news to the poor.   He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives   and recovering of sight to the blind,   to set at liberty those who are oppressed,   19 to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor."       Hebrews 12:1 ESV   Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us,       John 21:20a; 21-22 ESV   20 Peter turned and saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following them... 21 When Peter saw him, he said to Jesus, "Lord, what about this man?" 22 Jesus said to him, "If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you? You follow me!"

Mark 10:46-52 (NKJV)Andrew, Isack, and Edwin consider the question Jesus asked both the sons of Zebedee and the son of Timaeus: What do you want me to do for you?Read the written devo that goes along with this episode by clicking here.    Let us know what you are learning or any questions you have. Email us at TextTalk@ChristiansMeetHere.org.    Join the Facebook community and join the conversation by clicking here. We'd love to meet you. Be a guest among the Christians who meet on Livingston Avenue. Click here to find out more. Michael Eldridge sang all four parts of our theme song. Find more from him by clicking here.   Thanks for talking about the text with us today.________________________________________________If the hyperlinks do not work, copy the following addresses and paste them into the URL bar of your web browser: Daily Written Devo: https://readthebiblemakedisciples.wordpress.com/?p=23402The Christians Who Meet on Livingston Avenue: http://www.christiansmeethere.org/Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/TalkAboutTheTextFacebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/texttalkMichael Eldridge: https://acapeldridge.com/ 

Come As You Are Series - BartimaeusMark 10:46-52 “Then they came to Jericho. As Jesus and his disciples, together with a large crowd, were leaving the city, a blind man, Bartimaeus (which means “son of Timaeus”), was sitting by the roadside begging. When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!” Many rebuked him and told him to be quiet, but he shouted all the more, “Son of David, have mercy on me!” Jesus stopped and said, “Call him.” So they called to the blind man, “Cheer up! On your feet! He's calling you.” Throwing his cloak aside, he jumped to his feet and came to Jesus. “What do you want me to do for you?” Jesus asked him. The blind man said, “Rabbi, I want to see.” “Go,” said Jesus, “your faith has healed you.” Immediately, he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.”How many of us have the faith of this man that Jesus healed?  He was sitting on the side of the road, and when he heard Jesus was passing by, he called out to him.  The crowd of people told him to be silent, but he continued to call out.  How many of us listen when others tell us to be silent?  Or worse yet, we don't feel worthy enough to speak up in the first place, or we are too nervous to speak out and ask for help, fearing rejection.  Bartimaeus did not listen when others told him to be quiet.  He kept calling out.  He believed that Jesus could heal him, and he was not going to let the chance pass him by.  Once Jesus heard him calling out, Jesus told the crowd to call him over.  When the crowd told Bartimaeus that Jesus would see him, the bible says, “He threw aside his cloak, sprang up, and came to Jesus.”  How great is that?  How many of us are jumping up at Jesus' call?  I know it's different.  Jesus was right there, and he got to see him and talk to him.  However, we can also talk to Jesus at any time we want to.  Even though we cannot see him, he is calling us to him.  He wants to invite us into a deeper relationship with him.  Do we hear this call?  Do we jump up, throw our cloak aside and run to him when we are called? I love the faith that Bartimaeus had.  He knew Jesus could heal him.  He did not seem to have any doubt that Jesus could cure his blindness.  He also didn't seem to doubt that Jesus would want to help him or to question whether he was worthy enough.  He saw Jesus walking by and called out to him.  Do we do this?  Jesus is here for us; he wants us to call out and to rely on Him.  Are we doing that?  It seems each week at my Prayer Group, God is showing up for us, and he is telling us to come closer.  He keeps telling us to rely on him, that he is our protection and our refuge.  Why are we not calling on him more?  When Jesus healed Bartimaeus, He said, “Go your way; your faith has made you well.”  How great would it be to hear those words from Jesus?One scripture verse that I think is amazing and that I struggle with is Mark 11:22.  This verse is Jesus' reply to the cursed fig tree.  Jesus said to them in reply, “Have faith in God.  Amen, I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, ‘Be lifted up and thrown into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it shall be done for him.”  This is the type of faith that I strive for, yet I sometimes wonder if it's possible.  I wonder if there are humans who can have this type of faith?  I know that God can do anything.  I truly believe this.  And yet, when I think of myself commanding a mountain to be lifted up and thrown into he see, I can't seem to wrap my head around that.  I have searched for this type of faith for a very long time now.  Probably since the first time I actually heard this scripture and let it sink in.  The very next verse is Mark 11:23, “Therefore I tell you, all that you ask for in prayer, believe that you will receive it and it shall be yours.”  This again just blows me away.  All that you ask for shall be yours if you believe. That seems like a lot of pressure, and at the same time, a huge promise on God's part.  As I mentioned earlier, ever since I heard scripture like this, I have sought out this type of faith.  I would love to believe without a shadow of a doubt that God can do all the things I ask Him to do, that He will answer all of my prayers.  I find it a struggle to believe as much as I would like to, and I wonder if this is because I have a human brain and we were trained from an early age not to believe in things that we can't see or prove.  We were mostly taught that there are certain things that can be done and things that can't be done.  I think as humanity grows, we are learning to question that more and more.  But it takes time to overcome years of that type of thinking.  I thought I would share one way I have been able to deepen my trust and faith that God can do all He says He can do.  I read books about all the miracles God has done and continues to do.  I love reading books about healing.  God is truly amazing, and He performs miracles every single day. If we were just on the lookout for them, we would see them.  If we can't see them in our lives, we can read about them in others' lives.  Harold Hill's book, “How to Live Like a King's Kid,” is an excellent example.  If you read all the amazing things that God did in his life, you can't help but start to believe he will do it for you as well.  Harold Hill also discusses his faith journey and how he reached a point where he began to see God do amazing things in his life.  Additionally, I have read books on healing by Francis McNutt, Randy Clark, Mary Healy, Matthew & Dennis Linn, which have been particularly beneficial.  When you read about God's healing of others and how there are people out there today who are calling upon God to heal people every day, then it strengthens your faith that he will answer your prayers as well.  Hebrews 13:8 says, "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.”  We all know that Jesus performed miracles while he was alive and walked the earth.  He raised people from the dead, he cured numerous illnesses, he turned water into wine, and he did many other remarkable things.  This verse from Hebrews lets us know that these miracles were not just something he did in the past.  “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.”  He is still performing these miracles today, and if we struggle to believe this, then we need to seek out the testimony of it, because it is out there. Another thing I pray often is Mark 9:24, “Lord, I believe, help my unbelief.”This story goes well with the Come As You Are series because Beartimaeus did just that. He knew he wasn't worthy to talk to Jesus, yet he called out to him anyway. He heard everyone telling him to be quiet, and yet he continued to call out, not because he thought he deserved the healing, but because he wanted it so badly. Is there something that you want so badly you are willing to call out to Jesus even though you don't feel worthy? Is there something you want so badly that you are willing to jump up and answer Jesus's call? Ask Jesus for whatever it is; what have you got to lose?Dear Heavenly Father, I ask that you bless all those listening to this episode today. Lord, we ask that you increase our trust in you. Lord, we believe, help our unbelief.  Lord, we need you to show us the way. We would like nothing more than to have the faith to move mountains, and we know that you are the only one who can give us that faith. So we're asking you, Lord, we are asking for the faith to move mountains.  Lord, give us the courage to ask when we need healing or when someone else needs healing.  Help us to turn to you first and ask you to heal them.  Lord, we give you permission to use us as your instruments of healing, as you used countless people before us.  Jesus, you are the great physician, and we ask that you continue that work through us.  There are too many people dying in the world today.  Let us help you help them.  Let us be your hands of healing, Lord Jesus.  We love you, and we ask all of this in accordance with your will and in Jesus' holy name, Amen.Thank you so much for joining me on this journey to walk boldly with Jesus. I look forward to meeting you here again tomorrow. Remember, Jesus loves you just as you are, and so do I! Have a blessed day!Today's Word from the Lord was received in June 2025 by a member of my Catholic Charismatic Prayer Group. If you have any questions about the prayer group, these words, or how to join us for a meeting, please email CatholicCharismaticPrayerGroup@gmail.com. Today's Word from the Lord is, “My children, I tell you that I love you. I want you to be fully convinced of it. The more you are convinced of it, the more you will convince others that I love them, too. Again, I tell you, be bold, be courageous, be mine, and make me known.” www.findingtruenorthcoaching.comCLICK HERE TO DONATECLICK HERE to sign up for Mentoring CLICK HERE to sign up for Daily "Word from the Lord" emailsCLICK HERE to sign up for my newsletter & receive a free audio training about inviting Jesus into your daily lifeCLICK HERE to buy my book Total Trust in God's Safe Embrace

10 And he left there and went to the region of Judea and beyond the Jordan, and crowds gathered to him again. And again, as was his custom, he taught them. 2 And Pharisees came up and in order to test him asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” 3 He answered them, “What did Moses command you?” 4 They said, “Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of divorce and to send her away.” 5 And Jesus said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. 6 But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.' 7 ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, 8 and the two shall become one flesh.' So they are no longer two but one flesh. 9 What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.” 10 And in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter. 11 And he said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her, 12 and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.” Let the Children Come to Me13 And they were bringing children to him that he might touch them, and the disciples rebuked them. 14 But when Jesus saw it, he was indignant and said to them, “Let the children come to me; do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of God. 15 Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.” 16 And he took them in his arms and blessed them, laying his hands on them. The Rich Young Man17 And as he was setting out on his journey, a man ran up and knelt before him and asked him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” 18 And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone. 19 You know the commandments: ‘Do not murder, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and mother.' ” 20 And he said to him, “Teacher, all these I have kept from my youth.” 21 And Jesus, looking at him, loved him, and said to him, “You lack one thing: go, sell all that you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” 22 Disheartened by the saying, he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions. 23 And Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, “How difficult it will be for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God!” 24 And the disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said to them again, “Children, how difficult it is to enter the kingdom of God! 25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God.” 26 And they were exceedingly astonished, and said to him, “Then who can be saved?” 27 Jesus looked at them and said, “With man it is impossible, but not with God. For all things are possible with God.” 28 Peter began to say to him, “See, we have left everything and followed you.” 29 Jesus said, “Truly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or lands, for my sake and for the gospel, 30 who will not receive a hundredfold now in this time, houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions, and in the age to come eternal life. 31 But many who are first will be last, and the last first.” Jesus Foretells His Death a Third Time32 And they were on the road, going up to Jerusalem, and Jesus was walking ahead of them. And they were amazed, and those who followed were afraid. And taking the twelve again, he began to tell them what was to happen to him, 33 saying, “See, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be delivered over to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death and deliver him over to the Gentiles. 34 And they will mock him and spit on him, and flog him and kill him. And after three days he will rise.” The Request of James and John35 And James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came up to him and said to him, “Teacher, we want you to do for us whatever we ask of you.” 36 And he said to them, “What do you want me to do for you?” 37 And they said to him, “Grant us to sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your glory.” 38 Jesus said to them, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?” 39 And they said to him, “We are able.” And Jesus said to them, “The cup that I drink you will drink, and with the baptism with which I am baptized, you will be baptized, 40 but to sit at my right hand or at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared.” 41 And when the ten heard it, they began to be indignant at James and John. 42 And Jesus called them to him and said to them, “You know that those who are considered rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. 43 But it shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, 44 and whoever would be first among you must be slave of all. 45 For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” Jesus Heals Blind Bartimaeus46 And they came to Jericho. And as he was leaving Jericho with his disciples and a great crowd, Bartimaeus, a blind beggar, the son of Timaeus, was sitting by the roadside. 47 And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out and say, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!” 48 And many rebuked him, telling him to be silent. But he cried out all the more, “Son of David, have mercy on me!” 49 And Jesus stopped and said, “Call him.” And they called the blind man, saying to him, “Take heart. Get up; he is calling you.” 50 And throwing off his cloak, he sprang up and came to Jesus. 51 And Jesus said to him, “What do you want me to do for you?” And the blind man said to him, “Rabbi, let me recover my sight.” 52 And Jesus said to him, “Go your way; your faith has made you well.” And immediately he recovered his sight and followed him on the way. The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), Mk 10:1–52.

In this episode of the Endless Podcast, Markisan and Ben had the privilege of talking to the mysterious post-metal artist Thumos. While there are no artist "reveals "in this cast, we had a fantastic time talking to Thumos. We begin with his origin story, development as a musician, and the birth and development of this stunning post-metal project. We talk about Thumos's early works, including last year's riveting and rifftastic EP Atlantis--a record that made both Markisan and Ben's top albums of the 2024. Next, we dive into the creative process that spawned The Trial of Socrates an EPIC double-album released on July 4, 2025 on Snow Wolf Records. After a deep dive into Thumos's approach to crafting songs based on one of the most influential works of ancient philosophy ever produced, the discussion shifts gears. Drawing on a great idea by Markisan, we discuss how some of Socrates's most influential quotes have influenced our own lives. What ensues is an enjoyable and often introspective dialogue by three metal heads posing as philosophers LOL. In all seriousness, we are really thrilled with how this interview came together and the document produced herewith. So retreat to your cave, kick back, and crack open a Hemlock Modern West Coast IPA by New Trail Brewing Company! "Γεια μας!"***A short selection from the track "Timaeus" from the EP Atlantis appears after the introduction. After the interview concludes, we include The Phaedo"--a song about Socrates coming to terms with his own death--in its entirety. Thumos shared some deep insights into interpreting this climactic moment of the saga into music, so we highly recommend listening!

A handful of videos on social media depict a recent gathering, reportedly in Georgia, where a group of people were gathered to chant “Atlanta” is “Atlantis.” Supposedly they were there to create an “energy vortex” in order to summon the spirit of Atlantis and reclaim the city for black people. What exactly is this supposed to mean?Atlanta was founded in 1837 as a railroad terminus originally named "Terminus,” because the city marked the end of the Western & Atlantic Railroad. It was renamed "Marthasville" in 1843 and then changed to "Atlanta" in 1845. Some believe the city name is a shorthand for “Atlantica,” as in the Atlantic Ocean. Others believe the city was named after Atalanta, a mythologized heroin known for her speed and independence (the wild boar hunt and race against her suitors) which were qualities of the growing rail hub that is Atlanta. The mythical land and concept of Atlantis in some ways even predates Plato, though he is credited with its story. Writing in his Timaeus and Critias Plato derived the Atlantis story from Solon, an Athenian lawmaker who learned of the same from an elderly priest in the land of Egypt at the Temple of Sais. At the time, around 630-560 BC, the records were already at least 8,000 years old. Reportedly a global cataclysm destroyed Atlantis sometime between 9,600 to 11,600 years ago. Later on Francis Bacon termed his ideal city the New Atlantis or Platonopolis. The timeframe noted by Plato places the destruction within the window of the Younger Dryas, 12,900 to 11,700 years ago (10,900-9,7000 BC).It's one thing to be unaware of seemingly lost, drowned or buried history, but another to be so shockingly unaware of basic mythology and recent local history. It is understandable so many are disenfranchised by the lies and ego of mainline historical narratives, but the turn to Q-Anon, Flat Earth, Tataria, and World Fair conspiracies appears to be another layer of disinformation rather than the truth. The “Atlanta is Atlantis” video exemplifies a growing stupidity about human history. *The is the FREE archive, which includes advertisements. If you want an ad-free experience, you can subscribe below underneath the show description.FREE ARCHIVE (w. ads)SUBSCRIPTION ARCHIVEX / TWITTER FACEBOOKWEBSITECashApp: $rdgable EMAIL: rdgable@yahoo.com / TSTRadio@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-secret-teachings--5328407/support.

Deep beneath the waves of myth and time lies Atlantis, a lost empire of unparalleled splendor, whispered to have birthed a race of giants whose legacy endures in ancient stone and scattered lore. In *Giants of Atlantis: The Legacy of the Fallen Race*, we embark on a speculative journey into the heart of one of humanity's greatest enigmas. Were the Atlanteans towering beings of superhuman stature, as some ancient texts suggest, or are their monumental traces merely echoes of a forgotten culture? This book explores the tantalizing possibility that a race of giants once walked the earth, shaping civilizations and leaving cryptic markers in stone circles and megalithic temples. Drawing from the accounts of Plato, who described Atlantis as a naval power sunk by divine wrath, we begin with the philosophical cornerstone of the Atlantean myth. Plato's dialogues, *Timaeus* and *Critias*, paint a picture of a sophisticated society lost to catastrophe. Yet, he hints at inhabitants of extraordinary might, capable of feats that defy modern understanding. Could these be the giants of legend? The book delves into parallel accounts from Saxo Grammaticus, whose *Gesta Danorum* chronicles Norse tales of towering figures wielding godlike power, and Adam of Bremen, whose descriptions of Baltic temples suggest sacred sites built for beings of immense scale. Patrick Chouinard is an American author, alternative archaeologist, and investigative mythologist who challenges conventional narratives about humanity's remote past. A prolific writer with ten published books exploring ancient civilizations and forgotten histories, Chouinard serves as Editor-in-Chief of The New Archaeology Review, a platform for cutting-edge archaeological research. As former host and producer of Archaeology TV, he brought alternative archaeological perspectives to mainstream audiences. Beyond academia, Chouinard is a dedicated political activist who advocates for transparency in historical research and the democratization of archaeological knowledge.www.patrickchouinard.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/earth-ancients--2790919/support.

Welcome to The Daily, where we study the Bible verse by verse, chapter by chapter, every day. Today's shout-out goes to Tom Ludy from Tutle Lake, WI. Thank you for your partnership with us through Project23. You're helping spread God's Word to hearts that are hungry for truth. This one's for you. Our text today is Mark 10:46-52: And they came to Jericho. And as he was leaving Jericho with his disciples and a great crowd, Bartimaeus, a blind beggar, the son of Timaeus, was sitting by the roadside. And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out and say, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!” And many rebuked him, telling him to be silent. But he cried out all the more, “Son of David, have mercy on me!” And Jesus stopped and said, “Call him.” And they called the blind man, saying to him, “Take heart. Get up; he is calling you.” And throwing off his cloak, he sprang up and came to Jesus. And Jesus said to him, “What do you want me to do for you?” And the blind man said to him, “Rabbi, let me recover my sight.” And Jesus said to him, “Go your way; your faith has made you well.” And immediately he recovered his sight and followed him on the way. — Mark 10:46-52 Bartimaeus had one shot. One moment. He couldn't see Jesus—but he had heard the stories. So he cried out: “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!” And what did the crowd do? They told him to shut up. That's how the world responds to visible, verbal faith. They don't mind if you stay quiet about your beliefs. But start crying out to Jesus—start declaring your need for him—and people get uncomfortable. They'll try to shame you. Silence you. Pressure you to tone it down. But Bartimaeus wouldn't be silenced. He cried out even louder. Because real faith breaks through cultural pressure. Real faith speaks when others say, “Be quiet.” Real faith refuses to blend in. And here's what's beautiful: Jesus stops. Right there in the noise, the crowd, the pressure. He hears the cry of faith and calls Bartimaeus forward. Then he asks: “What do you want me to do for you?” It's not a trick question. Bartimaeus doesn't hesitate. “Rabbi, let me recover my sight.” And Jesus heals him. But more than that, he makes him a follower. Bartimaeus leaves the roadside and joins Jesus on the road to Jerusalem. Faith in Jesus will set you apart. And that will make people uncomfortable. And good! The world will tell you to stay quiet. Stay polite. Stay private. But Jesus isn't looking for silent believers. He's calling out to those who cry out. So don't let the world mute your worship, your convictions, or your witness. Speak up. Cry out. Follow boldly. Because Jesus stops for those who won't stay silent. #BoldFaith, #SpeakUpForJesus, #Mark10 ASK THIS: When have you felt pressured to keep your faith quiet? What would “crying out” look like for you this week? Who in your life needs to see bold, unapologetic faith? What's keeping you from following Jesus fully, like Bartimaeus? DO THIS: This week, speak openly about your faith at least once. Don't hide it—declare it. PRAY THIS: Jesus, give me the courage to speak up when the world wants me to be silent. Let my faith be louder than fear or pressure. Amen. PLAY THIS: "Gratitude."

To become a follower of Jesus, visit: https://MorningMindsetMedia.com/MeetJesus (NOT a Morning Mindset resource) ⇒ Join the MMM Prayer Team: https://MorningMindsetMedia.com/PrayerTeam ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖ TODAY'S SCRIPTURE: Mark 10:46–52 - [46] And they came to Jericho. And as he was leaving Jericho with his disciples and a great crowd, Bartimaeus, a blind beggar, the son of Timaeus, was sitting by the roadside. [47] And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out and say, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!” [48] And many rebuked him, telling him to be silent. But he cried out all the more, “Son of David, have mercy on me!” [49] And Jesus stopped and said, “Call him.” And they called the blind man, saying to him, “Take heart. Get up; he is calling you.” [50] And throwing off his cloak, he sprang up and came to Jesus. [51] And Jesus said to him, “What do you want me to do for you?” And the blind man said to him, “Rabbi, let me recover my sight.” [52] And Jesus said to him, “Go your way; your faith has made you well.” And immediately he recovered his sight and followed him on the way. (ESV) ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖ FINANCIALLY SUPPORT THE MORNING MINDSET: (not tax-deductible) -- Become a monthly partner: https://mm-gfk-partners.supercast.com/ -- Support a daily episode: https://MorningMindsetMedia.com/daily-sponsor/ -- Give one-time: https://give.cornerstone.cc/careygreen -- Venmo: @CareyNGreen ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖ FOREIGN LANGUAGE VERSIONS OF THIS PODCAST: SPANISH version: https://MorningMindsetMedia.com/Spanish HINDI version: https://MorningMindsetMedia.com/Hindi CHINESE version: https://MorningMindsetMedia.com/Chinese  ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖ CONTACT: Carey@careygreen.com  ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖ THEME MUSIC: “King’s Trailer” – Creative Commons 0 | Provided by https://freepd.com/ ***All NON-ENGLISH versions of the Morning Mindset are translated using A.I. Dubbing and Translation tools from DubFormer.ai ***All NON-ENGLISH text content (descriptions and titles) are translated using the A.I. functionality of Google Translate.

Jesse Hoogland and Daniel Murfet, founders of Timaeus, introduce their mathematically rigorous approach to AI safety through "developmental interpretability" based on Singular Learning Theory. They explain how neural network loss landscapes are actually complex, jagged surfaces full of "singularities" where models can change internally without affecting external behavior—potentially masking dangerous misalignment. Using their Local Learning Coefficient measure, they've demonstrated the ability to identify critical phase changes during training in models up to 7 billion parameters, offering a complementary approach to mechanistic interpretability. This work aims to move beyond trial-and-error neural network training toward a more principled engineering discipline that could catch safety issues during training rather than after deployment. Sponsors: Oracle Cloud Infrastructure: Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) is the next-generation cloud that delivers better performance, faster speeds, and significantly lower costs, including up to 50% less for compute, 70% for storage, and 80% for networking. Run any workload, from infrastructure to AI, in a high-availability environment and try OCI for free with zero commitment at https://oracle.com/cognitive The AGNTCY (Cisco): The AGNTCY is an open-source collective dedicated to building the Internet of Agents, enabling AI agents to communicate and collaborate seamlessly across frameworks. Join a community of engineers focused on high-quality multi-agent software and support the initiative at https://agntcy.org/?utmcampaign=fy25q4agntcyamerpaid-mediaagntcy-cognitiverevolutionpodcast&utmchannel=podcast&utmsource=podcast NetSuite by Oracle: NetSuite by Oracle is the AI-powered business management suite trusted by over 41,000 businesses, offering a unified platform for accounting, financial management, inventory, and HR. Gain total visibility and control to make quick decisions and automate everyday tasks—download the free ebook, Navigating Global Trade: Three Insights for Leaders, at https://netsuite.com/cognitive PRODUCED BY: https://aipodcast.ing CHAPTERS: (00:00) About the Episode (04:44) Introduction and Background (06:17) Timaeus Origins and Philosophy (09:13) Mathematical Background and SLT (12:27) Developmental Interpretability Approach (Part 1) (16:09) Sponsors: Oracle Cloud Infrastructure | The AGNTCY (Cisco) (18:09) Developmental Interpretability Approach (Part 2) (19:24) Proto-Paradigm and SAEs (24:37) Understanding Generalization (30:15) Central Dogma Framework (Part 1) (32:13) Sponsor: NetSuite by Oracle (33:37) Central Dogma Framework (Part 2) (34:35) Loss Landscape Geometry (40:41) Degeneracies and Evidence (47:25) Structure and Data Connection (55:36) Essential Dynamics and Algorithms (01:00:53) Implicit Regularization and Complexity (01:07:19) Double Descent and Scaling (01:09:55) Big Picture Applications (01:17:17) Reward Hacking and Risks (01:25:19) Future Training Vision (01:32:01) Scaling and Next Steps (01:36:43) Outro

To become a follower of Jesus, visit: https://MorningMindsetMedia.com/MeetJesus (NOT a Morning Mindset resource) ⇒ Join the MMM Prayer Team: https://MorningMindsetMedia.com/PrayerTeam ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖ TODAY'S SCRIPTURE: Mark 10:46–52 - [46] And they came to Jericho. And as he was leaving Jericho with his disciples and a great crowd, Bartimaeus, a blind beggar, the son of Timaeus, was sitting by the roadside. [47] And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out and say, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!” [48] And many rebuked him, telling him to be silent. But he cried out all the more, “Son of David, have mercy on me!” [49] And Jesus stopped and said, “Call him.” And they called the blind man, saying to him, “Take heart. Get up; he is calling you.” [50] And throwing off his cloak, he sprang up and came to Jesus. [51] And Jesus said to him, “What do you want me to do for you?” And the blind man said to him, “Rabbi, let me recover my sight.” [52] And Jesus said to him, “Go your way; your faith has made you well.” And immediately he recovered his sight and followed him on the way. (ESV) ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖ FINANCIALLY SUPPORT THE MORNING MINDSET: (not tax-deductible) -- Become a monthly partner: https://mm-gfk-partners.supercast.com/ -- Support a daily episode: https://MorningMindsetMedia.com/daily-sponsor/ -- Give one-time: https://give.cornerstone.cc/careygreen -- Venmo: @CareyNGreen ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖ FOREIGN LANGUAGE VERSIONS OF THIS PODCAST: SPANISH version: https://MorningMindsetMedia.com/Spanish HINDI version: https://MorningMindsetMedia.com/Hindi CHINESE version: https://MorningMindsetMedia.com/Chinese  ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖ CONTACT: Carey@careygreen.com  ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖ THEME MUSIC: “King’s Trailer” – Creative Commons 0 | Provided by https://freepd.com/ ***All NON-ENGLISH versions of the Morning Mindset are translated using A.I. Dubbing and Translation tools from DubFormer.ai ***All NON-ENGLISH text content (descriptions and titles) are translated using the A.I. functionality of Google Translate.

Finding Jesus in Unexpected Places // Stopping a Jesus Parade Mark 10:46-52 (NIV)“Then they came to Jericho. As Jesus and his disciples, together with a large crowd, were leaving the city, a blind man, Bartimaeus (which means ‘son of Timaeus'), was sitting by the roadside begging. When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout, ‘Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!' Many rebuked him and told him to be quiet, but he shouted all the more, ‘Son of David, have mercy on me!' Jesus stopped and said, ‘Call him.' So they called to the blind man, ‘Cheer up! On your feet! He's calling you.' Throwing his cloak aside, he jumped to his feet and came to Jesus. ‘What do you want me to do for you?' Jesus asked him. The blind man said, ‘Rabbi, I want to see.' ‘Go,' said Jesus, ‘your faith has healed you.' Immediately, he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.” Luke 4:16-21 (NIV)“He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. He stood up to read, the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written: ‘The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor.' Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him. He began by saying to them, ‘Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.'"  The 59 “One Another's” of the New Testament1.               “...Be at peace with each other.” (Mark 9:50) 2.               “...Wash one another's feet.” (John 13:14) (Serve one another)3.               “...Love one another...” (John 13:34) 4.              “...Love one another...” (John 13:34)5.               “...Love one another...” (John 13:35) 6.              “...Love one another...” (John 15:12) 7.               “...Love one another” (John 15:17)8.              “Be devoted to one another in brotherly love...” (Romans 12:10) 9.              “...Honor one another above yourselves.” (Romans 12:10)10.            “Live in harmony with one another...” (Romans 12:16) 11.             “...Love one another...” (Romans 13:8) 12.             “...Stop passing judgment on one another.” (Romans 14:13) 13.             “Accept one another, then, just as Christ accepted you...” (Romans 15:7) 14.             “...Instruct one another.” (Romans 15:14) 15.             “Greet one another with a holy kiss...” (Romans 16:16) 16.            “...When you come together to eat, wait for each other.” (I Cor. 11:33) 17.             “...Have equal concern for each other.” (I Corinthians 12:25) 18.            “...Greet one another with a holy kiss.” (I Corinthians 16:20) 19.            “Greet one another with a holy kiss.” (II Corinthians 13:12) 20.            “...Serve one another in love.” (Galatians 5:13) 21.             “If you keep on biting and devouring each other...you will be destroyed by each other.” (Galatians 5:15) 22.            “Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.” (Galatians 5:26) 23.            “Carry each other's burdens...” (Galatians 6:2) 24.            “...Be patient, bearing with one another in love.” (Ephesians 4:2) 25.            “Be kind and compassionate to one another...” (Ephesians 4:32) 26.            “...Forgiving each other...” (Ephesians 4:32) 27.            “Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs.” (Ephesians 5:19) 28.            “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.” (Ephesians 5:21) 29.            “...In humility consider others better than yourselves.” (Philippians 2:3)30.            “Do not lie to each other...” (Colossians 3:9) 31.             “Bear with each other...” (Colossians 3:13) 32.            “...Forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another.” (Colossians 3:13) 33.            “Teach...[one another]” (Colossians 3:16) 34.            “...Admonish one another” (Colossians 3:16) 35.            “...Make your love increase and overflow for each other.” (I Thessalonians 3:12) 36.            “...Love each other.” (I Thessalonians 4:9) 37.            “...Encourage each other...” (I Thessalonians 4:18) 38.            “...Encourage each other...” I Thessalonians 5:11) 39.            “...Build each other up...” (I Thessalonians 5:11) 40.            “Encourage one another daily...” Hebrews 3:13) 41.             “...Spur one another on toward love and good deeds.” (Hebrews 10:24) 42.            “...Encourage one another.” (Hebrews 10:25) 43.            “...Do not slander one another.” (James 4:11) 44.            “Don't grumble against each other...” (James 5:9) 45.            “Confess your sins to each other...” (James 5:16) 46.            “...Pray for each other.” (James 5:16) 47.            “...Love one another deeply, from the heart.” (I Peter 3:8) 48.            “...Live in harmony with one another...” (I Peter 3:8) 49.            “...Love each other deeply...” (I Peter 4:8) 50.            “Offer hospitality to one another without grumbling.” (I Peter 4:9) 51.             “Each one should use whatever gift he has received to serve others...” (I Peter 4:10) 52.       ...

One of the greatest mysteries of all time: Atlantis. What began as a single line in Plato's Timaeus—an island swallowed by the sea in a day and night—has fueled over two thousand years of obsession, speculation, and wild theories.This episode unpacks the origins of the legend, starting with Plato himself. A philosopher, not a historian, Plato introduced Atlantis through dialogues meant to explore morality, politics, and the collapse of civilizations. The tale he tells is rich in detail: a powerful island kingdom of concentric harbors, gleaming temples, and divine bloodlines, eventually undone by its own corruption.From the Temple of Poseidon and its golden statue to the mysterious red metal orichalcum, the description of Atlantis feels more like a blueprint than a metaphor. Yet the story ends abruptly, with Zeus about to speak—and then nothing. Plato left us with a cliffhanger that still echoes.The boys then trace the legacy of Atlantis through history—from the Renaissance age of exploration to Ignatius Donnelly's 1882 book that claimed Atlantis was the mother of all civilizations. They break down the leading location theories, including Santorini's volcanic past, the eerie rings of the Richat Structure in the Sahara, the underwater anomalies near the Azores, and even Antarctica under the ice.But it doesn't stop at geology. Atlantis has become a cultural mirror—showing up in alien lore, Nazi expeditions, New Age mysticism, and blockbuster films. Was it real? Was it metaphor? Or something in between?Whether Atlantis was fact, fiction, or fable, one thing is clear: it's a legend built to last.www.patreon.com/theconspiracypodcast

What you are about to read in these pages, is part of a long and systematic research begun with the intention of re-examining Plato's works of Timaeus and Critias.Its original objective was exceeded by some of those achieved. The idea was to make a connotatively accurate translation through which to examine the logic of the ancient Greek myths and of Plato the Rationalist in the role of Mythographer. This sort of translation is probably without precedence. It is certainly not commercially viable at this stage. But it does provide the accurate sense of every word, phrase, line, paragraph and passage of the ancient text. To ‘study the logic of myths', means to conduct an examination of a mythical account in order to see whether it contains connotations, terms, expressions or a particular form of writing in which can be identified possible axioms, laws, principles and rules or perhaps a systemic procedure that allows the taxonomy of what is true and what is false. To ‘study the logic of Plato', means to seek the rationale of the mythographer and what method (if any) he applied when writing a myth and to determine whether he combined truths and falsehoods and if so, why.Ultimately, to study what a myth is in purpose and in function because  the Ancient Greek Myths have shown that contain many and important true information. So, why one should write such a true story in a such way that looks false?Plato was preferred because he has always been regarded as the representation of Rationalism, which somehow seems incompatible with creative writing.  Accordingly, the myth chosen as the most appropriate for examination was that of Atlantis because of its workable length -neither too long nor short-, its descriptive elements and the acknowledged authenticity of its author Plato.The results of this taxing, in every aspect, investigation, as the reader will quickly come to appreciate from simply reading the information herein,  were entirely unexpected and cannot be regarded as anything less than astounding.(As a whole, the cost of the first research has exceeded € 200.000 and has run into thousands of man-hours. Besides the wealth of information here, there's much more and just as rich.)Although the project's initial intent was to study the logic in myths and mythographers and which study yielded an unexpected amount of data as well as a formal structure to myths, the investigation went on to lead to somewhere completely different and by so doing, reward the author with a magnificent prize (amongst many), namely, the full decipherment of the myth of Atlantis and revelation of the whole truth!There now remains for the archaeologists to confirm these groundbreaking findings since, History seeks the truth, while Archaeology seeks the evidence.The two parts of the Methodology of Mythology (MoM1 and MoM2) that follow are in brief outline and almost exactly as when presented at an international conference of Philosophy and at other scientific meetings and scholarly proceedings, where they made excellent impressions to corresponding acclaim. They reveal a hitherto unknown dimension to myths, at least to those written by Plato and Homer. It is the application of a singular method which sorts out the truths and falsehoods contained in the myth.  The MoM also revealed a way of writing which conceals information in outwardly straightforward text, information that would have been discernable only to whoever had been instructed as to this esoteric form of writing.The third part of the project is about Atlantis and its analysis in the book ‘The Apocalypse* of a Myth'. It deals with the decipherment of the myth and the identification of Atlantis as a physical entity. The reader of this site is recommended to go first into MoM1 & 2 and then into the part on Atlantis. It is not obligatory to follow this sequence but it will facilitate the reader's realization that the recount of Atlantis is not a ‘regular' story and has much hidden beneath the surface, even a tiny part is presented here. Certainly, Plato's reports do not make for straightforward or easy comprehension. If they did, the ambiguity surrounding Atlantis for the past ~2.300 years would not have remained so mystifying, simply because it would have been resolved long ago. The reader of this website will almost certainly come to appreciate the words of warning and prior notice as to the aptitude for rational thought that Plato demands of his reader.The same challenges in comprehension apply to the completed and comprehensive book ‘The Apocalypse* of a Myth'. A limited advance edition was published in Greek while the main and updated edition is in English. As assessed by many of the 200 or so test readers of the Greek edition, most being graduates from institutions of higher learning, the book ranges from decidedly thought provoking to highly exciting (for all Scientific fields) even if indeed challenging. Most who sought to fully understand all that the book contains admitted to reading it at least twice in full while going over certain aspects of it several times. It was truly gratifying to hear by many that they placed the book amongst those most often visited in their library, because of the plethora of useful information it contains in general for anyone wishing to delve further into ancient historical events or even for philosophical perspectives, irrespective of the Atlantis storyline.https://platoproject.gr/Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/earth-ancients--2790919/support.