Down the Wormhole

Episode 110
Let's all geek out about the James Webb Space telescope!!!
If you haven't seen the first five pictures that NASA released from Webb, make sure you check them out here...
https://www.nasa.gov/webbfirstimages
 
Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast
 
More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/
 
produced by Zack Jacksonmusic by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 109
Do prayers for healing work? Do "thoughts and prayers" actually have a measurable effect on a sick person? What should we be praying for anyway, and are we missing unique opportunities for spiritual growth? Rachael is our guide this week as we navigate scientific studies, Jewish prayers, and the difference between being "healed" and "cured".
 
Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast
 
More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/
 
produced by Zack Jacksonmusic by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 108
In part 15 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Dr. Joseph Shane. He teaches us how to navigate contentious spaces, how to communicate across the pews, and how to have a more gentle existential crisis. My favorite line from this episode is, "Evolve your faith or hasten its irrelevance". You're going to need to listen to the whole episode to get the context of that, though! 
 
Dr. Joseph Shane is Professor of Chemistry and Science Education at Shippensburg University. In addition to his responsibilities to chemistry and teacher education, he teaches an honors seminar on interactions between science and religion and conducts outreach to regional churches and public venues. He was the lead editor and contributor to a book to assist science teachers in addressing topics with religious implications, Making Sense of Science and Religion: Strategies for the Classroom and Beyond, which was published through the National Science Teaching Association (NSTA) in 2019. He is also an Elder and youth Sunday school teacher at First Presbyterian Church (PCUSA) in Carlisle, Pennsylvania.
 
Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/
 
Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast
 
More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/
 
produced by Zack Jacksonmusic by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 107
Do you remember that brief "anthropause" in 2020 when billions of people stayed inside due to COVID? Do you remember seeing dolphins in Venice and wolves wandering the streets of NYC? Most of those stories were fake, but they were so believable because that's how nature works. It heals, it rebounds, and it finds a way. So in this episode, we want to take a look at what makes nature so resilient, what we can learn from it, and what our place is within it. We're talking asteroids, cosmic flowers, and divine intervention.  
 
Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast
 
More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/
 
produced by Zack Jacksonmusic by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Episode 106
We are thrilled to be joined today by author, speaker, and public theologian, Brian McLaren. His new book, "Do I Stay Christian?: A Guide for the Doubters, the Disappointed, and the Disillusioned" is an absolute must-read for any Christian struggling to make sense of things in this crazy world we live in. We talk about creating hope, fighting white supremacy, re-wilding Christianity, and the playful joy of reimagining religion. 
Speaking of reimagining religion, have you checked out Zack's new podcast with his wife Nichole, "Reimagining Faith with the Pastors Jackson"? If you enjoy DtW (and of course you do), then you should check it out! 
 
Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast
 
More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/
 
produced by Zack Jacksonmusic by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 
 
Transcript 
This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors.
Zack Jackson 00:04
You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. Our guest today is an author, speaker, activist and public theologian. He is the author of over 15 books including faith after doubt, a generous orthodoxy and a new kind of Christian which got me in a whole lot of trouble at my home church 20 years ago, his new book do I stay Christian, a guide for the doubters, the disappointed and the disillusioned is an absolute must read for any Christian struggling to make sense of things in this crazy world we live in is an absolute joy and honor to welcome to the podcast, Brian McLaren. Oh, joy
 
Brian McLaren 00:45
and honor for me to be with you guys. So, so glad to be here.
 
Zack Jackson 00:49
Yes, I was thrilled to death to get that the email confirming that you had time in your very busy schedule to be with us today. We're all big fans, and I'm sure a lot of folks on the of our listenership likewise.
 
Brian McLaren 01:03
Well, hey, and I gotta say, now that I know about you guys, I'm your fan as well. And, you know, this subject of the inner interaction between faith and science, my goodness, so important these days. So really happy to be in this conference. Yes, thank you.
 
Zack Jackson 01:21
I love the way that you weave these two things together in your writings, by the way, and I've noticed it really in the past 10 years worth of books are so it seems, it seems almost effortless that every once in a while you're just gonna get some reference in there to evolution, some reference in there to the cosmic origins of the universe, it just seems like it is. It is always somewhere in the back of your mind.
 
Brian McLaren 01:45
Well, it's Yeah. And maybe I could say it this way. Without science. I don't think I could be a Christian. So. So yeah, I can't imagine how anyone would want to have a faith that were they had to keep their faith in one compartment. And then everything else. Another compartment compartments, right. Yeah.
 
Zack Jackson 02:10
Well, that's a sound clip that I'll definitely Absolutely. So Ian and I have been talking a lot recently about your new book, which when the time this podcast launches will have been released yesterday, so available to all of your major retailers. So this book, which is just so helpfully entitled, do I stay Christian? answers that question, which I think a lot of folks have had over the past couple of years, especially. But it's it's very helpfully organized into three sections, the answer that question that? No, I will not stay Christian. And here's why. Yes, I will stick it out and stay Christian. And the last section is how, which of those sections is taking up the most real estate in your mind? And in your day to day life?
 
Brian McLaren 03:03
Well, let's see. I think all of them jostle for the top position. But I think actually, the writing of this book propelled the third question up in importance. Because in the writing of this book, I realized it's just inevitable. Some people cannot stay Christian, the religion is killing them. It's damaging them, they need to get away at least for a time. And, and other people will stay Christian, it's who they are, and how could they deny who they are? And, and then what I realized is, even whatever you decide on staying Christian, you have to wake up the next morning, and ask what kind of a human being am I going to be? And that I hope that the Reading of the book helps lift the importance of that question up for everybody.
 
Ian Binns 04:02
Well, and I, you know, Brian, I really appreciated that aspect of the book. And as I said, Before recording, I absolutely loved the book, you know, so for me, I don't have the kind of historical experiences that I know, Brian, you talk about in your books, and that Zach has had and talked about before, the feeling I needed to leave, like, deconstruct and then come back or anything like that. But one of the things that I've always struggled with, is and you you do so well, in the first several chapters, when the answer to your question is no, you know, those chapters explaining No, just really stood out for me. And so but sorry, I know, I'm rambling. This is normal for me. But at the end, I loved as you just said, to connect it back to what kind of human do we want to be? You know, I tell people a lot when they question, my faith, because I'm open with my doubts and questions and the idea of a literal resurrection. I think those are all questions and doubts I have. And I don't know if I'll ever be able to resolve them yet. But I think I prefer to think of it as that I want to live my life, fighting for what Jesus fought for,
 
Brian McLaren 05:12
what a great way to what a great way to sit.
 
Ian Binns 05:15
Right? And so if it's more of that's the way I live, I don't have to stand on a rooftop and scream, everyone be a Christian. It's more of a this is the life I want to live. And I love that you did that.
 
Brian McLaren 05:26
And isn't it ironic that major sectors of the Christian religion are really uninterested, whether you want to fight for the things Jesus fought for, they're really interested in whether you will check certain boxes, agreeing with their authority figures about what you're supposed to say about Jesus. So I just can't help but think that Jesus would be happier with someone who's ready to join him in the struggle with his word for that was follow me, then then have certain opinions about me. In fact, you know, there's that password thing in the Gospels where he says, You know, I really don't care if you call Me Lord, Lord, I mean, what difference does that make the words you use about me? If you don't do what I say so?
 
Ian Binns 06:10
All right. Well, and in this book, and also to in your podcast, learning how to see, you start off talking about something that was very close to me. So I got my PhD from the University of Virginia. And so I was in my wife and I were in Charlottesville was the first place we really lived as a young married couple. Were there for 208. And so when the the situation happened in Charlottesville in August of 2017, that was very challenging for us, because the grounds of UVA are places I spent four years of my life that we love that town. And so that was very challenging for us. And then hearing you on your podcast and Reading this book. I would love to, if you could talk more about that experience. Because I didn't realize you were there. And so I just curious if you can kind of talk about that. Yeah.
 
Brian McLaren 07:04
Well, the story of how I ended up there was kind of interesting, I had introduced this couple to each other who ended up getting married, and both were seminary graduates. And so they were a ministry couple in Charlottesville, and they contacted me and they said, Look, Brian, we you may not have even heard about this. And I hadn't it it turns out, you know, before, was it August 10. I forgotten the date now. Whatever the date was, in August, they'd had a series of Ku Klux Klan rallies, it was like it. A lot of people don't know this. But there is a group of people who are planning for a civil war. And they want to make Charlottesville the capital of the new Confederacy.
 
Ian Binns 07:46
I did not know that part.
 
Brian McLaren 07:48
Yeah, it's scary. And it's crazy stuff. But and, and yet very disturbing. And they said, so a really big one is coming in August. And we're we're trying to get clergy to come support us, and to stand with us. And they said, we're finding a lot of clergy of color. And we're finding a lot of women, clergy who will come we're really finding it hard to get white male clergy to come. And of course, there's a big supply of them, but they just couldn't get them to come. So they said it. They said, Is there any chance you could come you need to know it's going to be dangerous, there going to be a lot of guns there. Several militia have already signed up to be there. And they'll all come heavily armed. And I said, I'm not going to tell that last part to my wife. But yes, I would be honored to be there. Actually, she knew that there would be some danger. And she made me make certain promises to her about what I would do and not to when I was there, but it was just an experience I'll never forget first seeing how organized these folks were. They were super, super highly organized. I was invited into a meeting an Antifa meeting of people who were organizing to try to not let these folks sort of rule the city for a day. And I never thought in my lifetime, I would see people carrying Confederate flags, and Nazi flags and a bunch of other flags along with Bibles and other Christian paraphernalia. I never thought I would see that. And of course, and I happen to be just up the street when Heather hair and other was killed and others were injured by a guy using a car as a terrorist weapon to drive through a crowd. And a group of us clergy went I was wearing you know, black leather shoes and I just remember the feeling of my feet slapping against the ground as I ran down this hill into this crowd where there's chaos and people screaming and crying. And so an experience I'll never forget. But then January 6 2021 happened and I just thought there they are again, you know, and in between, I'd organized an a public An event here in Florida where I live, where we had been, our event was disrupted in the entrances were blocked by the proud boys. So I yeah, this has been a big part of my experience and watching the complicity of major sectors of the Christian faith with these folks has been the AI, it's highly significant in the way I wrote this book, do I stay Christian? Because I feel like that I wish I'd put the sentence in the book. But it only became clear to me actually, in the last few days, that one of the reasons I wrote the book the way I did, and I took those first 10 chapters to really take the No seriously is because I am worried that those 10 chapters give a kind of overview of some of Christianity's crimes. And through the centuries, I'm worried that the worst things Christianity has ever done will be exceeded in the next few years. And that's why I feel anyone who stays Christian, better be aware of the danger that our religion poses to this world and to many of our neighbors. And that then puts a kind of responsibility on us to say, if I'm going to inhabit this religion, I better take responsibility for trying to stand up to some of the harm that it is in danger of doing and not just in danger of doing it is actually doing, you know, as we speak, no, yeah.
 
Zack Jackson 11:29
I mean, we're not just complicit in the rise and spread of white supremacy. Western Christianity is the author of white supremacy, it is very much our child. And it is completely inseparably intertwined with Western Christianity as we know it. And so this is not an issue for the black church to figure out or to lead us in. This is not an issue for people of color to be taking charge. This is our problem, our sin and our need to, to work on to fix to fight. And you're somebody who's been at the frontlines of that. It seems, what what can the rest of us do us white Christians out here? How can we help fight the scourge? I mean, just look, even as we're recording this, we just, we just witnessed another white supremacist, killed 10 people in a buffalo grocery store. And by the time that this podcast launches, who knows? We'll have there will be another one. It just seems like we're just spinning our wheels. Yes.
 
Brian McLaren 12:31
Well, let me say first, I really agree with you that white Christians really have a responsibility right now. And one of our responsibilities is to listen to the cries and the agony and the frustration of our neighbors of color. who are who are just, you know, who can blame them for saying, you know, if they hear thoughts and prayers one more time, you know, I mean, it's just, it's just, yeah. So here's what one thing I think we can do, I think we can all make a commitment that we will never let a racially harmful statement go unchallenged. And, and I think we have to learn how to challenge them in ways that don't create a worst blowback. But silence is its own vote of confidence, and its own voters support for outrageous, immoral, harmful, dangerous statements. So my little recommendation to people is that you've developed your own version of this five word statement, here's my version of it. Wow, I see that differently. It's instead of, you know, you're such a bigot, you're, it's I see that differently. I throw a while in there, because I want to add a little bit of emotional intense intensity without having to yell or scream. Wow, I see that differently. And almost every time I say that, people say, What do you mean? What do you mean? And if it's in public, I say I say to them, I'd rather talk to you about this in private. If you'd like to ask me about it in private some other time, I'll be glad to talk to you. And the reason I say that, and there might be times to have the conversation in public. But what I've noticed is that anytime these conversations happen in public egos are so involved, people are defending themselves, people are performing their loyalty to whatever group it is. And so it seldom becomes an act of communication, and usually becomes the kind of argument that hardens people and their positions. And I would like to be someone who helps little cracks form in their position or, or helps soften their position. And if if I can set up the terms of that discussion, then I'll say to them, if you're ever curious about why I see things differently and how like came to see things differently. I'll be glad to have that conversation with you and private. Just let me know when you'd like to know how I came to see things differently, because I'm not asking them to tell me how they see things. I'll listen respectfully if they want. But I've been listening respectfully, that's what got us into this situation. And so while I see that differently is my, my mantra in these circumstances?
 
Ian Binns 15:27
Well, that's very disarming, I
 
Brian McLaren 15:29
think, and I go, and I feel it's honest, and it's not aggressive. But it also is an act of protest. And it's just an act of deferring boldly, hopefully, graciously, non hatefully, you know? Yeah. And frankly, I'll just say, frankly, late in the book there, in that house section of the book, there's a chapter called, announce and renounce, or renounce and announce, and in some ways, it's the same thing. It's, it's, it's having more and more of us just have the courage to say, I am not where you are. And to do it in a way that says, It's not that I hate you. It's not that I am going to insult you. In fact, I'm going to just state in a way that says, I don't, I'm nothing's changing in our relationship, but I'm not where you are. If that creates a problem for you, then we'll deal with it. But I need to let you know I can be at a different place than you are. So I thought
 
Ian Binns 16:31
that story you told in that chapter about John Ray and Amanda was really powerful. And one of the phrases that stood out, it was after early on in the story. When John Ray comes back to Amanda and says, I was confronted by your father for 20 minutes. And the phrase that you use in the book was he felt that he was in the presence of Christian hate? Yes. And I thought that was just just those four words, or five words. Yeah, forward presence of Christian hate just really kind of caught me of because I feel like that's what we're seeing a lot of right now.
 
Brian McLaren 17:08
Yes, yes. And of course, Christians will say, that's not hate, that's love. And they, and they're satisfied with that. But there is something really ugly going on. It's just ugly. And I've experienced that. And my gosh, when you're on Twitter, and Facebook, you know, I grew up fundamentalist. And part of being a fundamentalist is you didn't cuss? And you didn't use crude language. And you you felt this obligation to be decent and, and respectful. But my gosh, the profanity and I mean, it's just, it's just shocking to me to see what what people are doing in the name of Jesus, and it's all sort of acceptable. And of course, some of this is because they're imitating their new leader, you know, Donald Trump, who's, in a sense, the new leader of their denomination that has that has newly formed and, and, and part of this is just stuff that's been in the American psyche for a long time, and maybe we're better with a profanity, because it's, you know, somebody said, what I mentioned, I've had a lot of interactions with the proud boys, they said, there, it's just the kk k with that, and the sheets are off. And I think that's, there's some truth to that. So this is a historical reckoning, that needed to happen. So better now than not letting it happen, you know, letting it fester for another 100 years.
 
Zack Jackson 18:35
Yeah, that chapter, which kind of tells the story of a couple whose ideologies had changed, their faith had changed, and they hadn't really let their family know, which I think a lot of folks who have deconstructed can relate to because they're going to, they're afraid of then being renounced by their family. And she gathers up the courage after her husband has been sort of accosted for 20 minutes to go up and just tell her father, this is how it's going to be from here on out. And you talked about that in terms of a coming out story for her. And that framing, I think is really helpful. And something that queer theologians, this gift that they have given us, this idea of coming out, it is a vulnerable experience, in which you can be hurt in all new ways. But it is such an empowering experience. I read one, one theologian referred to John one as God's coming out that Jesus is incarnation is him, showing who he truly is to the world and offering up himself to be either accepted in new ways or hurt in all new ways. And I honestly had never understood the Incarnation until then. But this idea that those of us us who are straight sis hetero folks who have never had the need to come out to people to tell them, This is how you have perceived me. But this is how I truly am. We've just always been known for who we are, that this is something that we we should learn, that we should need to love louder than the hate and that we need to be more vocal. It's not enough to just love on our own, but that we need to love loudly and outwardly. Yeah,
 
Brian McLaren 20:30
another little saying that has kind of been sitting with me lately is I would rather be rejected for who I am then accepted for who I am not.
 
Ian Binns 20:39
And I wrote that down. Well, like I, I want to tattoo that on my arm or something, because I think that's such a powerful phrase. It really is.
 
Brian McLaren 20:47
And I think what one of the things that just saying it that way helps me do is realize that the fear of rejection has so much power over so many of us. And as someone who's experienced a bit of rejection. And now I know Zach has led to other people to being rejected. But, but it's, it's not the end of the world. It's not the worst thing that ever happens to you. In fact, some pretty amazing positive things happen can happen in the experience of rejection. So And isn't it interesting in the gospels, this is really a major theme of Jesus teaching. Hey, guys, if you take seriously what I'm saying, you're gonna be rejected, here's what's gonna happen and it and then we're surprised when it happens.
 
Zack Jackson 21:39
Right? The high priest is gonna block you on Twitter at this point. And
 
Ian Binns 21:44
well, and I think you mentioning the rejection, the fear of rejection, I mean, that's something that cripples me at times, you know, with my own work of wanting to write, as an academic for more public audience, it, it, something that holds me back quite a bit. And Reading, you know, your book has helped and then also Rob Bell's work as well as helping me remember that it's not, I cannot control people's reactions to my work in my message.
 
Brian McLaren 22:14
And so we're writing about things that matter than then there are things that people have strong opinions about, and they have vested interests in. And so of course, there'll be pushback, like, you know, every once in awhile, I have to sit down with myself and just say, of course, people would get upset. What were you expecting to get a Nobel Prize? You know, of course. So, yeah, that's just the territory. And it's, it's, it's part of the privilege of talking about things that really matter and, and working on things then that matter. So I like that doesn't it doesn't make it easy, but it does, I think it is, it's something we have to do that helps us navigate through those first few experiences of rejection, that that can either scar us for life or become our hazing. For for a member membership, and a new, a new community.
 
Zack Jackson 23:19
And I've experienced a lot of the dirty underbelly of the Christian church growing up in, in the back rooms of the church, and then being a part of church leadership, the first 10 chapters of your book, where you talk about all the reasons why you should leave Christianity. I, at the end of every chapter, I thought to myself, I know where he's going. I know there's a there's a part two, but I'm almost ready to just like, just close the book here and be like, yeah, no, he does have a point, why should I be a part of this and re even Reading part two, a couple chapters in where you're talking about why we should stay Christian. And I thought, these don't quite outweigh yet in my mind, where, where Part one was. And then then I hit chapter 14. And you asked us to consider an anticipatory Christianity that is leaning towards the future. And I love that phrase so much. I highlighted it, I wrote it down. And anticipatory Christianity because it describes the stance towards the future in which that doesn't necessarily claim that everything in the future is better than everything in the past that we're evolving into something better, just something different to newer and maybe better adapted. Would you care to unpack that phrase for us? Yeah. Wow. That is bringing you life and older.
 
Brian McLaren 24:46
There's a lot of ways to do it. But a kind of fun way is to say that both in religion and science, a lot of us inherited a religion, where the Locus of Power was always in the past. So So the, you know, the big bang happens. And I bet most of us have seen this in a science movie somewhere. And it's like somebody's playing pool and they hit the cue ball and the cue ball hits the rack of, you know, balls, and everything is action reaction being driven from the past. And that describes, that's one way of looking at the universe. It's one way of describing the universe. But there's another way to look at it to say, to think of the Locus of Power, not just being in the past, but actually being the future itself, that opens, that constantly gives everything a chance to move in some new direction. And the way that theologians have talked about this is to say instead of thinking of God, pushing things out of the past into the future, imagine God in the distant future, inviting things to keep moving toward maturity. The one of the early church scholars, who is a very imaginative fellow, his name was Gregory of Nyssa. And Gregory, got in trouble with a lot of his fellow scholars, because they all bought into this idea of Greek philosophy that perfection is static, because perfection can only get worse, if it could change, it wouldn't be perfect. If it could change for the better, it wouldn't be perfect. So perfection is always static. And Gregory said, that's just not good enough. He said, perfection is infinite progression, this idea of an endlessly open future for endlessly new possibilities, you know, and so that way of thinking, instead of God's sort of being in control, either behind us or standing over us, it's God inviting us into greater freedom, and greater wholeness and greater maturity and greater relationship and greater diversity and greater beauty, which is actually what we see kind of unfolding in the universe, you know, there was no Mozart or Bob Dylan or Taylor Swift, you know, 4 billion years ago. And so these things, new things that you never ever would have anticipated, are baked into the possibilities and, and have chances to open up. So that's, and when we let that kind of almost scientific view, also have a theological expression. It helps us think about Christianity, not as something that is already set in concrete, but something that is, in its very early stages.
 
Zack Jackson 27:48
It is hard to think about Christianity in its early stages, 2000 years later, but that is, that can be helpful,
 
Ian Binns 27:56
if we can, you know, I think I said before we started recording that, especially Reading the first part of your book, where you're providing, you know, many reasons why the answer to your question will be no, that's when I was Reading it near my wife, and I would stop and be like, Oh, my God, I have to have to read this for you. So if I can read a quote to you, that just really stood out for me. And I just would love to get your thoughts on it a little bit more, but it's in the chapter. Because Christianity is a failed religion. And at the very end, you talk about, you know, you kind of are speaking to that your reader, obviously, of asking if that was harsh to them, for people to consider many of the things you've already shared. But you say if you persist in minimizing these failures of the past and brushing them aside as trivial matters, then please realize, to growing millions of people, you now represent the contemporary failure of Christianity to transform lives. To put it more bluntly, you are a living example of the failure of Christianity, and you are another reason for them not to stay Christian, which resonated with me. I mean, I probably I'm very emotional person. And I started crying when I read it, but it was just a, I'd love to know, how did that feel. As a leader in Christianity, many people look to you to write that sentence.
 
Brian McLaren 29:21
Yeah, I remember writing it and I and I have been in so many of those conversations. I won't mention this name just out of politeness, but a leader of people in my generation, and probably your generation would know his name. He died a few years ago, but he was super well known, highly respected on Christian radio and all that sort of thing. And we once had an email exchange and he gave me permission to go public with it, but I just couldn't do it. And in that email exchange, he said the Crusades weren't that serious. The Witch burnings were exaggerated, he just minimized every single thing. And I just thought to myself, you know, you think you're making Christianity look better. And something else I realized about him is that, for him, Christianity and Western civilization were fused together. And his defense of Christianity was a defense of Western civilization. And in that way, it was an act of aggression toward Muslims, and Buddhists and Hindus. And so it all sort of was of a piece, you know, and I think that's part of what so many of us just don't want to be part of anymore, we don't want to be part of that kind of dismissive defensive. Christianity. And, and, of course, you know, I'm not wanting to go around and vilify all these people of the past. I mean, they are what they are, and they did what they did. And, and, and if I'd been alive, I may have done many of the similar, similar things. But to say that the message of Jesus Christ should not have demanded more of people. It just feels to me like a pretty low opinion of the of Jesus and His message.
 
Ian Binns 31:21
Well, and as I said, early on to, you know, I try to live by his message and what he fought for, and died for, right. But one other thing you said a little bit earlier in the text, you said, you know, teaching others by their example, to live by Jesus's spiritual method of radical non discriminatory love and courageous truth telling, you know, that's gotten me in trouble at times. With some, and I don't do it nearly as much as I used to. And Zach has actually said, and some of my science education friends have said that they're really happy that I don't engage as much on Twitter, as I used to, partly because I was blocked by Ken Ham, who is still welcome to be on the show. But what I also have several friends who are members of the LGBTQ community, and who are people of faith, and I remember telling one of them one time when we were having a conversation about some of their struggles, and I just kind of said that I believe in a God who loves us for us. Yeah. And that if that makes me wrong, when I have to face God, it didn't my time. And I'm told that's not the way it works. My response to my friend was, I don't want to be there anyway. Like if that if that's what can get me into heaven. If Heaven is a place that they say, you messed up, you have to renounce that I'd say I'm going somewhere else.
 
Brian McLaren 32:49
Yes, that that God is not good enough. Right? That's just not good enough. My friend Tripp fuller says, Look, if if your view of God isn't half as nice as Jesus, there's something wrong. So, right,
 
Zack Jackson 33:06
how can Christians take Jesus and like, look at him in the Gospels? And then be like, All right, well, but at the end of it all, we're gonna meet scary God. And he's going to do the scary judge thing. While Jesus the guy, you know, the don't cast the first stone guy. He's just going to be in his room because he's a naughty boy or something. I don't know. Why is he not up on the jet like we can affirm that all members of the Trinity are of one substance, according to the ancient Creed's, but yet won't apply Jesus's examples of grace to the judgments that we fear from God, there
 
Brian McLaren 33:46
was a Quaker theologian who I just think captured what we're discussing right now. So aptly, he said, it was Elton Trueblood. And this isn't a quote, but this is sort of the substance of one of his ideas. He said, The Christian understanding of the deity of Christ did not mean that we had a definition of God. And Jesus came along and we lifted him up to that definition. He said, what this really is supposed to mean is that we had a definition of God. And Jesus came along, and we had to adjust our definition of God. And I think that's very well, I think that's very well said, I think that's what it should have been. I don't know if that is what happened historically. But I think that's how it should have been.
 
Zack Jackson 34:38
Yeah, if I can, if I can pivot here for a second. We've we've been on some heavy topics. I want to I want to lighten things up a little bit. I your chapter on rewilding ourselves and our faith and humanity itself was far and above my favorite chapter of the book. I highly They did. The basically the whole thing. It reminded me very much of a conversation those longtime listeners might remember, way back in 2020, episode 42 with Dr. Scott, the paleontologist from PBS, his dinosaur, I
 
Ian Binns 35:15
remembered it too. First thing I thought about called
 
Zack Jackson 35:19
reinventing the natural world was was his and his theory. And his, the whole devotion he has towards educating children is that in in order in order to save the world, from climate disaster from environmental disaster, we will not do that by better spreadsheets. Because nobody is apathetic because they don't know the facts. They're apathetic because they don't care. And so his entire life Miss mission is to help children fall back in love. I love to read and chant nature, and to get them outside. And even while watching television to then inspire them to go outside afterwards. Because when you fall in love with the world, then you want to save it. It's your mother. Again, it's not it's not just a commodity anymore. And Reading your chapter about being out on a kayak in the middle of the of Florida. And there's gators and birds and fish and the whole deal. I'm I'm there in my mind. And I'm imagining my own slice of wild here in the Pennsylvania mountains. And I'm wondering if you can talk a little bit about how the natural world and how this process of rewilding has awoken your spirituality and how we might best share that with people.
 
Brian McLaren 36:40
Well, maybe I could just tell you two quick stories. One from yesterday, we had a death in the family over the last week. And so I was out of state. I was in New Jersey, for the funeral. And I had to do a whole bunch of interviews for this book. So I was in, in the home office of my deceased brother in law. To conduct these interviews, I brought along my microphone and had my computer set up. And right outside his window. There's a dogwood tree and in the dogwood tree, about two feet from the window was Robin building her nest and so I was doing interviews literally from you know, 10 in the morning till 11 At night, cuz some of them were Pacific Coast time. And so as I sat there through the day, I watched the mother Robin, come and go and come and go mouthful of mud a mouthful of grass and watching her use her the shape of her body to form the perfect cup. If you've ever observed a bird's nest, it's just this perfect semi sphere. Oh my goodness, it's just an I never gotten to watch that. That's such a intimate angle. And if that wasn't good enough, just before dark, she was out, I guess gathering more materials. And a little English Sparrow came in and climbs into her nest and steals a bunch of grass. And it was just great. And I just felt like I just got to see a little bit of mischief and fat, all the rest of it. But just all felt I just it just was it. There's a poet. What a great resume. There's a fellow named Lanham from Clemson University, who's a biologist and a poet. Isn't that a great combination? And he uses that term in one of his poems orgasm, that we have these experiences of oh, that produce this sort of delight you know, that's that goes beyond words. And, and I had said I felt watching that all unfold. And then another experience. Last summer I fall in love with a place I highly recommend it for people who like this sort of thing called ring Lake Ranch. It's a Christian based retreat center, but it's just a place that brings you out into the wilderness of Wyoming and you get to ride horses and fly fish and hike and and just enjoy an incredible a place with deep history for the sheep eat or people that Native American people that area and, and I took a hike with a botanist. And as we walked through a Badlands area along the Wind River Gorge. She would just everything she talked about was the relationship. We came along she said see that flower there says I've never seen that flower in bloom during the daytime. It's a night blooming flower. And she said there is one species of wasp that pollinates that flower and it only comes out at night. And she said isn't it amazing to think one species of Wasp and one flower have evolved to be sort of partners in their in one another survival, you know, and then we'd come upon a sagebrush, and she talked about before she was done, you just felt you were on holy ground, it was like a burning bush. But it was the sagebrush because she explained, this is high desert. And in the in the winter, snow drifts form around sage brushes, and that snow drifts, then when it melts, it concentrates moisture around the base of the sagebrush, which helps the sagebrush live but also becomes like a little oasis of moisture. And then she starts talking about all the creatures that depend on that moisture of the sagebrush. And I mean, you're done. And you're just, you're, it's ecstatic to think of the web of life that is around you. And, and that sense of connectedness, if that's not holy, I don't know what it is, you know. And so any kind of Christianity that wants to ignore all that and just look at the world as something that God plans to destroy, because he wants to suck our souls up into heaven or send them somewhere else. You just think what, what a blasphemy to, to discount and the wonder and glory that's there, you know, in that a Badlands of the Wind River Gorge.
 
Zack Jackson 41:27
You talk about that sort of mutual evolution. And the two things that when we first were developing the ideas of evolution, the common conception was survival of the fittest, the strongest, right the the beefiest and biggest teeth. And we've learned that the in many ways that was just white supremacy, Reading itself into science, when the truth is that it's survival of the most adaptable, the most resourceful, the best collaborators is, is survival of those who can work with others best is is how species evolve and continue that relationality is just,
 
Brian McLaren 42:10
and if we're going to survive, we have to learn that wisdom from from creation, I was honored to be invited to write a book about the Galapagos Islands. So I've had a chance to visit there a few times. And I in my book, I wrote a couple of chapters about Charles Darwin and I, I got to read his biography while I was there, and and then just did a bunch of research and that term survival of the fittest, you may know this. It wasn't Darwin's term. And Arthur, Arthur Wallace, I think it was Arthur was his first name, I, he, he recommended the term because natural selection sounded like it personified nature too much, you know that nature is making choices. Like a Calvinist, God makes choices, and they wanted to get away from that. When they use the word fittest, it meant fit best, the opposite of the most domineering and aggressive, it's those who fit best.
 
Zack Jackson 43:06
So yes, yes, you will love my favorite. That my favorite new fact in physics that is just that is filling my soul with all in wonder these days. Is that do you think about the part of the atom that makes that has stuff, right? That has mass that has the stuff that makes you a thing, and not just nothing? Where does your mask come from? Well, only 9% of the mass of an atom comes from the particles of the atom 91% of the mass of every atom comes from the interaction between the atoms, the forces created by the protons and neutrons, generate the the 91% of the mass of you and I and the planet and the stars. Everything is a relationship between things without the relationship, the things that exist don't exist. And I love that. I mean, that is just, that's the illogical.
 
Brian McLaren 44:05
Literally the weightiest part of the universe is its relationships.
 
Zack Jackson 44:10
Exactly. It is it is, if you ever wanted to find a fingerprint of a relational Creator, who created a creation that continues to create, it's right there.
 
Brian McLaren 44:20
And this is when you were talking about anticipatory Christianity. This is if if what will happen if we're given the chance to incorporate all of these magnificent understandings into our theological work, and not just be stuck under this very low ceiling of Neoplatonic philosophy? Which has its own beauties and all the rest, but you know, yeah, so all of this is one of the other reasons it's a little hard to walk away in spite of all the horrible things because somebody is going to get to do this kind of revisioning of what we mean when we say the word God, in light of all of this, and what we mean when we say the word human in light of all of this, and it's sort of would be a shame to miss miss that fun.
 
Zack Jackson 45:15
It is fun, isn't it?
 
Ian Binns 45:17
Well, and, you know, Reading throughout your, your book too about, you know, the interconnectedness of all things, and just the importance of, you know, stepping back from that just developing those connections and those relationships, you know, that's something that as a teacher, I do with my students, and, you know, I teach future elementary school teachers how to teach science. And so one of the first things I really focus on is not necessarily, let's get into teaching science immediately, it's, let's develop a connection to each other a relationship. And, you know, I've been told by some of my colleagues that they've always been impressed that typically by week two, I've developed a very strong rapport with my students. And I tell my students, this is my messaging to them all the time, is that if you're able to connect with your students, on a personal level in some way, you can teach them anything there is yes, yes, yes. Because they will learn to trust you and know they're in a safe space.
 
Brian McLaren 46:21
Yes. And in the presence of that kind of respect and affection, you know, and in the presence of that, our curiosity comes out. And so then we become natural learners because we feel safe and all the rest. Oh, it's so true. And this, again, is one of the things that I think we have to realize that the Christian religion, by working so much on a base of fear and shame, creates an antagonistic environment to learning and curiosity. And it might be one of the factors in the lack of transformation we were talking about before, it makes people sort of hunker down, rather than open up.
 
Ian Binns 47:07
Well, that's, you know, part of that, too, with developing that relationship and connection is in it kind of touches on something. Zack, you said earlier when talking about Dr. Scott, coming on, as you know, teaching people to love nature, again, is that I approached my class, also teaching them to not fear science. Yes. And to realize why it's such an incredible thing to teach. And that children are natural born scientists. Yes. Just they'll whole notion of being curious and wanting to ask a question is doing science. And so I remind them of that. And then I say, Now let's have some fun, and focus on ways to teach it. But if they can get that down, yeah, pretty quickly, we're gonna have a good time. So
 
Brian McLaren 47:54
be a nice thing for seminarians to hear.
 
Zack Jackson 48:00
I mentioned before we started recording, friend of mine just wrote his first book, called Jesus takes the side embracing the political demands of the gospel, his name is Johnny Rashid. By the time this episode airs, I think it'll be a week out from release. And in it, one of the things he argues is that Western Christianity doesn't have a sense of honor, but it does have a sense of shame. And most societies are honor shame based, and his family comes from Egypt, and they have a deeply ingrained system of honor and shame and honor and shame is how you keep society together, how to keep religion together, but Western Christianity has a lot of shame. But we have no systems of honor. anymore. And so we cling desperately, to our our dogma, our beliefs, our right thinking, because it is so easy to feel shame, and so hard to find honor in the system anymore. Sounds remarkable. It is. And it's it's a great book, and everyone should read it. But I think that when we're talking about reimagining the church and reimagining our faith and our religion and what it means to follow Christ. I mean, I can't think of another historical person who spent more time pouring honor on people that other people poured Seamus. Yes, yes, yes. And if we're going to reimagine this faith, I think we put that near the center. I love it. As as we're, as we're sort of wrapping up our time together. I want to I want to ask you one more question. That for me, is very full circle. Because back in 2006, I preached a sermon as a teenager, at my home church, based on your brand new book, The secret message of Jesus. A part of that book is in which you talked about how the phrase the kingdom of God doesn't work. In this post monarchical world. You know, nobody knows what a kingdom is anymore. Jesus was using a metaphor for his time that no longer works, and probably carries too many too much baggage for it to be useful. And you propose a dozen different solutions. The the, my favorite one at the time was the dream of God, that was the name of the sermon, actually just listen to the sermon today, it was very hard to listen to an 18 year old me preach a sermon. But here we are. I wonder if in the past 16 years, you've found a version of the kingdom of God that resonates deeper with you. And with the current reality, we find ourselves very
 
Brian McLaren 50:40
much. So that's very relevant to our discussion today. You know, there, there's a chapter in the book called to free God and, and I, I have a beautiful quote from Barbara brown Taylor that plays heavily in the book and and, in fact, maybe the way for me to say the phrase is to say that I think this phrase refers to the kingdom of God. And I think it refers to God. In that chapter I talk about in do I stay Christian, I talk about the you that we refer to God, that seems to me becomes a we, because the the nature of God, it seems to me is a God of participation, who invites us into participation in the divine life. And so anyhow, the phrase is the web of life. And, in fact, I, I wrote a little table grace, that is my table grace for the last several years. And it's I just say, for this breath, for this heartbeat, for this meal with these companions. For the web of life of which were part we give thanks with all our heart. And it's an as I'm saying, the web of life. I realized, I'm not just talking about you that web of life includes God. It's a we that's God and creation in that one web. So that now I think the web is what weighs 91%, or this 91% of the mass.
 
Zack Jackson 52:20
Yes, absolutely. It is all about how we are connected to one one,
 
Ian Binns 52:24
if I may ask one more question. Brian is based on something you said to us at the very beginning. After you talked about your experience with Charlottesville, you said you kind of alluded to that you are concerned about things to come. Yeah. Right. So that was hard to hear. Yeah. So what gives you hope? Yeah. Because January 6 was rough. It was rough. For those of us who admit what happened.
 
Brian McLaren 52:57
So in that's really an important question. And in fact, that's going to be at the heart of the next book I write actually. And I guess one thing I can say is the word hope used to mean for me, where do I see trend lines that make me think things might get better? And I'm not defining hope that way anymore. I'm not defining hope as having anything to do with evidence or not, not depending on evidence. And because what I expect this is what's helping me have hope, to not have to depend on evidence for things getting better. What I expect will happen is that forms of Christianity will get worse than they've ever been. I think that's almost unavoidable. I think, I can't imagine it not happening. i There are people who want it to happen, they want Christianity to become in words I would use uglier, more selfish, more vicious, more violent. And I have no hope that that will not happen, like that will happen. But here's the here's what I think, as that happens, I'm quite certain that we are seeing and we'll see extraordinarily beautiful expressions of Christian faith and other expressions of human life as well. Just because the ugliness that we'll see will will provoke many of us to step out of sort of complacency into a more vigorous and robust expression of beauty and pursuit of beauty. And, and the lies and conspiracy theories on one side will make us more passionate to actually know and face the truth and and, and, of that, of course, I do see evidence I see our conversation being evidence all The three of us are different than we were three years ago. And, and so, you know, it's just all around us. I would I was, you know, I said I was out of town. And when I was on a plane coming home this morning, as I walked down the aisle of the plane, I just had one of those kinds of grace moments, where as I walked down the aisle, I, this guy is asleep. And this woman is tending her child, and this older person is Reading a magazine. And as I'm walking down the aisle toward my seat at the back, cheap seat of the plane, I just felt this tenderness and love and saw the beauty of these people was one of those moments where you just sort of you feel every one of these people is beloved, you know, and, and I just think more and more of us are moving in that direction. But that won't stop the ugly people the ugly things from happening, and taking over more and more people's lives to so that's how I that's how I survived i i have to be able to expect the worst will happen and and the best will happen.
 
Ian Binns 56:07
So then we'll just also have to have you back on when you finish that next book. Okay. I would like that. I would appreciate that response. Brian. That helps a lot. salutely Thanks. Yeah.
 
Zack Jackson 56:18
The book is called do I stay Christian, a guide for the doubters, the disappointed and the disillusioned, it is available wherever you get your books as of yesterday. Brian has been such a pleasure to talk with you for the past hour. Thank you so much for carving time out of your ridiculously busy life to be
 
Brian McLaren 56:38
such a delight. It's just been a pleasure. I'm, I feel energized and I'm so glad you're doing what you're doing. Thanks for having me on. And please keep up the good work. It's important. Thank you
 
 
 

Episode 105
Maggots! Bloodletting! Graverobbers! Decapitated ducks! Cornflakes! This episode has it all! Join us on this wild ride through the history of Western Medicine as we look at the breakthroughs, setbacks, prejudices, and methodology behind it. 
 
Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast
 
More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/
 
produced by Zack Jacksonmusic by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 
 
Transcript 
This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors.
 
Zack Jackson 00:04
You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. This week our hosts are
 
Kendra Holt-Moore 00:14
Kendra Holt-Moore, assistant professor of religion at Bethany College, and my most recent ailment was a concussion from a snowboarding fall,
 
Zack Jackson 00:28
Zack Jackson, UCC pasture and Reading, Pennsylvania, and my most recent ailment was COVID.
 
Rachael Jackson 00:36
Rachel Jackson, Rabbi Agoudas, Israel congregation Hendersonville, North Carolina, my most recent ailment is real, pretty bland, but irritating nonetheless. It's just a headache. But it was one of those headaches that I couldn't get rid of a headache for no reason. And I felt like oh my god, I'm just old, I now just get headaches.
 
Ian Binns 01:01
And Ben's Associate Professor of elementary science education at UNC Charlotte. And my most recent ailment is arthritis in my right hand, where this part is where the thumb comes down and connects to the wrist. It is definitely confirmed no longer early onset arthritis. So yeah, that was fun.
 
01:26
Why did you why did you ask her this question?
 
Ian Binns 01:29
For two reasons. One, because we just passed your birthday, Rachel. So celebration.
 
Rachael Jackson 01:38
Your old everything hurts. Just adding the parenthetical aside, Everybody Hurts from REM is an amazing song from 1992. And it's younger than
 
Ian Binns 01:50
I am interested. No, yeah, no, that was out before? No. When were you born again, Kendra. 1991. See, so
 
01:58
nothing hurt, then. I was fresh.
 
Ian Binns 02:05
The second reason that we're asking this question is because we're starting our new mini series, our next mini series on healing. So for today, I'm gonna give a just a very quick crash course, in kind of the history of healing from a science perspective. And I will let our listeners know that my background and understanding this is definitely more than the western science. So please, if anyone hears this and says, hey, you've left out some cultures, historical cultures that I do apologize for that. But as I said, this is gonna be very brief. So we could do several episodes just on the history of medicine. But so anyway, so I kind of wanted to just give some general, interesting things that have occurred over time. And then we wanted us to be able to get into a conversation about, like medical treatments, for different ailments, as well. But some of our understanding of the history of medicine goes all the way back to prehistoric times. And this is where I think it will come into play throughout our series as well, of how different cultures used to attribute different types of magic or religion to ailments, you know, maybe it was something to do with evil spirits or something like that. But you know, supernatural origin versus more of a natural origin of reason for different ailments. But one of the things that we know from the discovery of different prehistoric skulls is that they would actually drill a hole into the skull of the victim, because they believe that that the speculation is and then we actually see this occurred in more recent human history that it would release the disease. And so that was one thanks, you mean patient? Did I sit victim, you get saved. Because you know, if
 
Zack Jackson 03:54
you're going to your show, and your hands
 
Ian Binns 03:56
are gonna drill during prehistoric times, and you're gonna knock a hole into the person's skull, they may end up being the victim. Right? So, so yeah, there you go. And then now we were going to jump ahead to ancient Egypt, when we start actually seeing some evidence of written evidence of different types of treatments and medicine. One examples from the what was called the Smith Papyrus, written in 1600 BCE, right around there. But it was actually we believe it was a copy of a text from much earlier, so roughly 3000 BCE, but in that particular Papyrus, that's now I think, in New York. It contained 48 case studies. There was no theory for anything, but it was an observation and kind of a recording of what it is that they knew. So the case studies were all written, same way, the title, the examination, so what they're observing, and then the diagnosis, and then the treatment, and then they will have a glossary for terms. But again, they were still be speculation about what role Old Evil forces or spirits play in the cause of diseases. And then we're gonna jump ahead more to ancient Greece. And this is where many people may have heard of Hippocrates, of Coase Brahm, circa BCE, or for 20 BC, he was one of the first people who kind of focused on natural explanations trying to move away from supernatural explanations. And he was one of the people who came up with the idea of the four humors, which those are blood, yellow bile, black bile, and phlegm. And if you are healthy, that means the four humors are in balance, if you were not healthy, that means something was off, one of the humors was off. And so this is where we start getting the idea of bloodletting. So for example, if someone had a fever, it was due to an abundance of blood. And so they would do bloodletting as a way to cure the fever. But still, at this time, and again, I'm skipping over a lot of people. They learned different things with anatomy, but they were only allowed to dissect animals, because at the time, it was illegal to dissect humans. At which time, still 420 BCE. So this is still the BCE era, ancient,
 
Zack Jackson 06:13
ancient really, that sounds more like a Christian hang up than agree. Yeah. Well, and actually to
 
Ian Binns 06:17
this, and trying to prepare for today's episode, I did see in some of the more ancient eastern cultures of like Hinduism, and from the early early stages of that, that they were also not allowed to cut into the human body and dissect human bodies either. So this is not just in that area. But yeah, you're right, because, Zack, as you just said, that we see that all the way up into the 1500s that they weren't supposed to be dissecting humans in in Europe, for example, but they did not necessarily figure out the reason or the causes of the different parts of the body that they were removing from the body. So when it came to anatomy, who the Egyptians from my from my understanding, or my off on that, which I find that's
 
Zack Jackson 07:01
fine, it depends. The the Ebers papyrus and again, all these papyrus papyrus papyrus Pappa Ria, I don't know if the plural is. The Papyrus is they are named after the the hippopotami Yes, sorry. They're all happy to discover they're all named there. No, not the Discover. They're named after the white guys who bought it at auction and then brought it back to their country. So, you know, all of Egyptian treasures are in Europe or America somewhere instead of where they belong. But anyway,
 
Ian Binns 07:35
yeah, the Smith Paul Bader is probably wasn't named for a guy named Smith all that back then.
 
Zack Jackson 07:40
Right now Pharaoh Smith. No, that's not really an Egyptian name. But the Ebers papyrus was in 1550 BCE, and it had a really detailed explanation of the heart and the entire circulatory system. It was a bit wrong in some of the ways in that they thought that the the heart pumps all fluids. So that includes urine and semen as well as as blood, but they understood the purpose of of the blood going through the muscles and the veins and the arteries and all of that they actually also had some psychiatric conditions that were tied up in conditions of the heart. And they mentioned like dementia and depression, which were problems of the heart because they would dissect people after they died and look at the quality of their ventricles and all of that. So they didn't know what the brain was. They thought that was garbage. But the heart was the center of
 
Ian Binns 08:37
all thank you for correcting me, Zack, I forgot about that Papyrus. Papyrus? popularized by Bob Yes, go ahead, Rachel.
 
Zack Jackson 08:46
Papyrus hippopotami
 
Rachael Jackson 08:47
I was just going to add that because things are because things are so ancient, we tend to forget that there was we say Egyptian. We're looking at 1000s and 1000s of years when we say Ancient Egypt, so 1500 BCE is kind of the middle right? Middle late kingdom, right? This is the these are the new kingdoms. Were this is not, these are not the ones that built those giant pyramids. That's 1000 years earlier that they did that. So I think when we when we talk about that we should do a little bit of justice and say, hey, it would sort of be like saying, hey, all Englanders life for all time, right? Well, that's just been 2000 years like it's at some point. So just to add to that piece and same thing with the the Greek piece or the ancient Greek has been around for a very long time. That's that's the history not the
 
Zack Jackson 09:45
speaking of the history piece to in about in the 1200s or so BCE, there was this mysterious Bronze Age collapse in which these massive societies, the ancient Egyptians, the Mycenaeans, all the the the Hittite They just they just collapsed. And we're not entirely sure why possibly the sea peoples possibly climate change, possibly a million other things, aliens, if you watch the History Channel, but all of these amazing societies, the Minoans, another one, they all just disappeared. And so you see later Greek society and later Egyptian society, then trying to make sense of the fact that there are these ancient ruins that are massive, and they just assume that ancient heroes built them, which is where a lot of the mythology comes from. But so like this sort of understanding of anatomy and health was probably somewhat lost in going into the period that now you're talking about where people aren't allowed to dissect. So we see them now because we found the papyrus, but they may not have had them
 
Ian Binns 10:46
as well. So Zach, you mentioned, you know, of that massive loss of civilization around that timeframe? And you mentioned your seafaring people to a man, are you talking about Atlantis there, buddy?
 
Zack Jackson 11:01
I am actually the Minoans. We're probably the source of the Atlantean myth as far as
 
Ian Binns 11:07
because wasn't Plato, one of the first ones to talk about it. Plato was the first one to write right about that we have documentation.
 
Zack Jackson 11:14
It's an Egyptian story that Plato heard and wrote about that there's this island nation that was super advanced in technology and in society, and then they angered Poseidon, right, and then they were wiped out by the sea for their iniquities. And so that lines up really nicely with the Minoan people who were on Crete, who at the time, I mean, we're talking 1500 BCE. Further back had like three storey buildings with hot and cold running water, and indoor plumbing. They had amazing art and architecture. They were they they were doing things that 1000s of years later, people hadn't discovered. And then they were just they were hit by this massive tsunami after the oh, what's that, that place in Greece that everyone goes on vacation with the beautiful blue waters of Santorini the volcano there exploded and caused caused dust it caused tsunamis and basically wiped out their society and in the Mycenaeans conquered them, and then the Bronze Age collapse. So we forgot all about them for 1000s of years, but they were probably the inspiration of Atlantis. It's not aliens, sorry. It's probably just Minoans. It's a bummer. Yeah, well, this has been Zach ruins mythology for you.
 
Kendra Holt-Moore 12:31
A new segment? I love that. Yeah, exactly.
 
Ian Binns 12:33
You could just splice this out and move it to the end. So let's get back to because I think while we're doing this to it's interesting, you all I am going to be focusing mostly on how we start to see more of a focus on natural phenomena, natural explanations and a scientific approach to medicine, that you still do see, you know, and like Apocrypha as being one of the individuals again from 420 BCE, trying to move away from Supernatural that even with the work of Hippocrates, that it did not drive out, like the rivals, you know, long that more traditional forms of healing up to that point, those those are traditional forms of healing belief and practice that those still existed. So it's not like when his work and and his contemporaries, you know, and then actually, there's speculation that Hippocrates was multiple people. It was not one. And so, just because of that, though, it did not drive out this the more traditional ways of belief and practices all say, so then I'm going to jump ahead roughly 500 years to Rome, and Galen. So Galen was a individuals from 129, to circa 200 CE. And he really started getting into this notion of we need to rely on the world of our senses. And but he still accepted the idea of the four humors that was originally proposed by Hippocrates. He recognized the arteries contain blood and not merely air, he also showed how the heart sets blood in motion, but he did not have an idea about the whole notion of circulation, blood circulation, but he was he did start figuring out that, you know, the heart did move things at least a little bit. We definitely see evidence with control experimentation with Galen key focus on on anatomy, but again, at the timeframe, dissection of humans was illegal. And so his work was focusing on animals, their section of animals, and it's his work. That actually kind of stayed when you think about Western culture and Western medicine, kind of was the prevailing view of how things were done until the 1500s. was actually the reason why I remember that so much is with that part, because his work was occurring rather right around the time of Ptolemy, when he talked about astronomy, and that stayed around for roughly the same Not a time till you know, Copernicus work. So it was kind of all those things started happening right around the same time. So now again, you know, my apologies for leaving out multiple cultures that I want to jump ahead again now to Medieval and Renaissance Europe. And so as I said galas, views kind of held strong until roughly the 1500s. And this is when we see Andreas alias, emerge. And yes, there were others before him, but he was one of the first ones to really get into dissection of humans. I think he had he was a person who had students who were grave robbers, because it was still illegal at the time. But he realized that we needed for anatomy, we needed a better understanding and body so he would have his students would become grave robbers and steal the bodies, and then they would do special dissections, you know, for like a show. I mean, there were many, many people watching, but they would have lookouts to make sure that they weren't doing anything, they wouldn't get caught.
 
Zack Jackson 15:58
Do you put them back? I don't know that after you're done? No.
 
16:02
I would hope so. Yeah,
 
Ian Binns 16:03
you think so?
 
Rachael Jackson 16:04
I would think so. Not just think so.
 
Ian Binns 16:08
Yeah. Then apparently he was a very skilled Dissector. And he felt like you know, it was they had to move away from Galen and his views. And don't forget, you know, I said, you know, we're jumping time. This was 1400 years later. So Galen, his views held strong for a long time. But he did a lot of dissection of humans. And his scientific observations and methods, with these facilities show that Galen can no longer be regarded as the final authority. And so that's when we start to see and again, this is also aligned with the time of the Renaissance. That's when we start seeing movement away from more ancient understandings when it comes to science, to medicine, for example, he believed in the importance of empirical knowledge, independent observation and experimentation. So this alias is really into those types of things. I don't know if he was ever caught. I have to look into that one. Yeah,
 
Zack Jackson 17:04
well, now he Oh, yeah. You blew his cover, man.
 
Ian Binns 17:07
Sorry, sorry, everybody. But what's interesting is even when that was occurring, we were also still seeing some people who were holding on to the idea that, you know, while experimentation is important that we still need to Paracelsus was one of them. I think I'm saying that correct. He presents the idea that humans are the ultimate ends of God's creation. So the ultimate form he held on is something called a chemical philosophy, which is a Christian philosophy. But it was not very widely accepted at the time, because as I've already said, this is the time of the Renaissance. So we're trying to move away from those types of explanations. And so he was still around, but he was trying to blend the two, between experimentation, but also to hold into the importance of God and humans kind of being the ultimate form. And then the next person I want to talk about before we start really going into different types of ailments stuff, just because of, as I said, the history as William Harvey, he was 15, seven 816 57. So he advanced medicine even further, because of careful observation, experimentation, he really focused on collecting more evidence. And this is when we really start to see what we now think of as experimentations. So, you know, control experimentation manipulate in nature, so he can see something that normally would not be seen, he came up with the theory of the circulation of blood of blood. So we started trying to have a better understanding how blood circulated throughout the body. And again, you know, he still was someone who did believe in the impact of a designer, but he really focused on the more natural explanations.
 
Zack Jackson 18:46
It's interesting that you say that he he discovered the circulation of the blood when we just said that 3000 years earlier, the Egyptians knew about the circuit. Oh, you're right.
 
Ian Binns 18:56
Yeah. Yeah, and plumbing, and plumbing,
 
19:02
plumbing, our own and in the world, but it
 
Ian Binns 19:05
is fascinating historical texts still hold us like William Harvey is one of the people who really did that.
 
Zack Jackson 19:11
Well, God forbid, they credited an African for exactly discovering yessing.
 
Ian Binns 19:17
And so just because of, you know, because I really want us to get into conversations around like different types of treatments we see throughout history for different ailments. You know, this was the time of the Renaissance. When you start moving past that. I mean, you as we've seen, we've discussed throughout on this show, in the past about the history of science and how scientific advancements just took off during this timeframe. Incredibly fast, right. And it was the same for medical medical advancements, too. And so we continue to see lots of different changes over time to the point where we are to our today, but what I really want to focus on unless someone wants to talk more about other history is getting into these treatments that we see throughout history. If we can
 
Zack Jackson 19:59
Yeah, That's absolutely yeah, you're chomping at the bit over there. You want to talk about about some some trees.
 
Ian Binns 20:05
So because one of my hat, like asthma, so asthma used to be treated, it was treated by smoking.
 
Zack Jackson 20:16
Oh, yes, smoking pipe of
 
Ian Binns 20:19
tobacco or cigar has the power of relieving a fit of asthma, especially in those not accustomed to it,
 
Zack Jackson 20:26
which I thought was really amazing custom to tobacco.
 
Ian Binns 20:29
That was this. That was the argument being presented is amazing. Yeah. There's an when when ish was this it was more like the 1800s.
 
20:39
Oh, recent.
 
Zack Jackson 20:40
Yeah. Well, counterpoint. No, that is not don't don't smoke, if you have so please
 
Ian Binns 20:47
understand that these are old, not accurate. There's a another thing with the whole idea of smoking. Yeah. For Your Health. This is. Back in the late 19th, early 20th century, I found a site talks about these different types of treatments out there smoking, for your health, asthma cigarettes. Yeah. So and they were this is an advertisement, not recommended for children under six. That was nice. But they were actually called asthma cigarettes. And they effectively treat asthma hay fever, foul breath, all diseases of throat, head colds, canker sores, bronchial irritations. So yeah, so that was a good thing.
 
Zack Jackson 21:30
Well, so when you're talking 19th, and 20th century, and these are like some crazy, wacky solutions for things like when they would give cocaine to children for their cough, and all of that. That's not entirely like saying that the ancient Romans used electric eels to cure hemorrhoids. Which, which is real? Well, when we're in the 19th and 20th centuries, a lot of these are the companies understood the awful things that their, their their products did to people, but they made marketing false advertisements to sell these addictive things to people. You know, the Bayer Corporation knew all about the addictive qualities of cocaine and still pushed it as a as a simple pain reliever, because they could get people addicted to it. And like those sorts of predatory capitalism has existed for the past couple of 100 years with with pharmaceuticals, and we are paying that price now with the opioid epidemic. So when the smoking industry in the 1800s, they didn't understand that it gave cancer, obviously, but they knew it wasn't good. Yeah, no, those advertisements are intentionally misleading, because there was no oversight.
 
Ian Binns 22:49
Well, and earlier, I referred to bloodletting. And, you know, was talking about, you know, ancient, ancient Greece, you know, and for 400 BCE, bloodletting did not just end then, bloodletting was something that was continued for a very long time, for centuries. And
 
Rachael Jackson 23:06
right, and I believe, and I have not fact check this. So someone else has please correct me or collaborate, whichever it might be. I said, No, we're doing stuff about presidents. And a little factoid that I heard was that George Washington got a fever, just like you're saying in and at that time. It's George Washington, early, early 19th century, and he got a fever. And so they decided to do bloodletting. And they did bloodletting twice on him. So much, so that he died. Oh, good. I have not, I have not double checked that fact. But I also haven't seen anything to contradict it. So yeah, take that with a grain of salt as it may. But that was, it was all the way up until George Washington is when they were really still using this as a technique to cure people from things like fevers, which are very, very dangerous, but unless you have something to just take down the fever, you're either gonna live it or you're like, or you're not.
 
Zack Jackson 24:12
Yeah, the Constitution Center. Constitution. center.org says that that process of bloodletting probably let about 40% of his blood supply, right. So you can't really make it through a sickness with 40% of your blood supply.
 
Rachael Jackson 24:28
Right. So imagine I mean, think about when you donate blood do the three of you donate blood any on a regular or at all ever works. I
 
Ian Binns 24:37
grew up in Europe. Right? Yeah, Mad Cow Disease just because people don't know.
 
Rachael Jackson 24:43
Yeah. Yeah. Zack, do you ever
 
Zack Jackson 24:48
know I don't I don't I mostly have issues with needles. Yeah, exactly. What me not to
 
Rachael Jackson 24:53
Yeah, don't do that. better for everybody that you don't go to the hospital for donating blood.
 
Kendra Holt-Moore 24:58
Drive was can So I think because of a COVID related thing, but I would like to, but I haven't.
 
Rachael Jackson 25:06
Yeah, yeah, it's one of those like really simple, really useful things that if a person is healthy and no guilt, no judgment. For anyone that does or doesn't, you can do it every 56 days, and they take about a leader. And generally speaking, people, adults have five to six leaders. And they say, Okay, you're gonna feel queasy, don't do any weightlifting, don't do anything strenuous for a minimum of 24 hours. Like, you've got to just take it real easy, and you have to be healthy when you donate, because your body needs every blood cell that it has when it's healthy, or when it's sick. And when it's healthy. Yeah, we've got an extra 20%. So let's give it away. But if you take more than that, you're not going to survive very well. And then if you take more than that, and you're sick, your body has no ability to fight off the diseases, right? We talk about blood cells all the time, and the white blood cell counts and red blood cells. And how do we think we were just talking about the circulation system? Right, the circulatory? How do you think all of those good anti me when your immune system actually gets to these infections through your bloodstream? And if you don't have a good flowing bloodstream? Right, if this is August, after a rough summer, it's not happening.
 
Zack Jackson 26:29
So I know that in modern medicine, they still do use leeches, there are medical legions, and they're usually used to drain excess blood or like, you know, pooling of blood and hematoma hematomas. Is that the thing? Because it's, it's sanitary. And it's easier. And if people are willing to have a leech on him for a while, then it's great. But like, historically, bloodletting has been around for very
 
Ian Binns 26:56
long, 1000s and 1000s. Like,
 
Zack Jackson 27:00
it must have worked at least a little bit, or else they wouldn't have kept doing it. Right.
 
Rachael Jackson 27:06
But don't you think correlation and causation comes into play here. But people get people get better, regardless of what we tried to do them. And so just because someone got better doesn't mean that what we did to them made them better? Well, so
 
Zack Jackson 27:23
like, there's an old remedy, in which if you got bit by a snake, you would take a duck and put its butt on the wound, and then cut its head off. And then while the bite is on the wound, and the thought was that it would suck out the poison,
 
Ian Binns 27:37
the dung Would Suck out the poison.
 
Zack Jackson 27:40
Yes, yes. Yes. Everyone knows this wanted
 
Ian Binns 27:42
to make that claim. I'm quite excited about that.
 
Zack Jackson 27:47
Like that. That didn't stick. Yeah. But like draining people have their a painful procedure that is gross, and makes me feel queasy thinking about that stuck around for 1000s of years where like, is there any kind of medical benefit? Like even in obviously not in Washington's case, like if you have an infection, don't get rid of your blood? But like, what that stimulates SIBO antibodies to then like go to the wound, or like adrenaline to help boost the system? What? Are any of you familiar with any positives of blood lead? I
 
Kendra Holt-Moore 28:28
not? I'm not answering this question to like, describe physiological processes, but the placebo effect is extremely powerful. Like in just the study of medicine, like contemporary researchers, there are some who have done a lot of really interesting work on placebo effects. And obviously, like, we don't have the same kind of data to, like, you know, like double, double blind study results of placebo effects for like, ancient practices, ancient cultures, but I think, you know, cross culturally, all human societies, we all do things that, you know, as Rachel said, we can't really like tie a causation thread between those practices and healing in a definitive way, but a lot of what we do, we do for like cultural or, you know, comfort reasons. And even that is like different than placebo, which, in a lot of cases, like the placebo effect does actually change. Like it does lead to physiological changes. And it's kind of like weird and mysterious, but I think that I think that's not something to take for granted or under appreciate. Because, you know, I think even like early psychological studies showing, you know, if you're in a situation shift where you're around like comforting, familiar people and a comforting, familiar environment, you just fare better. Like even if we're not talking about injury, you fare better in terms of your, like mental health, mental well being, which translates to sometimes like physical well being. And that, you know, those are, those are things that are, I think, often considered, like, non essential pieces of the healing process. But, but yet, we we all, you know, like there are studies to show that people care about a doctor's bedside manner. People care about having, you know, chaplains come into hospital settings to, to support people and that that, that does facilitate something real in terms of healing. But it's it's just not, there's not like a clear, like, hard scientific way of describing that necessarily, but I that it's not to say that it's like not important also.
 
Rachael Jackson 31:04
Yeah, I would, I would add that, you know, you were just talking to Kendra about hospitals. But also previous to that you were saying, in places where people are surrounded and around things that they're comfortable with, the best healing happens when you're not in a hospital. Right. Hospital is no place for a sick person. I mean, and I mean, that my dad, my dad, was now a doctor said that, to me, it's like, that makes perfect sense. Because to really, unless you're really sick, and you can't be at home, being at home is your best chance of getting better. And I'm using that word intentionally, right, getting closer to a cure and your sense of normal, faster than being in a hospital, and that hospitals are there for the very, very sick people who cannot be at home for whatever reason. So it's one of those other reasons like stay away from a hospital. Also, they just have a lot of germs still stay away from a hospital. Unless, again, you have no other alternative. And so, you know, to answer Zach's question there too, I think the idea of Zack, you were kind of recoiling from the achiness of leeches. And I wonder, are the bloodletting perspective? I wonder if part of the causation and the correlation might be, you're now treating a person differently. You're giving them advantages. Maybe you're giving them more soup, maybe you're giving them more fluids? Maybe you're treating them differently, because Oh, it's so serious that we have to call a doctor in or whoever, whatever their title was, whoever was giving the leeches, the priests perhaps, right, that now they're so different that their everydayness is being being treated differently. You give them the extra blanket, you give them the soup, you take them outside, like whatever it is, that that's really what's happening. And so yes, the leeches are helping but only as a secondary issue.
 
Zack Jackson 33:08
That reminds me of the correlation causation argument around the increased health of religious people. We've heard that those numbers thrown around a lot that people who regularly are connected to religious communities are healthier live longer than people that don't. Right. Yeah. And the argument from the religious perspective is that well, faithful people have God, and God heals you. And prayer works. And so prayer prayer for people are healthy people. When the opposite argument is then yeah, the opposite argument is that, well, you're connected to a religious community, you've got people that care for you, you've got people that come by There's comfort, there's there's connection, there's soup delivered to your door every day. And those intangibles are what caused the the health and the healing. Yeah,
 
Kendra Holt-Moore 33:58
and the direction of the correlation is not always clear, if you're looking at like study results. So if you're healthy and able bodied, to like get to your church, or synagogue or whatever, then you can, you can do that. But you were already healthy from the starting point. Whereas if you're like chronically ill and unable to get out of bed, then maybe you don't go to a religious service, because you're not able to but the starting point, the kind of direction of behavior was influenced by the status of your health rather than, like the status of your religiosity. And that that whole like body of literature is like, really, really vast. And it is really interesting, but it's a good, good examples to bring up when we're talking about correlation.
 
Ian Binns 34:48
Yeah. But Zack, you asked earlier about, you know, why did bloodletting last for so long? I mean, there is, you know, I just started remembering that there are certain Um, chronic diseases, blood diseases that people will have, or blood cancers that will have where it will produce too much either iron and their blood or too much red blood cells. And the way they do that, the way that one of the treatments for that is a phlebotomy and so, which is the removal of amount, a specific amount of blood, it's more than just going in and doing a donation, for example. And so I and that is done for medical purposes, like my dad used to have to do that, because of a blood disease that he had. And so, I saw I started very quickly looking at what is the difference between bloodletting and phlebotomy? And some of this is just saying that bloodletting was a therapeutic practice that started in antiquity, but that there still flub a lot. Phlebotomy is another way of saying bloodletting
 
35:57
is, when you go rolled, it's phlebotomist. Correct? It's the person that takes
 
Ian Binns 36:01
control now than it used to be. Right. Yeah.
 
36:03
Or at least, we think it's
 
Ian Binns 36:07
yes.
 
Zack Jackson 36:08
Yeah. So one of the things I wanted, so I want to be cautious about to when we talk about old, older treatments, you know, the cutting off the duck's head and how ridiculous it is, or the how they used to use urine to whiten their teeth. You know, stuff, stuff like that, where we can easily look back at those folksy unintelligent people and say, My goodness, aren't we so intelligent? Today, we have science and science has given us all the answers. And those of you who might be listening at home or have people in your lives, who you've talked to about sorts of things, well, then, you know, get kind of, rightly upset at the sort of hubris of that, that there's there's medicine, and then there's alternative medicine, and alternative medicine is based just on placebo and fantasies and dreams. And real medicine is based on science and truth. And I think Modern medicine is wonderful. And it has given us so much more trust in the process and understanding the why of things work. But that a lot of what we have in modern medicine is based on traditional medicine. You know, the ancient Ancient Egyptians knew that if you had pain, or inflammation or fever that you could chew on birch bark, and it would reduce those things. And it wasn't until much later that that's how we got aspirin now, or I think of penicillin just comes from what mold. And how many of like indigenous cultures will watch the way that nature interacts with itself. And then we'll gain lessons from that, you know, watching what this animal eats when they eat it. And then using that and applying that and finding that those things work. And only much, much, much, much later do we discover the scientific rationale for it. And we're seeing sort of a resurgence in the past couple of decades of people taking indigenous medicines seriously and looking for like the whys of why these things have stuck around for so long. And lots of times discovering that there is there is wisdom behind these traditions. And the whole colonial Western mindset of it's our way, or it's just fantasy is not all that helpful.
 
Rachael Jackson 38:36
Thank you for that perspective, I think we do need to, you know, recognize our own bias. And also recognize, you know, as we're sort of talking about the with the tobacco industry, that there's a lot of push with marketing, and there's a lot of issues in those ways that we're all very susceptible to that came out of this trusting of the scientific process. And just because it's old, doesn't mean it is old and unscientific doesn't mean that it's not also helpful. Right. So putting that caveat also,
 
Zack Jackson 39:10
sometimes they are awful. Do the old things, you know, like we if you have syphilis at home, do not inject mercury into your urethra, because that does not work. Right, despite the fact that Blackbeard did it. And
 
39:27
well, and I think too, are there other are there other? Oh, sorry. Yeah. Well,
 
Ian Binns 39:31
just real quick, you know, you talk about this, and I think this will be, you know, what you're just discussing, Zach, you know, and wanting to be respectful. And one of the people I hope to get on the show sometime is David distinto, who wrote the book, how God works. And in this particular book, I mean, he is talking in some situations about healing, you know, and says early on, I'm not finished yet but you know, it's says I realized that the surprise of my colleagues and I felt when we saw evidence of religions benefits was a sign of our hubris. Born of a common notion among scientists, all of religion was superstition, and therefore could have little practical benefit is that learned and as this book shows, spiritual leaders often understood in ways that we can now scientifically confirm how to help people live better lives. And so that he is someone I really, you know, reach out to him see if we can get him on the show, because I think that's some interesting research he's done to show. You know, what is it we're learning now? And how it's applicable to helping others but another one I wanted to bring up was the notion of maggot therapy.
 
40:44
Oh, yes, yeah. Which I've done a little bit
 
Ian Binns 40:47
here, but if you know more, please, but
 
Zack Jackson 40:51
which I now say it Rachel hates bugs.
 
40:57
I do leeches all day long. But maggots.
 
Zack Jackson 40:59
I got this don't talk about
 
Ian Binns 41:01
this great book called strange science, wonderful. All these cool things in here, but one of them is pages on maggot therapy. And it says it sounds like something from a horror film fat cream colored maggots eating their way through infected sores and wounds. It's not its medicine. Rachel, says Rachel right there. Since it's so sad since ancient times, doctors have used Magus to prevent wounds from getting infected, and the 1940s Antibiotics replace maggots. But bacteria adapted and started to become resistant to antibiotics. And now we get the return of the maggots. Maggots work by secreting digestive enzymes that feed on dead tissue. Those enzymes also killed bacteria and a wound and speed up healing. Doctors are placed between 203 100 maggots on a wound then cover it maggots and all with mesh beneath the mesh the maggots feed for 48 to 72 hours. When they're done, the doctors remove them. wounds that haven't healed for months even years often respond quickly to maggot medicine. And I really am hopeful this is a video clip we need to share of the wonderful reactions we're seeing from both Rachel and Kendra
 
Rachael Jackson 42:25
I'm just gonna be real public about this. If I'm ever in a situation where I'd not have a wound that heals and the only thing that could cure me is Maga therapy. Just put me out of my misery. Just don't
 
Zack Jackson 42:38
just go to
 
Rachael Jackson 42:42
the blog, the blog and I'm like, kill the maggots like don't even just all amputate or that's I respect people that go through that so much. I'm not one of them. I think that never having that issue.
 
Kendra Holt-Moore 42:54
You can put the maggots on me but then also punch me in the face and knock me out.
 
43:02
Alright, so I'll be dead and Kendra will be unconscious. Yeah. And South could be loving every minute.
 
Zack Jackson 43:09
As well of bugs. Sorry. Yeah.
 
43:11
All right, Ian, where are you? Where do you fall on this this highly nutritious
 
Zack Jackson 43:14
to after they're done? Yeah, he's just you can just kill them and dry them and then eat them and then you get all your personal flesh. Then you get the nutrients back. Well should you
 
43:28
cook in your body,
 
Zack Jackson 43:34
because they know either way you deal with with insects. You take the insects you suffocate them in a box of carbon dioxide so you don't squish them or anything. Then you take them out and you dehydrate them and then you crush them into a powder and add that into your food. That's the best
 
Ian Binns 43:50
way to by any chance interview all seasons we're talking about maggots.
 
Zack Jackson 43:55
Can we continue for the rest of the episode? Rachel?
 
Ian Binns 44:00
Yes, that's another video clip needs to be shared of Rachel doing the gagging reflex each time I talk about maggots. She's like well
 
Kendra Holt-Moore 44:09
I feel bad for Rachel.
 
44:11
Like I don't I'm not queasy, but now I guess I
 
Ian Binns 44:15
will. So let's let's get into another discussion. Then. Kellogg's cornflakes. Now I'd found a very
 
Kendra Holt-Moore 44:21
good transition away from dear listener.
 
Zack Jackson 44:27
Now that's a segue
 
Ian Binns 44:28
dear listener. So when I mentioned Kellogg's cornflakes prior to recording, both Rachael and Kendra have perked up and seemed to know more information about this than I did. And so I will only share the very little bit of information I have but please reach and Kindle Kendra jump in and tell us what you know about the Kellogg's cornflakes but from what I have read is that Jay is Kellogg one of the people who developed Kellogg's cornflakes he was a medical doctor and health activist and he created the cornflakes. He was one of the people who created any hope that they would prevent sexual urges or more specifically to inhibit the urge to masturbate. And so Rachel, Kendra, you reacted earlier what what did you know? Because this took me by complete surprise because it didn't work. So
 
Kendra Holt-Moore 45:14
I was gonna say, Rachel, you go because I have to go it's like noon. I don't really have that much to add, either. I just I know that that is a statement.
 
Ian Binns 45:26
Do we not want to then talk about the very last one about hysteria before Kendra leaves?
 
Rachael Jackson 45:29
We can keep talking about it. I think she's she's got it. Yeah, I
 
Kendra Holt-Moore 45:32
mean, I'm gonna say Good. Might have to, like 30 seconds thing
 
Ian Binns 45:35
for anyone to tell us about hysteria. Kendra. Wow.
 
Zack Jackson 45:36
Don't eat cornflakes. Just stick with Cheerios. Cheerios make you horny. So you know that's
 
Ian Binns 45:44
the science apparently
 
Kendra Holt-Moore 45:45
bowl of cereal if you feel nothing.
 
Zack Jackson 45:50
Just cereal? If you want to feel nothing at all.
 
Kendra Holt-Moore 45:55
Land bland, bland cereal for a bland, bland sex life. That's Sorry. All right, see you later.
 
46:06
Cool. J cereal.
 
Zack Jackson 46:09
So what kind of what kind of like sexy breakfast? Was he trying to?
 
Ian Binns 46:13
I don't know. Rachel, can you help us out?
 
Rachael Jackson 46:16
So I think I'm in the same same boat of it was a factoid that I very much knew and held on to. But beyond that, I don't have a whole lot of information. I mean, the idea is, you know, everyone has breakfast. And so to prevent those urges in the morning, which and also just let's just clarify something here. When they say masturbation, they really mean men. Yeah, I'm sorry. Nobody, nobody. Yeah. Right. And so basically throughout time, and this was a religious issue. And so it wasn't a doctor issue. It was a religious issue of male masturbation is against God, going all the way back to some genesis of Don't spill your seed and, and Leviticus and stuff like that. But it's bad idea to spill your seed and that got translated into don't masturbate. And so as a religious idea, and if you look at men, generally speaking, I think we were talking about this maybe a couple of weeks ago to in the morning, men generally have more of how to say this, erect penises based on what was going on in the evenings, and the dreams and their inability to regulate their own erections. And so if that's the first thing you do in the morning to stop that have cold, dry cereal. Well, something that's bland,
 
Zack Jackson 47:56
and I will, let's also say, Kellogg, as a human, Mr. Kellogg himself was a bit of an anti sex fanatic, that the man was married, and still never had sex, and wrote books about how he and his wife never had sex. And they lived in separate bedrooms, and they adopted their children. And that sex pollutes the body. And it's the worst thing in the world. And so, like, this guy was afraid of his body, right? And again, not want anyone else's body. Yeah, he
 
Rachael Jackson 48:28
did this in a religious context. He didn't do it just because he was asexual and thought everyone else shouldn't be too. Yeah, I'm not a sexual anti-sex. So
 
Ian Binns 48:37
I will say this. And so I did look it up. And so and, you know, this is now I'm getting this from Snopes. And you know, there could be good or bad things getting things. So but according to snopes.com, so the claim, what is the you know, the Kellogg's cornflakes were originally created an effort to discourage American consumers from masturbating. And as you said, Rachel, it's male, actually, so it should say that the rating is mostly false. And so what this they're saying what is true is that the creation of cornflakes was part of JH Kellogg's broader advocacy for a plain bland diet without referring to cornflakes in particular, Kellogg elsewhere recommended a plain bland diet as one of several methods to discourage masturbation. So can I guess that was a people just put that together?
 
Zack Jackson 49:34
Can I just read a little quote from one of his books, please do other way. So he talks about onanism, which Rachel alluded to is a story of Odin from where we're in Scripture, are we? That is that is where he's supposed to consummate this.
 
49:55
So this is the story of this is in Genesis in Judah Genesis. Yeah. This is
 
Zack Jackson 50:01
and where he's supposed to impregnate his brother's widow, and then spills the seed on the ground because
 
Rachael Jackson 50:08
he doesn't want to because he wants the child to be his own and not be his brother's his dead brother's wife's son, and therefore all the dead brother's property goes to him and he doesn't then have a son. So instead of doing that, they just like,
 
Zack Jackson 50:26
so then God knocks him out. Right, so, so he talks about onanism. So when he talks about onanism, he's talking about masturbation. He says neither plague nor war nor smallpox have produced results so disastrous to humanity as the pernicious habit of onanism. Such a victim dies literally by his own hand. Yeah, such a victim dies literally by his own answer. You must have been so happy with that line. Can you imagine him writing that out? And he's like, Oh, this is a killer. This is good. This is good. This is good. He dies by his own hand. Oh, I gotta show this to someone.
 
Rachael Jackson 51:04
Yeah. Also, let's just add to who this person was. He spent 30 years of his life dedicated to promoting eugenics.
 
Ian Binns 51:15
Yes, he did. So near the end of his life,
 
Rachael Jackson 51:18
whether or not there was the direct cornflakes is for masturbation, it was promoted by a person who was anti sexual and pro eugenic to donate. You know, that's the history
 
Zack Jackson 51:33
of cornflakes. Yeah. Meanwhile, recent research has found that for most people, sex is actually super healthy. For a person's like continued health and well, being mentally, physically, emotionally, releases all kinds of amazing hormones and good things into your body. And like a lot of religions throughout history have have have recognized that have seen, like Judaism, spiritual ecstasy, like orgasm is like spiritual ecstasy. That's like the moment of connection to the divine. This breaking forth between the natural and the the supernatural. And this thin place and spirituality have, like, celebrated that. And I think we're coming back around to that. That's a good thing. Right? Oh, Christianity is still lagging far, far, far behind. Thank you some combination of Plato and Augustine, but we're getting there. You know,
 
Rachael Jackson 52:37
maybe it's kind of like Plumbing. Right? They had an ancient Egypt, and then it took like, one or 2000 years to come back. Yeah.
 
Zack Jackson 52:48
Yeah. Yeah. So
 
Rachael Jackson 52:49
you know, your plumbing. Yeah. Not quite, not quite that way. But no, my Jewish comment, my Jewish comment was that Judaism sees, and by Judaism, big broad stroke brush using right here, normative ancient orthodoxy style, Judaism saw sex only within a marital heterosexual concept. But inside those boundaries, yay, more of it. Also, it's a double mitzvah, it's a doubly good thing to do on Shabbat, the day that we're supposed to be the highest connected to God. And this was one of the ways to be even more connected to the Divine was through sex with your spouse. And I was thinking, as you're talking about Kellogg to how they didn't have sex, even though they were married. One of the things in an ancient Catawba marriage document, given it to the wife was written that if the husband doesn't fulfill his side of the contract, because, well, he doesn't or he's dead, then she gets XY and Z things, you know, 50 chickens, a sheep or whatever. Depends on what she's worth old widows and or excuse me, old, divorcees are worth nothing. But beyond that. One of the stipulations in there is how often they have to have sex, how often the husband must provide sex to his wife, not the other way around. And it listed how frequent so a day trader was like, once a week at a minimum, right, but a merchant, every three to say they had a donkey driver that was once a month and then a camel driver was once every three months because they recognize that if your camel driver, you're you're gone for a very long time, so don't punish them. And then they had like, and then because these are scholars writing this and I don't know what their problem was, they just want to have sex with each other instead of their wives. They said, Oh, like every seven years. Is all your seven years. Yeah, like it was ridiculous, how often or how not often they had To have sex so that they could go to the go to their rabbi's house and study with him for years on end, and then just come back once every few years have sex with the wife and then go again. So yeah, so having, like having sex in the religious concept again, and that very narrow first understanding of sis heterosexual marriages, has kind of made sex positive in Judea. Yeah. Yeah.
 
Ian Binns 55:30
So I know because you know, we are approaching the hour. But I do want to at least because, you know, we talked about before recording. And it's a chance for me to get all my giggles out around this idea of hysteria. Your giggles out most of my giggles. But this was something that I do remember hearing about, you know, at one point about female hysteria. And there's different articles that I have found that talk about, you know, because even there were films about it, or there was a film about it, and play. And so the idea was that, and thankfully, I'm gonna keep fumbling this. But Rachel introduced us to a really cool person, I want to do a shout out for sigh babe on Facebook. does some really interesting stuff. I'm really excited about Reading more about her. But what's interesting is that the argument is, is that hold on, let me pull my thing up, and just be easier. It was believed or this is the argument that in the Victorian era, doctors treated women diagnosed with hysteria, which is no longer a diagnosis, by the way, by genital stimulation to induce an orgasm. This hysteria was supposed to be a buildup of fluid in the woman's womb. And doctors assumed that since men and Jackie lated, and felt better that it stood to reason this would work for when women. Apparently, you know, there was multiple, you know, ideas of what was it that the different symptoms that people would have, obviously, if they were experiencing hysteria, and so this was the way to go was this manual massage. But a text came out in 1999. From and I believe that toss are doing more research for this this episode. A historian wrote this book that came out in 1989. And in that she argued that this was the reason why the vibrator was invented, was to make it so that it was easier for the doctors having to treat women for hysteria. I'm just saying that Oh, nice. But you know. So, yeah, and found out that that actually is not accurate. A more recent paper from last couple years has come out showing that this is actually inaccurate, that there is no evidence whatsoever suggests that women are treated for hysteria, by doctors bringing them to orgasm in their offices. So, or that this was the reason why vibrators were invented. But again, a medical treatment. That was something that took off based on one historians perspective, and or book, and then others kind of pushed back on it was fascinating. And we can share these in show notes or something. But in Reading about this particular ailment, and this suppose a treatment Amad. Yes. And suppose the treatment, there was interesting to read about how this particular historian of technology kind of has backpedal a little bit. And so well, no, I didn't mean I meant it more as a hypothesis, not a yes, this is the way it was. But then, you know, when you actually look at the writing shows, that's not actually how it was presented in the text itself. But it still took off, right? Because it was, I mean, when you think about it, this sounds kind of funny. And so it took off, people listen to it and
 
Rachael Jackson 59:13
right, because also, you know, God forbid, somebody creates something for women's pleasure, simply for women's pleasure,
 
Ian Binns 59:21
right? And that's actually there's no reason at the very beginning. It's a disturbing insight, implying that vibrators succeeded not because they advance you know, pleasure, but because they saved labor for male physicians.
 
Rachael Jackson 59:35
Right? So again, yeah, simply for women that has nothing to do with the man right gets co opted into a story of oh, those poor men, just poor, poor doctors, or in a really awful way of the abuse, the potential abuse of Doc Just taking advantage of their women patience, and showing that it's okay. None of this is ever okay.
 
Ian Binns 1:00:11
But even there, I mean, you can easily go online and find
 
1:00:17
trying to find their, you know, articles
 
Ian Binns 1:00:18
to support that this will that it was used for this as as recent 2019. Right. Yeah.
 
Rachael Jackson 1:00:28
So no, no your sources correct. And use some good thinking. And if you're going to Google things, feel free to use private browsing. Yes.
 
Zack Jackson 1:00:39
And if your interest the scientific method, you know, and you're feeling a little hysterical, just want to try it out. See if it works for you. That's in your hypothesis. Thank you. Science is just messing around and taking notes right so.
 
1:01:04
Wash your hands first.
 
Ian Binns 1:01:05
And after. Okay, that's all I got.
 
Zack Jackson 1:01:13
Thank you, doctor. Doctor, doctor.
 

Episode 104
Today we welcome the Rev Dr David Wilkinson all the way from Durham, England. Dr Wilkinson is an ordained Methodist minister with PhDs in Systematic Theology and Theoretical Astrophysics. In addition to working for St John's College, he is the project director of “Equipping Christian Leadership in an Age of Science” which seeks to do exactly what the name implies. We talk about their surprising research into Christian leaders' attitudes towards science, how to think about biblical miracles, how to have constructive dialogue, and what happens when you put bishops in a room full of humanoid robots. This is an engaging, heartfelt, and inspiring conversation, and we're excited to bring it to you. 
 
ECLAS - https://www.eclasproject.org/
Reid, Lydia and Wilkinson, David. (2021.) ‘Building Enthusiasm and Overcoming Fear: Engaging with Christian Leaders in an Age of Science’, Zygon 56 (4). https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/toc/14679744/2021/56/4
 
Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast
 
More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/
 
produced by Zack Jacksonmusic by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 
 
Check out Zack and Nichole's new podcast "Reimagining Faith with the Pastors Jackson" here...
https://www.patreon.com/reimaginingfaith
https://reimaginingfaith.podbean.com/
 
Transcript 
This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors.
 
Zack Jackson 00:00
Hey there, Zack here. Before we get to today's episode, which is so good, by the way, I wanted to let you know that my wife, Nicole, and I just launched a new podcast called reimagining faith with the pastor's Jackson. I haven't really shared a whole lot about this on the podcast yet. But we both just quit our church jobs, and are in the process of planting a new faith community called Open Table United Church of Christ. At this new faith community were committed to being theologically progressive, locally minded with Jesus at the center. We're starting from scratch. And we are rethinking every part about what it means to be a community of faith in this particular moment in history. We are really excited about the ways that the Spirit is moving among our little team. And we wanted a way to share that with you all as well. Hence, the reimagining faith podcast, we'll be posting new episodes every week, delving into our particular convictions, telling stories, interviewing difference makers and giving you an inside peek into the messy and ridiculous process of planting a church that is not quite a church, but it's also kind of a church, but not really, you know, it'll probably make a lot more sense after you hear a few episodes of it. So why don't you just go ahead and subscribe. Just search for reimagining faith with the pastor's Jackson wherever it is that you get your podcasts. And if you want to help us expand to this work, you can support us at patreon.com/reimagining faith. And now, on to the podcast. You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. Our guest today is the current principal of St. John's College Durham and a professor in the Department of theology and religion. He has PhDs in both theoretical astrophysics and systematic theology, having served as both a Methodist minister and an academic professor. He's also the project director of equipping Christian leadership in an age of science, which is a project whose goals are near and dear to my heart. And I'm sure many of yours as well. It is my privilege to introduce the Reverend David Wilkinson. Welcome to the podcast. Thank
 
David Wilkinson 02:19
you, Zack, it's so lovely to be here. Lovely to talk to you.
 
Zack Jackson 02:24
Yes, I'm so glad that we were able to coordinate across the ocean, get our time zones correct and, and that you're able to be with us today I am fascinated by just the breadth of the work that you have done and that you are doing with the organizations that you're associated with. And so, again, it's an honor to have you here with us. So I mentioned in that that introduction, equipping Christian leadership in an age of science, or EC L A s do you do pronounce the acronym when when you're in a company,
 
David Wilkinson 03:01
about team pronounces it in class, and part of our team pronounces it at class. And we haven't come to agreement on what the correct pronunciation is. So I'm happy with the project.
 
Zack Jackson 03:15
Did any of you consider switching the acronym the words around so it would spell something like Eclair or something that well,
 
David Wilkinson 03:22
as you can see, remember and see from me, I'm very open to a close and as many as possible, probably too many for me. But, I mean, you know, sometimes theology and science is dominated by some of these acronyms. I think what we've been concerned about has been that sense of equipping Christian leadership. And about almost 10 years ago, my friend and colleague Tom McLeish, who's a theoretical physicist and a lay theologian, and I were speculating about what happened when senior Christian leaders, such as bishops, or leaders of other denominations, or leaders of parachurch organizations, those organizations that span different churches, were asked about science. And one of the things that we noticed was that senior church leaders often responded with fear, or negativity, or silence. And the problem with that is that then those who serve as Christian leaders under them, if they come from a scientific background, if your senior leader responds with fear or negativity or silence, then that doesn't really affirm what you're bringing to ministry, in terms of your interest or passion about science. And then that ripples down into congregations, where disciples who live out their lives with a vocation to be scientists, technologists are in Engineers, they're not affirmed in their vocation. And of course, that then ripples out to reinforce this very dominant model of relationship between science and religion, that conflict model of science and religion or independence, that the two have to be separated. And so we thought, Is there a project to be done where we can equip Christian leaders to engage with science with joy, with humility, with confidence with excitement? And that would have a ripple down effect throughout the church?
 
Zack Jackson 05:36
Yes, I mentioned I resonate with this. This is the this is the project that I'm working on for my doctrine ministry program right now, creating resources for pastors to engage, to equip them to have these conversations because it is just so important. So in what ways have since you started this program? How have you been able to start equipping leaders,
 
David Wilkinson 06:00
one of the things we first realized sack was the importance of personal relationships and conversations. And so we started with, with conferences, where we would invite a small group of senior leaders, intentionally inviting them to come here to Durham. And we would take them into science departments, where we introduce them to world class scientists. Now, sometimes, in this work, organizations will choose a scientist who happens to be a Christian. We didn't do that. We just went for world class scientists, whatever their religious backgrounds, and we threw the bishops into their labs. And we got these people to talk about their own science and their work. And it was just terrific from cosmology and simulating universes through to biology, genetics, we even had one wonderful incident where we took 30 bishops into one of our engineering labs here in Durham, where we have small robots, six of them, artificial intelligent robots, humanoid robots, and the bishops were kind of pressed against the wall. Worried about this, these little robots who are wandering round, and the robots went up to the bishops, and started to talk to them. And suddenly the bishops move towards the center of the room, as they started conversing with these robots. And I wish I'd had a video camera to show you. And in a sense, we start with with bishops who are a little worried about science. And slowly they move into the center. And part of that is talking to research students, and talking with professors, and actually seeing that these folk work in science, because they're passionate about finding out about the universe, or they're passionate about helping society and other people, that some of the the big, bad images of science are not quite true when you meet scientists themselves. And we brought into that conversation, then theologians into the conference, to help decode some of the issues of play within the interplay of science and theology. And so this bringing together of people to talk together, and what we found, was after the sessions, the bishops were thrilled to have encountered science. And the scientists were thrilled to encounter bishops, and other senior church leaders who took science seriously. And many of the scientists without any Christian commitment turned up at the bar later on in the conference, to talk more with the bishops. I think there's something really important about that kind of interaction of people, that learning not just about the science in the abstract, but science in terms of it being done by scientists. And then we thought to ourselves, Well, there's one or two other things that we really need to do about this. So we've had a research strand, where we've interviewed 1000, clergy and a number of bishops and senior church leaders about what they really think about science. That's been an important thing. And we might want to go on to some of those findings in a little bit. We've also followed the US in a program called Science for seminaries and working with church leaders are beginning of their ministries. And then we wanted to provide some model situations where people could see how a local congregation could use the scientists within their congregations to do something fruitful for the kingdom, either for the church or for the community. And we call that scientists in congregations. And that's a program that's been used in lots of different parts of the world. And then the final strand that we've done, which is peculiar to the UK, in the UK, the Church of England is the established church. It has a lot of political and media presence. There are bishops in the House of Lords, for example, scrutinizing legislation. And so we embedded a team member within the church of England's work in that area, to assist on some of the questions such as fracking, or AI, that are going through legislation to help Christian leaders give sensible voices within the public debate. So those are some of the things that we've been really excited by Zach.
 
Zack Jackson 11:07
Oh, wow. Yeah, that that sounds very exciting. I would, I would venture to say that most congregations have at least one professional scientist within it, whether they, they're open about that or not. But I'm curious about the ways that your program has, has used scientists within congregations, how are you using those those gifts of people?
 
David Wilkinson 11:32
I think, I think that's a really crucial question. And so let me give you some for instances of some of the projects that we've supported. So we've supported a project called Take your vicar into the lab, where a number of scientists in the congregation have said to their church leader, why don't you come into our workplace, and we'll tell you about what we do day by day. And again, we're talking about people with vocation, and a very different context to what happens in the church on a Sunday. One group of scientists have worked with a professional theatre group drama group, to write a play on artificial intelligence. And this play will, will tour the country, the 45 minute one act play, then there'll be a coffee break. And then into the venue will come a number of local scientists who work in the area of AI for a question answered on AI and religion and Christianity. Another group we've worked with, has produced some resources for something that we call messy science. Now, in the UK, there's a very strong program called Messy Church, which is a way of doing church, for families with young children. And that involves some crafts, and making things. And what we realized was that actually, there are a number of children who are much happier to blow things up in science experiments, to make craft activities. And so we've we've created a book called Messy science, which is scientific experiments that you can do and as part of Messy Church, or indeed, that you can do for an all the family or all age worship on a Sunday, which involves some of the fun of science. Why, for instance, you can take a beaker full of water, and just put a piece of paper at the bottom of it, turn it over, and the water doesn't fall out most of the time. And so these kinds of things is about using the gifts and the passion and the interests of scientists. And I think you're right, like I think virtually every congregation has scientists or teachers of science or technology or engineering within it. But what we're not good at doing is affirming those gifts. So some of the churches I go to, if a young person says the Lord has called me to seminary or Bible college, the congregation will say hallelujah, they will bring that young person to the front. They will so we're going to pray and lay hands on you. And here's a big envelope with money in it to support your expenses. But if a young person in that same congregation says, I'm going to go and study chemistry, I wonder whether that congregation also brings the young person to the front, lay hands on them and gives them a big envelope to help them with their expenses. And I think that's about out, saying science as a gift from God. And to be a scientist is as much a vocation as it is to be a pastor, or to be a missionary.
 
Zack Jackson 15:11
Wow. That is a that is profound. It's I don't think that any churches out there would affirm a child's choosing to become a scientist the way they would be so proud of our little, our little boy who's grown up to be a pastor, and we'd love to help you out in any way we can. But a scientist is essentially seeking out God in just empirical ways through the creation as opposed to
 
David Wilkinson 15:40
theology, Kepler, the great astronomer, once said that science is thinking God's thoughts after him. And what a wonderful way of looking at the universe and that guy became a Christian at the age of 17, just before going up to university to study physics. And early in my Christian life, I kind of realized that if if I say that Jesus is the Lord, then he is Lord of all, not just what I do on a Sunday, but what I do in terms of my interest in mathematics and astrophysics. And so what does it mean to be disciple within that area, as well as what I do in terms of lifestyle with money and relationships, and all the rest of it. And I think that's an area that the church hasn't been good at, in an area that we can work out and help Christian leaders to see science as gift. And the responsibility that that brings.
 
Zack Jackson 16:42
Yes, I wish that more churches had that kind of had that kind of understanding, you know, that that kind of heart and belief. But according to the research that you all have done. That was there was a paper that was published in zeigen, Journal of religion and science, recently, looking at the disconnect between religious leaders interest in science and their willingness to talk about it publicly. There were some very interesting findings in there, would you care to tell us a little bit about
 
David Wilkinson 17:17
Yes, absolutely. And some things that surprised us. We wanted to serve a clergy first of all, and we surveyed about 1000 of them from all different churches and backgrounds. And one of the most surprising things was how often they find themselves talking about science, or engaging with people about science in their ministry. Now, we didn't expect that to be the case. Although looking back on my own ministry, I was a pastor for a decade, in full time, work leading a church. I remember, it was in Liverpool, just off Penny Lane for those who remember the Beatles. And we used to run a luncheon club, where, on a Wednesday lunchtime, we would gather together some elderly folk and provide them with a fairly basic but nutritious and wholesome lunch. And I remember going to a lady who was very elderly, and left school at the age of 14. And I would normally wander around and say hello to people. And I sat down at her table. And she looked at me and said, Now then David, she said, What's this Stephen Hawking and quantum gravity all about? And what does this mean for God? Now, I think sometimes we underestimate the kinds of questions that people have. And so we found that clergy were often addressing questions about the environment, questions about genetics, questions about what does it mean to be human? These big questions, and yet, often, they felt a little bit of a lack of confidence in engaging with these questions. And I think that partly comes from this conflict model, which is so embedded within Western tradition, which you found in the New Atheists. So for Richard Dawkins and others, you now find in many stand up comedians, who also represent the conflict model. But I think sometimes it's also about those subtle messages from the church that has said, Beware of science. And they've often coupled science with images of the Tower of Babel with trying to replace God or atheism. So I think we found that I think we also found and this is, this is something which really fascinated me. And that is the Sometimes the how why distinction becomes a avoidance mechanism for deeper theological questions. What I mean by that, is that when we talk about science and theology, and I often do this myself, we can talk about science about the how, and theology about the why, when it comes to the origin of the universe, for example, my area of, of work and science and, you know, quantum gravity, and is the how of God doing it. Questions of purpose and meaning or value is why, and that's a useful first order distinction. But we found that many senior church leaders were using it as a way to avoid some of the deeper questions. So if you use the how wide distinction, you can perhaps avoid the question, well, how does God really work in the universe? How does God work in healing in miracles in prayer? How is God involved in the laws of physics or not? Now, those can be quite scary questions to folk. But they're important questions for many people. And then I think we I think the third thing that we found was sometimes this fear of certain ways that science has been used, protect, particularly when it comes to theories of evolution. So although there was an openness to assessing scientific theories, there was a sense of those who have used the post Darwinian controversies to argue against Christianity, and to use some scientific theories and evolution and sociobiology. Sometimes I used to argue that once you have a scientific understanding of something, it's nothing but that. So religion could be seen and the way that it's developed, and its socio biological, biological origin. But then that quick move to say, and that's all it is. That's the mistake. So those are some of the things that came out of the research.
 
Zack Jackson 22:23
So I hear the the one idea that science provides the nuts and bolts the understanding of how things work, and religion then gives it the meaning, right, I've heard the illustration that you can learn all you can about the molecular makeup of a chocolate cake, and you can know all about its compounds, but no part of the science can tell you that it's a birthday cake, I'm sorry, that that that then has to come from the meaning. And then I also hear you mentioning, sort of at the end there about the God of the gaps that God develops as a way of explaining the things that we don't understand and has a way of helping us to sleep at night. Giving us a sense of control over the crops, as it were or the movement of the stars and the future and helping us to be less afraid. And as science then explains all of those things, then God gets smaller and smaller and smaller. And that model is just created in such a way that it eliminates itself. It does. And both of those two ways of understanding God are so prevalent, and they both are so limiting. What how do you how do you navigate this world? How do you hold both your faith and your understanding of science in intention in tandem?
 
David Wilkinson 23:47
Yeah. And the sack you've put your finger on it? I think and it's a question that goes back to an old book written by Jeb Phillips, many years ago, which was a book with the title your God is too small. You see, the problem with with God of the Gaps is, as you rightly said, God is too small. And the God that I see in Jesus is not a God who hides in small gaps of scientific ignorance. This is the Lord of all, who is the one who sustains every physical process within the universe. So for me, God is the Creator and Sustainer of the laws of physics. That's the first thing to say. I think secondly, God is big enough that he can sometimes do unusual things, beyond his normal ways of working. And therefore, both as a scientist and a theologian, I'm open to miracle. I'm open to God doing unusual things because I think God is big enough to to go beyond his normal ways of working and special prayer. Within SOS special events, I think the third thing that really helps me to navigate some of this sack is going back to Jesus time and time again. I remember, as a young research student, I've been on a conference in the middle of the summer in the University of Brighton, and Sussex and England. And we were the only people in the university, a group of 40, astrophysics PhD students. And there was only one pub. And so every evening we'd all end up in the same pub. And I remember sitting down with a with a colleague, very, very bright astrophysicist, who within half an hour, had proved to me that God didn't exist. I mean, he just argued against with all the classic arguments against the existence of God. And I remember wandering back to, to the small bedroom I had, and and thinking, Well, you know, I've only been a Christian two or three years. This guy's convinced me that the intellectual argumentation means that God doesn't exist, what am I going to do? And it was that point that by, by my bed on the bedside table was a Bible. I just opened the Bible, and I read again, the Gospels, and I become a Christian, because I'd seen in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus, God Himself walk in the pages of history. And there are many questions that I don't have the answers to, there are many intellectual conundrums about the problem of evil, or about how does God actually work in the world, which I don't have easy, simplistic philosophical answers to. But what I see in Jesus is a God who becomes a human being and lives amongst us, in the space time history, a God who participates in the consequences of suffering and evil, he bears them as well as I do. A God who gives me hope, in terms of bodily resurrection, going beyond our normal accepted patterns of what's possible in the world. And a God who actually has a historical record in Palestine, that you and I can sit down and discuss, we might not come to similar conclusions about it. But the data is there for us to discuss it. And so my understanding of science and theology is never simply what we might call the old, big arguments for the existence of God, the design argument, or the First Cause Argument, if I'm authentically Christian, then I have to bring into the conversation. God who reveals Himself in Jesus. And that's been an important part of, of my journey in trying to navigate some of these difficult questions.
 
Zack Jackson 28:14
As a pastor for the past eight and a half years, I not only get questions, nearly weekly, from, especially from the conference, and these teenagers who are thinking through these things in school, but also the adults I, I feel questions from my colleagues almost constantly, who likewise have people asking these questions, and they do not feel equipped to answer them. And so they, they give them you know, shrug shoulders, and I'm sorry, this is just what I believe I'll try to find resources for you. And one of the things that comes up quite often is miracles, when it seemingly when God breaks the rules, yeah. Because even if somebody who values God and values science, they will often just find naturalistic explanations for things. I mean, famously, Thomas Jefferson cut out all of the references of, of miracles in his Bible, and it was much smaller at that point. You know, for example, that if we believe that Jesus in the wedding in Cana and the book of John turned water into wine, using natural processes, I mean, just the fusion of atoms would have created so much energy, it would have leveled all of the Middle East, you know, in a nuclear explosion, and clearly that did not happen. So, either there was a sort of social miracle in which Jesus inspired people to run out to the liquor store, or there is something else happening something super natural. You've done a little bit of work into into miracles and what happens in prayer and things like that. Do you have any insights that you could offer to As clergy out there,
 
David Wilkinson 30:01
well, I have some insights, whether they're useful or not is another question.
 
Zack Jackson 30:07
Oh, the story of my life, I'll put that on my tombstone.
 
David Wilkinson 30:11
I think the first thing to say is that I want to take the gospel writers seriously. And I think sometimes Western scholarship has been rather patronizing to the writers of the Gospel by saying that they simply have rewritten the stories of social miracles, in terms of supernatural miracles, you know, and so, even more extreme would be those who've written that Jesus walking on the waters was actually because he was on a sand bank at the time. Well, I mean, you know, fishermen would know where the sand banks would be, and things of that sort, I think, the Gospel writers are being authentic in terms of what they believed, and I want to take that seriously. And then secondly, there is a granularity about some of the gospel reports, which suggests to me that they aren't simply made up to express theological truth about Jesus. So for instance, you mentioned the wedding at Cana, one of the one of the extraordinary things about that miracle is that Jesus turned between 120 gallons, 280 gallons of water into wine. Now, that that's, that's not the kind of usual detail that you would expect, in terms of if you'd simply wanted a miracle of water into wine, there's something really quite extraordinary about that unexpected about it. And I think there are a number of the miracle stories which just have that ring of truth about them. Now, that's the biblical scholarship at one level, which I think is important for us to do. I think then, as a scientist, I want to come with a number of convictions. The first is that 20th century physics tells us that the universe is far more subtle, and subtle than we ever imagined it to be. We live with the legacy of Isaac Newton's clockwork universe, where the universe is picture herbal, and predictable. And so the transformation of God has rules which he can't break, is based on that clockwork universe. But in the 20th century, as you well know, quantum theory, and then chaotic or complex systems, like the weather, we discovered that actually, the universe is not as picture trouble or as predictable as that clockwork universe was. Now, I don't want to push that too far to say, well, this is where God works in quantum systems. But I do want to take seriously as John Polkinghorne used to say, these things remind us of the danger of the tyranny of model of common sense. Our everyday experience and common sense isn't a good guide to the way the universe actually is, or indeed how God might work in the universe. And then I think coming back to that sense of the God who created the laws, has agency to work in through and beyond the laws is a very important theological question. And that maintaining of some limited agency, for God to work means that, that I'm open to God work in unusual ways. Now, all of that is not to say that I don't think there's an interesting question, as a scientist about where the energy comes from. I want to ask that question. And as a scientist, I want to say, when people claim evidence for healing, or evidence for the resurrection of Jesus, what is that evidence? And let's have an honest and serious conversation about it. I think that's important. But I don't think that all of those things need to be talked about in the round. I don't think that one of these things rules out the possibility of miracles. And so I know that's a very long answer to a very succinct question. But I think sometimes we get ourselves fascinated with wanting to give one line answers to actually very difficult questions. And one of the real problems of miracle for me, is actually not besides The real problem of miracle for me is, if God can work by miracle, why can't he do it more often? And in more serious ways, you know, so the Christian who says, I drove to the supermarket, and it was raining, and there was no parking spaces. But I prayed to the Lord, and suddenly a parking space was there for me. Now, apparently, I want to say to that Christian sister or brother, well, wonderful. But, Lord, why provide a parking space when actually, you know for that particular sister or brother, they could have done with a little extra walk, compared to what's happening with COVID? Or what's happening in Ukraine? And that's the problem of evil. And sec, I don't have any real answer to that. That's one of the big questions that I have. For when I see the Lord face to face. But I'm not prepared to reject the biblical evidence or the scientific openness. Because I can't fully understand the problem of evil, but I want to take it seriously.
 
Zack Jackson 36:16
That is a fantastic point. I think our anyone out there who's a religious leader has probably heard that second argument far more, you know, you hear stories of healing, and then I prayed for my mother to be healed and she wasn't healed. And then, then you have, you know, is the problem, my fate? Did I not pray properly? Did does, am I not favored by God?
 
David Wilkinson 36:41
And that's profound, profound, isn't it and that, and what that means, and that's where, for me, the what I sometimes call the messiness of the Bible, is really important. Because, you know, we have instances within the Bible itself, when Paul, for example, prays three times, about this thorn in the flesh that he has, and he's not healed. When, when we have this unusual incident of when Jesus is called by Mary and Martha, that his friend Lazarus is sick. And Jesus didn't immediately go and heal Lazarus. There's indications in Mark's gospel of times when the whole town or village were brought for healing. And Mark says, many of them were healed, not all of them. Now, that for me actually embeds this problem, not just in our experience, but there is a mystery going on within scripture itself. And, and the thing with Scripture is, it doesn't always give us the answer. I mean, I would love it. If Paul had provided not yet another letter, but a chapter entitled frequently asked questions. been brilliant. The apostle Paul had had a chapter on frequently answered questions, asked questions. And, and one of them would be the problem of evil. But of course, Scripture works often in narratives, in telling of testimony of story. And it's not the place where we get easy answers and philosophical theology. But it's important that our philosophical theology takes those stories seriously.
 
Zack Jackson 38:42
I can't imagine Paul trying to succinctly answer any question. Yes, let's say this is the man who spoke for so long that a boy fell asleep and fell out a window. Which, by the way, you know, he was able to raise this child back from the dead, but couldn't cure his own problem. preacher once told me that Lazarus still died. Yes. And that that sticks with me anytime I think about miracles. So aside from that, aside from the miracles, what do you think it's important that religious leaders should understand and, and in terms of science, and how can they possibly keep up with all of the new research not being scientists themselves?
 
David Wilkinson 39:34
I think both of those questions are really important. So let me take the second one. First, I'll come back to the first one. I don't think this is about equipping Christian leaders in terms of knowledge of science. I think this is about changing attitudes. So that as new science comes about, new discoveries are made new questions arise. Most religious leaders can encounter it, not with fear. But with a sense of, first of all, that this doesn't undermine faith. And second, that they already have resources within their own congregations that can help them. And we've talked already about the role and the vocation of those who are lay Christians and scientists. This is a terrific resource that God has given to every church leader from, you know, teenagers who are fascinated with the questions of science through to those who are at cutting edge research level. And so part of I think the change in attitudes, is that the church leader begins to see that ministry in this area is not just about them. But it's about the body of Christ together, relating to some of these questions. But in order to access that the initial response to science has to be changed away from fear into a humble listening to what's going on. Now, I think, to come back to the to the first question, I think, then there are some big questions for the next decade. And I think one of the biggest questions, which you and I have talked about before, is the question of what it means to be human. You know, I think we've gone through some of the interest and some of the big questions about origins, Big Bang, evolution, those types of questions, Christians still have different views on them. And we'll still keep continuing talking about them. But the central question of what it means to be human, I think is going to be highlighted in lots of different ways. For example, will artificial intelligence become conscious at some stage? If we discover extraterrestrial intelligence? What does that mean for human beings? The mind brain relationship, as we know more about what the relationship between mind and brain is all about? What does that mean, to be human? And, you know, even the Human Genome Project, that if I share 67% of my genes with cauliflower, which you can probably tell by looking at me, then, where's the distinction and being human? Now, I think, in lots of different ways in medical science through to what the James Webb Telescope is going to produce. That question of what it means to be human, is a central question for culture, for society, and for theology. Now, I think the great thing about the Christian faith for me, is that actually the question what it means to be human is a central theological question. It's been explored by generations of theologians down the ages. And one of the fascinating things for me is that it's not defined in the Christian tradition, by what I'm made of. It's defined by who I'm related to. So for me, the question of what it means to be human is a gift from God, a gift of intimate relationship, a gift of responsibility, a gift of creativity. So that to be human is not undermined by better understandings of what I'm physically made of, or that there may be other forms of consciousness out there. But that actually, what defines me as unique as a human being, is that God loves me. And God wants to be in relationship with me. And that may not be exclusive. In her there may be other intelligent beings elsewhere in the universe, who knows. But I don't think that's a threat to that central understanding of what it means to be human, or the kind of the shorthand that we use as theologians been made in the image of God.
 
Zack Jackson 44:34
That's beautiful. I, I'm so fascinated by the relationality of the cosmos, that we identify ourselves as a human by our relationship to each other, but we see it down to the fundamental level that 91% of the mass of the nucleus of an atom comes not from the proton and the neutron but from the forces that are generated by their interaction, and everything down to the fundamental Fields up until the galaxy clusters only exist in relation to one another. And if I mean, obviously, I'm, I'm imposing some of the meaning that from being a relational primate primates into the, into the cosmos, but you almost can't help but see the, the, the brushstrokes of a relational creator, in the fact that everything only exists in relation to each other. I
 
David Wilkinson 45:34
think that's right. Second, I mean, let me let me confess to you and to the listeners, that when I was trained first, as a, as a physicist, I thought that physics was the only true science, that chemistry, chemistry was for people who couldn't do physics, biology was for people who couldn't do chemistry. And I won't tell you what I thought of sociology. Now, now, of course, I have repented of such things.
 
Zack Jackson 46:03
For example, other mathematicians out there, for exactly
 
David Wilkinson 46:07
the reason that you've said that when atoms get together in relationship to four molecules, then a new series and levels of reality occurs, which is called chemistry. When those molecules get together and form living beings, a new level of biology emerges. And when human beings get together, a new level, which can only be studied by sociology emerges. And that's that emergent relationality, which you've talked about. And that reminds me as a physicist, that the universe cannot be simply reduced to its constituent parts, you have got to understand its constituent parts, but you can only understand them fully, when you understand the relationality between them, which is exactly the point that you beautifully made.
 
Zack Jackson 47:05
Well, thank you, thank you for the relational work that you're doing. And for that, being at the heart of your mission, understanding that it's not enough to just simply give information to clergy and to scientists, but to build relationships of understanding and mutuality. And that's, that is certainly how we interact. So for all the work that you're doing, through the foundation, through your your writings, and through, you know, the work you do at the college, thank you for for your life's work you're doing, you're doing really important work. And as we kind of ended our time together. Is there anything else that you would like our listeners to know, to take away from this conversation? I've
 
David Wilkinson 47:50
I've enjoyed the conversation immensely. Of course, I think it's important to say one of the fascinating things for me, as always, anything that one is able to achieve as an individual is only as strong as the team that you work with. And one of the great things about the work that we've been doing here in the UK is a combination of collaborations and partnerships between different universities and the Church of England. And the quality of the colleagues that that I work with, who involve scientists, theologians, sociologists, historians. And that's a very important part of understanding science. Science doesn't exist in a pure scientific vacuum. It comes with history that comes with philosophy. Indeed, it's framed for me by theology. And so as we work together, across different disciplines, so our understanding of these things becomes much, much richer. And the problem of divorcing the church from science is partly the way that our culture has divorced arts and humanities, from science. And I think particularly in the UK, that's been the case. And so part of this is a bigger cultural issue, which is valuing all types of human knowledge and how we interact together and learn more as community together. But thank you, Zack, I've really enjoyed this. It's a delight. What a wonderful podcast you doing. And thanks for for the time this afternoon.
 
Zack Jackson 49:35
Absolutely, and if any of our listeners out there are interested in learning more, they can go to E c l a s project.org. There's will be a link in the description if you'd like to learn more about what the equipping Christian leadership in an age of science is doing. There's plenty of videos from your previous conference, there's articles, there are links of places to get involved and to learn more and to help help equip you to do this very important work out in the world. You can also listen to any one of the 100 or so episodes of the podcast previously. We've where we've talked about a lot of these issues more in depth. So, again, thank you, David, for being here. And I wish all the best in all of your future endeavors. 
 
David Wilkinson 50:20
Thank you very much.

Episode 103
We are so excited to welcome Dr James Stump to the podcast today. Jim is the Vice President of Programs at BioLogos and hosts the podcast, Language of God. He is a passionate speaker, author, and organizer in the field of science and religion. He has written multiple books on science and religion, and has the uncanny ability to bring disparate groups together for meaningful and respectful conversation.  We sat down for an hour to talk about the work that BioLogos does, what he's most excited about, and how to have productive conversations with people who disagree with each other. 
 
Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast
 
More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/
 
produced by Zack Jacksonmusic by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 
 
Transcript 
This transcript was automatically generated by www.otter.ai, and as such contains errors (especially when multiple people are talking). As the AI learns our voices, the transcripts will improve. We hope it is helpful even with the errors.
 
Zack Jackson 00:04
You are listening to the down the wormhole podcast exploring the strange and fascinating relationship between science and religion. Our guest today is the vice president of programs at BioLogos. And host of the podcast the language of God is a passionate speaker, author and organizer in the field of science and religion. He's also the author of four views of creation, evolution and intelligent design, science and Christianity in Introduction to the issues, how I changed my mind about evolution, and the Blackwell companion to science and Christianity. We are so excited to welcome Jim stump to the podcast today. Welcome.
 
Jim Stump 00:42
Thanks, Zack. Good to be here. Thank you, Ian.
 
Zack Jackson 00:44
Yeah. And thank you so much for taking this time out of your day. I know that there's so much going on right now with BioLogos. We were just talking before the podcast started about the conference that you have just a couple of days, which, unfortunately, by the time that this podcast airs will be over. So
 
Jim Stump 01:02
there will be virtual recordings available to see if you're interested in that sort of thing. Yeah.
 
Zack Jackson 01:08
Oh, excellent. That was gonna be my first question. So for the folks who did not register, because they are just hearing about it after the fact, they can go watch
 
Jim Stump 01:17
those. So I think the way it works is you can register for the online portion. And it's a pay what you can kind of thing, and those are going to be available for three months after after the conference. And then there may be free versions that that come out. Don't hold me to that. I'm not entirely sure about that. But I think that's the way it works.
 
Zack Jackson 01:40
Excellent, wonderful. So you heard it here. First, folks. Actually, you probably already here last point. So for those of our listeners who are not all that familiar with BioLogos, could you take a minute here and explain a little bit about what it is that you that you all
 
Jim Stump 01:57
sure the BioLogos elevator speech. We are a nonprofit organization, founded by Francis Collins, who was the leader of the Human Genome Project, and then became the director of the NIH is currently the President's science advisor. He wrote a book in 2006, called the language of God after which our podcast was named. And in it, he shared about how he is this world class scientist, he didn't call himself a world class scientist. He's too humble for that. But he is a world class scientist, and how he came to understand these scientific things about the world, but then also how as an adult, he came to faith in Christ, and tried to show how those two things fit together in his own life. And after the publication of that book, he got lots and lots of questions, emails, even letters at the time, from people asking follow up questions. And he quickly got overwhelmed with all of that and put together a group of people to write out answers to frequently asked questions and they put it on a podcast or sorry, they this is a podcast, they put it on a website and call it BioLogos. And that's how biologists got started, it was answers to frequently asked questions about primarily science and evolution at the time, just after that podcast, after that website went live was when he was tapped by President Obama to become the director of the NIH and had to separate himself from bio logo. So it became a little more organized and incorporated and started having things like conferences and doing a blog and writing some other books and those kinds of things. And so here we are, 12 years later, or so that we're now a staff of 1414 people. We have a speaker's bureau, we have this podcast, you mentioned the website is still kind of the main hub of what we do. We had over 2 million unique visitors to the website last year, lots of them interesting, interestingly enough, still landing on these pages of frequently asked questions that Milo has gotten started with. So somebody does a Google search on something related to human beings and Adam and Eve and evolution or these days, we also talked about climate change and vaccines and those kinds of topics as well. And I think it's fair to say we've become a pretty trusted organization within the Christian community for people who are trying to take their faith seriously, but also want to take the findings of contemporary science seriously.
 
Ian Binns 04:35
Yeah, yeah. So
 
Zack Jackson 04:36
you've been with them since 2013. Or so I
 
Jim Stump 04:39
started in 2013. Half time I was a philosophy professor and split my time between BioLogos and the college I was teaching at for a couple of years and then went full time starting in 2015.
 
Zack Jackson 04:55
But what about your trajectory of your life led you to that point to the place.
 
Jim Stump 05:00
So I did a PhD in philosophy and was always interested in science. My undergrad degree was in science education II and I would have had you as a professor somewhere along the, along the route. And my father was was trained originally as like a middle school science teacher, he eventually became, became an administrator. But I, and we grew up in a Christian family, a very conservative Midwest Christian community. And so I was always interested in these two things and was never really forced into the kinds of positions you hear lots of people from conservative Christian families were creation science or young earth creationism or something we I was never forced into those kinds of positions, and was always encouraged to investigate and ask questions and look at the natural world as a good place, and was always interested how that fit with the Christian commitments that I had. And so I did this undergrad degree in math and science education, thought I might become a high school or middle school math and science teacher. And then immediately after college, my wife and I went to Africa actually to teach in a mission school for a while. And there I started Reading, Reading books more seriously than I did as a math major and in college. And so it was primarily the 19th century fiction shelf in the library in this little school way out in the middle of, of the jungle, actually. And somewhere in that conjunction between the math and science analytical training I had and then Reading 19th century fiction like Tolstoy and Dostoevsky and Melville and some of these great ideas that came out somewhere in the conjunction of those two things out pop philosophy, and I'm not the first person I've heard to say that, that they were attracted to philosophy through literature, but came back from there and went to grad school and philosophy, wanted to do something related to science and religion in a philosophy PhD, but was said no, you can't really do that in this department. But you could do science and, and metaphysics science and philosophy more generally. So I did a I did a dissertation that was kind of historical in nature, the scientific revolution, how the advancing scientific theories interacted with, with the advancing philosophical theories of the time, and how these two disciplines interacted with each other, all with an eye toward how does this affect science and religion. And so then started teaching in a small Christian liberal arts school where you teach about everything and don't have too much time to research yourself. But I got a fellowship one year through the Templeton Foundation to go to Oxford, for to do some projects in science and religion. And that was where I was introduced more specifically to the academic discipline of science and religion and really liked it, and started doing some things there. In 2013, BioLogos had a new president who was from Grand Rapids, Michigan, the BioLogos offices were previously in San Diego, the the past president was a professor at Point Loma Nazarene University in San Diego. But when Deb haarsma became president, she said, I'm in need to move the headquarters to where I live in Grand Rapids, Michigan, and only two of the staff wanted to move from San Diego to Grand Rapids, Michigan. Surprise, surprise. And so she put out a call looking for some new staff. And in particularly, she wanted somebody in philosophy and theology that could help to curate some of the resources for the website, and so on. So I responded to that saying, I am really interested in this and the work BioLogos is doing. And I think I could help in, in what you need, but I'm not ready to quit my full time, full professor tenured position to do that, can we work out some other deal? And to my surprise, she said, Yeah, let's do this. So for two years, by oligos, bought out part of my faculty contracts so that I could do each of them half time. And that was with the full, full permission of the administration from this little college where I was teaching and but then as word started getting out to some of the broader constituents in that community, it made them nervous that there was a faculty member, so closely aligned with BioLogos that accepts evolution, you know, so sort of long. We called it a dialogue started, but it was more of a one way monologue, I'm afraid and ended with some of the documents that faculty have to sign every year being changed. And it kind of forced me to say, I probably don't belong here anymore, and biogas wanted to hire me full time. So in 2015, I started working for them full time. That was a very long answer to your question of how I got here, but that's the know the nitty gritty like taste a lot of her.
 
Zack Jackson 09:57
I feel like a lot of our listeners can resonate With that, there's a lot of folks, especially those of us, who come from a more conservative background and more evangelical background, who we dip our toes into this world, we realize we're not alone in the people who really want to engage with science with integrity, and maintain our spirituality. And we discover this new and beautiful and exciting world that God has made. And there's a new life in us. And then we're met with a brick wall of opposition from the people who used to accept us where our identity used to be. And they've now changed, that'd be the fact that they changed their covenant that you could no longer sign in. Very similar thing happened to me in a church once, but is one of the things that I really appreciate about BioLogos of all of this sort of organizations that that are tackling these issues. You all seem to have the best inroads into the evangelical world, where there is, you know, historically, anyway, a lot of science denialism. What is it about about your organization that, that gives you this ability to speak, to speak science speak truth into a world. So full of denialism?
 
Jim Stump 11:17
That's kind of you to say that, and I wonder if one day somebody in the sociology department might write a write a big dissertation and do a big study related to science and religion organizations in the US because it's, it's a fascinating territory. BioLogos in its earlier days, so soon, after Francis Collins had to disassociate himself with the organization, there was one group of people that came in, and you can go, you can still find some of the the early articles that were written, more so you find when I travel, people who reacted in a certain way that wasn't very positive, I think there's a natural, I think there's a natural kind of progression for people that start to entertain these kinds of ideas. That leads them away. Part of what happens when you when you're trying to figure out how to reconcile evolution with Christian faith, and particularly with the Bible is your interpretation of Scripture, you start to realize has to be a little more nuanced, and, and not quite. So look, I just read this in the Bible, and therefore that's it. And we come to think that that wasn't a good way of interpreting scripture anyway. But what it does is it opens the doors for you to reconsider lots of other things, right, that you see, this is harder, this is messier than, then perhaps the community I came from had led me to believe. And I think there were some instances in those early days of BioLogos, where that was almost pushed down people's throats a little too harshly. And they felt like BioLogos was saying, Oh, you poor benighted evangelicals, let me help straighten you out. And let me you know, show you the truth. And you'll come to be just like we are, then that's that's maybe not a charitable way of interpreting that. But that's the kind of message I hear from people who were only acquainted with BioLogos in some of those early days, and then there was a very intentional decision for a kind of kinder, gentler approach, and the hiring of people that identified themselves as evangelicals, and we're still part of this world. And so I think we took on more of an aura of trying to reform from within rather than taking potshots from the outside, that's a little too simplistic and is perhaps a caricature of what was actually happening. But I think that's, that points to some of it that we have very intentionally tried to keep one foot in the evangelical world, even though you know the way the culture wars have bundled issues together. Science is on one side, and religion is on the other side, way too often. And we find ourselves in that No Man's Land out in the middle. But instead of just going with the flow of saying, well, then we're just going to become this progressive organization that sneers at evangelicals. You know, we've said no, we're, we're still part of this and many of these impulses we share. And so it's much more an issue of how do we articulate within, you know, the the framework that makes sense to that community? So I don't know it's a it's a really good question, and we are not a perfect organization and we misstep and stumble all the time, but It's a it's a one of our one of our values. I mean, our, in our founding documents, our values, say, rigorous science, Christ centered faith and gracious dialogue. So it's not I think too many people use the speak the truth in love verse as a weapon that gives themselves permission to club people over the heads with the truth as they know it now. And we're much more concerned about, you know, winning people through graciousness than just clubbing them with the truth.
 
Ian Binns 15:35
So I'm curious, I'd like that idea. You talk about the having the conversation, right, making it so that you can actually have a conversation? Which I really liked that how do you approach those who? I mean, I'm certain there are individuals or groups maybe who've started off maybe more antagonistic, or they've started off their conversation with you in an attacking type manner? How do you handle that? Or Or do you initially do? Do you know what I mean? More? I'm trying to get out here like it. People who maybe approach more with my way or the highway? I am correct. You were wrong. type of approach. What have you done in the past?
 
Jim Stump 16:20
Yeah. So thankfully, those people are the outliers. Actually. They're the ones that get the most press. They're the loudest voices out there. But it's not the norm. We commissioned a sociological survey origins a few years back, and it was really fascinating to see, yes, you can if you only ask the question, like, How old do you think the earth is? Or do you think human beings evolved? evangelicals? Still, the majority of them, say our, you know, young earth creationists or old earth creationist at least saying that there's no such thing as evolution. But when you dig a little deeper and ask, and how important is this to you? It's a really small percentage, it's like less than 10%, who pound their fist on the lectern and say, I'm a young earth creationist Darnit. And it has to be that way, or you're all going to hell or you know, that you hear those voices on the internet, particularly, but that's not the majority of people. And so there's a, there's a middle ground of people who are, you know, either don't really care that much about the issues, or they say, this is interesting, but it's not hugely important to me, and I'm not going to get into fights over it. So that's the first response to your question in is that it's not as many people doing that, as you might be led to believe, by if you only follow these issues on Twitter, right. But then there are those people and one of the things BioLogos has done is that we don't really do debates. I mean, that became that became part of the DNA, I'm afraid of evangelicalism and apologetics, to say we're gonna get up and, you know, have a debate and trot out all our fancy reasons and show people why, you know, we're really just as smart as you are actually smarter. Because we believe the truth. We've said, we're not doing that. We're happy to have conversations with people, but we vastly prefer those conversations to come out of relationship that has happened. So just as an example of that, reasons to believe is another science and faith organization out in California, founded by Hugh Ross, who is an astrophysicist, became a Christian later in his life and started this as an apologetics ministry. They're old earth creationists. So they accept the science of physics and geology that points toward the ancient age of the Earth in the universe, but they don't accept evolution. And we've had really good, interesting, productive talks with them. But it's only because we've spent a lot of time with them. And when I say spend a lot of time with them, it's not a lot of time on stages, talking in front of other people, or even doing this kind of thing on a podcast where you're having a conversation, but secretly, you're just trying to talk to your own audience, you know, preach to the choir, in some sense, we spent a lot of time with them behind closed doors out of the public eye just getting to know each other. So four or five representatives from our organization would get together with four or five representatives from their organization. And we'd talk about the common ground we have we talk about our differences. We'd also pray with each other and we'd hear each other's spiritual journey and stories and we'd eat a meal together. And so I often have said in response, in reaction to that and to these kinds of questions, that it's a lot harder to be snippy over the internet at people with whom you've prayed. People that you people that you have out with people that you know, their testimony, their stories, in when when you have that kind of a relationship, it's it's way harder to be uncharitable toward them. Where when it's people that you don't know anything about, you read a quote, or two, and you make all these assumptions about who they are and what they must be like, and you just go from there. So developing relationship has always been really important in the BioLogos approach to these things.
 
Ian Binns 20:30
Yeah, I like that, if you're talking about debates, you know, I've never found debates on these types of issues, worthwhile. And when I was faculty at LSU, for three years, from 2008, to 2011. And Louisiana, you know, at times has historically said trouble with teaching of evolution in schools and, and they still do, and I was testifying a lot down there against efforts to undermine the teaching of evolution, and also to undermine curriculum materials. And right before we moved back to North Carolina, I don't remember the name of the person. But someone reached out to me from a small group in Canada, wanting to set up a debate as a way to come after me. And I immediately turned it down. But I reached out to some of my mentors about it. And they just said, it's, it's not worth it. So you're, you're going the right way. But it was it was interesting to finally get on someone's radar that way. But again, I just saying it's not worth my time. So
 
Zack Jackson 21:30
there seems to be a fine line between a debate and a conversation. Right, and you are a podcast host? Do you find yourself in situations where things start turning into a debate over a conversation? And?
 
Jim Stump 21:49
Not very often, not very often. And I'm sure part of that comes through the selection of the people we have on the podcast to talk with. Most of them are people who agree with us to start with we we do consciously try to look over the course of a season or over a calendar year to make sure we're talking with people that are outside the tent, and outside the tent in different directions, whether that's they don't agree with us on science, or they don't agree with us about Christianity. And but those have those who have never, like gotten ugly or nasty or anything, so.
 
Zack Jackson 22:28
Okay. And so for those of you who are listening who are not familiar, Jim is the host of the the language of God podcast, which is saying before, one of the only regularly updating podcasts that tackles science and religion on a regular basis with any kind of intellectual integrity is how I think I would put it, but but I do regular Google searches because, well, you know, one of the reasons we started this podcast was because there wasn't a whole lot out there. And we were in conversation, the five of us and I, we realized there was not a whole lot of content out there. And there wasn't a whole lot of organization of people, everyone kind of felt like they were on their own. And so we wanted to create a community of people who, who at least were asking similar questions, if not on the same page. And you do that on a regular basis. So first of all, thank you for doing that. And I wonder if you might take a little, a little bit of time here and tell us a little bit about what is sort of the driving ethos behind your podcast and what you're trying to do with it?
 
Jim Stump 23:47
Yeah. One of the most frequently requested resources we had it BioLogos, in the middle teen years of the 21st century, was to have a podcast and we always replied with Yeah, that would be great. But we just don't think we have the resources to do it. Both the human resources as well as money we had known and that that answer was fairly, an uneducated, but we didn't, we didn't we just didn't know about podcasting. And I had a chance, depending on your theology, you might say providential conversation with a former student of mine, at a party one night, I asked him what he was doing. And he said, I started this new business, and I'm a consultant for podcasters. And I'm like, seriously, there is such that you can do that. And he said, Yeah, lots of people want and I said, What does it take to do a podcast? And we had this conversation for about an hour and at the end of that hour, I had the whole plan in mind to go back to the leadership at BioLogos and say, we need to do this. We can do this. It's not as complicated as I thought. It's doesn't take as much money as I thought. and using somebody like this, we can figure out how to do it well BioLogos we're, we're funded entirely through grants and donations, we don't sell anything. So our only revenue comes from those. And so anytime we have a new project, we ended up pitching it as a grant proposal, or we find a donor who's interested in that way, we really thought we needed to hire one more person than we then we had to be able to devote time to doing it. And so we ended up getting, we ended up getting a grant to start it to start it off. And to do that, you have to write up this big document saying this is what we want to do. And essentially, it was taking the academic conversations of science and religion that you guys know that that go on at all sorts of levels. But it doesn't often trickle down into the people in the pew. So this was a grant that was intentionally pitched to say, we want to bring the kinds of conversations that the scholars in our network are having regularly and to try to translate that for a general podcasting audience. For people that say, Yeah, I'm kind of interested in where humans came from. I'm interested in what the Bible has to say about this. And I'm interested in the latest scientific discoveries, but to take that and package it in a way that would that would be interesting for, for for those kinds of people. So it's designed very much to take the all the topics that BioLogos is is interested in and engaged in and to find the interesting people to talk to about that. My only qualifications as a podcasting host. Before starting this were that I was I was the announcer for the women's basketball team at the college where I was teaching for a number of years. And so I had practice speaking into a microphone in that regard. But I was something I thought I can I'd really like to do this, I think I can do this. And there was some skepticism going into it, whether this was really the right fit for me to be the podcast I was about, we started doing a few and people said, Yeah, I guess you can do that, that I guess, announcing three pointers translates Okay, and talking about science and faith, so, so now it's, it's like half of my job. It's and it's been one of the most enjoyable things that I've done. I really enjoyed having these kinds of conversations with with lots of people. So we just like you have recently hit the 100 episode mark, and have continued, continued on for we'll go for at least another couple of years. And we'll see what happens then.
 
Zack Jackson 27:42
Yeah, I only just realized that you all launched your podcast just about just a couple of months before we launched our podcast. Yeah, it was we must have lost at the same
 
Jim Stump 27:52
time, we must have sent the same need out there.
 
Zack Jackson 27:56
I think we probably did, it sounds like we sent the same need anyway, the the taking the from the the academy and bringing it back down to the people as it were. So in the past 100 and some odd episodes, what what are some of the things that you've learned that stand out to you?
 
Jim Stump 28:17
So, I mean, I think I've learned how to be a better podcast host than I was at the beginning. I've learned I mean, just through conversations with people, one of the things you see over and over again, is that what people believe is really deeply connected to who they are, where they live, the community that's around them, the ideas that we have aren't just floating around in, you know, some ether, that they're deeply connected to the people that we are to the communities that that we're part of. And that can be troubling to people sometimes if you think that leads you down this road of relativism of some sense, but I think instead it shows the embodied pneus of our faith, it shows that our faith can take on particular particular guises depending on where we are and who we're around. And that shouldn't be threatening, that should be an indication of the incarnational element of Christianity. Right. And so it's it always gives me I think, great hope to hear people different people's expression and articulation of their Christian faith dependent on the circumstances that they've found themselves in. And there are obviously commonalities through that. And different challenges. It's similar challenges that come out and are expressed in in similar ways but it it doesn't take away from the kind of uniqueness and embeddedness of of the faith in our in our lives as we find them. Use if
 
Ian Binns 29:59
Zach knows this. We've been friends for a long time night, I always bounce back and forth. And you were talking earlier. Jim, when you're talking about your journey, and you refer to a fellowship that you did, I think you said it was with Oxford maybe or something. Can you delve more into that a little bit? And what was that experience? Like? So what was it then? What was that experience for you?
 
Jim Stump 30:19
The John Templeton Foundation is the major funder of all things science and religion in, in this country and in several other countries. And they started a program designed for primarily for faculty at Christian colleges to get more engaged in the academic discipline of science and religion. And so this was, it was actually three summers in a row held at Oxford University. Wickliffe Hall is one of the colleges, one of the halls of, of Oxford University. So three summers in a row, I went over there for four weeks, each two of those summers, I even got to bring my family with me. And it was really transformative time. For me as a scholar and understanding deeper the the issues involved in science and religion. So we each had to pitch a project of some sort to work on throughout those times. And then there was a cohort of about 35 people who were there, and we got to know each other and became friends, and had these kinds of conversations a lot. And so I came back and started working and writing more seriously in the academic field of, of science and religion. And that's kind of what led me to BioLogos then, too, so yeah, and they've done so Templeton has done this several times with different cohorts. I was I was part of the second cohort. So it was see if I have my dates, right. 2003, four and five. Were the years that the summers that I was there, there was a three year program immediately before that, too. And since then, I think they've been doing just two year cohorts, but have had similar programs for quite a while. Yeah.
 
Ian Binns 32:01
That's because just for me, personally, that's something I'm interested in. And obviously I work at a secular institution, but of the fellowship that brought all of us together. Sinai's snaps as it was, was something that, you know, obviously was very powerful for me personally. And it led to the five of us becoming very good friends in this podcast. But it's something that I am more interested in trying to find other avenues just because, you know, as Zack mentioned, of the five of us, I'm the only one that's not as engaged, I guess you could say, within the religious community, as the others just because of my work. And as a science educator, which is not a bad thing. It's just something that I crave. So
 
Jim Stump 32:47
I think, when we have so when BioLogos has these conferences, like the one you mentioned, that's, that's coming up here this week, that's, that's what we hear most from the people who come and attend that they've been just craving fellowship around like minded people. Because for too many for too many people in their, in their religious communities, they find it challenging and difficult to talk openly about science. And for many scientists, then in their work situations, they find it difficult to talk openly about their faith commitments. And so again, we're kind of in that no man's land between those those two ideological camps. And so but there really are a lot of people out there like us that are interested in both of them. So it's, it's very, very nice to have a community of people that are involved in both.
 
Ian Binns 33:38
Well, and thankfully, my my church community, I'm an Episcopalian. And within my Episcopal Church, community, immediate community, at least it is very much welcomed. You know, I've taught several classes from my church, with my former Rector and my current Rector is a huge fan of our podcasts. And he actually was a high school biology teacher before he went to seminary. So it's an area that I get to talk about a lot, but you know, academically, you know, I get to do work on it and write about it. But you know, I do, I'm trying to get to know people in our religious studies program, for example, but also to to get to know people at different institutions around the country and seminaries and things like that as a way just to kind of collaborate more of science and religion centers as a way to collaborate more, because it's something that I find very fascinating, obviously, since we do this. Good. Yeah.
 
Zack Jackson 34:31
So you've, you've done a lot of work on with with BioLogos in the in building resources, right, with answering Frequently Asked Questions for for faith leaders for Christians, across the board. But what is it that within this, this fear this this, this world of science and religion, this relationship between the two that that just gets you jazzed? That That makes you excited that you could talk about for an hour.
 
Jim Stump 35:03
Yeah. So I got into this work primarily, because I'm teaching at this Christian College. And I started hearing more and more former students after I'd been there long enough former students, I'd start hearing that had left their faith, because they got out of the bubble that we were part of, and saw how science works in the real world. Maybe it was just watching the Discovery Channel, seeing nature, and, and somewhere deep inside them, whether it was ever articulated this way explicitly, or not, somewhere deep inside them from the religious communities they had grown up in, we're like, this doesn't fit. This doesn't work this with my faith, this view of the world doesn't, you know, I can't reconcile this. And I'm feeling that I got to choose, am I either going to double down and be part of this religious community? Or am I going to say, Yeah, this is the way the world works, and the what scientists told us, and they would feel at this fork in the road of having to choose between these two. And so I got into this because I was tired of hearing that of hearing people think that somehow they had to choose between science and, and faith. And so I said, I gotta sort some of this out myself. I gotta I mean, I've, as I told you before, I've I've never really tempted by things like young earth creationism, but neither was I ever completely sure how to reconcile, in my own mind, things like what Genesis says, with evolution. And so it was through some of my own Reading through some of the work in this Templeton group that I was talking about in Oxford, where it was like, Okay, now I'm starting to see the way that it's not like you have to compromise somehow, on your faith, it's that I need a little better, more sophisticated under understanding a way of interpreting scripture, that's actually better. It's not somehow, you know, shirking responsibility, but it's like, no, these, these documents didn't fall from heaven, that they were written in a time and place. And so coming to understand that just like, opened my eyes to say, Okay, I'm free. Now, I feel like I'm free to explore the scientific evidence and let that lead me where it will, because it's not going to threaten this commitment to faith that I have to this understanding of the Bible, even as this inspired document that that is, you know, been so important to our, to our tradition. So that in my own journey, led to I think I can show this to other people here now, too, I think, I think we can help people come so that they don't get to a crisis point the way so many of my former students had. And so that part of understanding in one bigger, more coherent picture has been really important for me, and I think, is is one of those things that keeps me juiced up and in talking to other people about this, that, that you can take both of these seriously, right, so that it's not not giving up on one or the other. More recently, so BioLogos, here about three years ago, made an intentional decision to expand the topics we talked about. Earlier on, it was mostly evolution and origins related work. And that was an intentional decision also to try to unbundle it from the other issues, because as we talked about on these culture wars, that too often the culture wars come as prepackaged bundles of of issues and topics and that you have to take all of one or all of the other and BioLogos said, No, we're not trying to get you to we're not trying, we're not talking about climate change. We're not talking about homosexuality, we're not trying to get you to vote democratic. We're just trying to talk about evolution as a way of unbundling that, but after doing that for about 10 years, we said we think we've earned enough credibility and trust that maybe we do need to talk about some other scientific topics. That was a at a strategic planning meeting in 2019. And we thought that 2020 was going to be the year of climate change and creation care for BioLogos. And then COVID happened. And we pivoted really hard in 2020, then to trying to provide scientific resources from a Christian perspective that people might trust related to COVID and really ramped up very quickly in that regard. And so then by about 2021, by the middle of 2021 or so we we started thinking more seriously and developing more resources on climate change. And that's become an issue now for me, that keeps me animated and sometimes keeps me up at night. And seeing that just the psychology of the way this is an issue works, that it's just far enough away that it doesn't feel like a crisis right now. But it really is a crisis right now. I mean, the things we're we have this short window right now as a civilization, to make the right kinds of choices, and to show how this ought to flow out of our faith. You know, rather than again, it being bundled on the opposite side of the culture wars from where many people of faith are. And they think that's what those liberal people are worried about. I'm not worried about that, well, to show that this ought to flow out of our faith, that we ought to be caring for creation, and that we ought to be worried about the justice have we in the in in the Western world, the industrialized world who have caused almost all of this are going to suffer the least from it, it's going to be the people who didn't cause it that are going to suffer the most. And what does our what does our faith commitment have to say about that? Right? Shouldn't? Shouldn't we of all people be most concerned about what the poorest and the least of these around the world are going to suffer as a result of what we've done over the last few generations? Yeah, yeah,
 
Zack Jackson 41:19
I was just Reading that the, you know, the Solomon Islands are probably going to be the first nation that is completely eradicated by the sea level rise, and they're trying to purchase large swaths of land in Asia is or
 
Jim Stump 41:32
relocate a country
 
Zack Jackson 41:34
to create a new country, as theirs is disappearing. We hear our are saying, well, you know, maybe it's 100 years out. I think we're all pretty, pretty aware. If you're listening to this podcast, you are probably fairly aware of the awful parts of climate change and the things that we shouldn't be doing. And there's perhaps, a sort of paralyzing nihilism to it. For those of us who think about this a lot. Is there anything happening in this in this realm that brings you hope, right now?
 
Jim Stump 42:12
Right at the end of 2021, we did a series on hope. And I've been thinking about it a lot lately, because in the in the sense of, is it possible for me to be hopeful, and yet not terribly optimistic? Because when I read the data, when I read the new IPCC report, I'm not very optimistic. And is that something different than hope, and I'm persuaded that I can be hopeful as an intentional choice of commitment, as a way of saying, this is how I'm going to look at the world. I'm committed to seeing it as God's creation as a place where God is sovereign, not in the sense that God controls every detail that happens, but in the sense that the good guys win. In the end, I'm committed to that view of life that, that God will work all things together for good. I'm not very optimistic about the the way things are going. But that ultimately, I'm not. I'm not even called to be effective. We had a podcast guest use this line that I just think is super powerful that we are not called to be effective. We're called to be faithful. And what does it look like to be a faithful Christian in these days? When it doesn't look like we're being very effective at convincing people to do the right thing? What does it mean to be faithful in that, in that kind of circumstance, and I think it's to continue to say that God's on the throne, Jesus is the Lord, within our tradition. These are the phrases we use that order our order our lives, and that we're going to continue to love our neighbor, and love our enemies, and to honor God with our hearts and souls and minds and strength. And hope then becomes the kind of outflow of looking at the world in that way and of being committed to that, to that way of looking at the world, that hopefulness can be and affect an outcome from the commitment to being faithful. And again, I think it's possible to have that attitude while at the same time the sort of emotional risk sponsz to immediate circumstances is not always very good. But that optimism or pessimism I see is that emotional reaction to what I see right now. Whereas Hope is the commitment to what I believe the way things are going to be, ultimately, much longer perspective, eternal perspective that hope derives from as opposed to optimism or pessimism.
 
Zack Jackson 45:28
I think you've just described Isaiah as call from Isaiah chapter six, where God says, you know, Whom shall I send to bring a message to the people and Isaiah says, ooh, pick me. And God says, Here's your message. Tell them to repent, but they're not going to do it. Thanks for that. I know from the outset that this is going to fail, but I need you to do it anyway. Oh, I like that, that a call to faithfulness, not effectiveness. Because there's a we, we just had a section in, I teach confirmation in my in my church, and we've got eight teenagers. And we were talking about Christology and talking about Jesus. And we got to the section on Christ's return. And they have a lot of questions about what it's going to be like, when Jesus comes back. Is it going to be like, when he came the first time? Is he going to be a baby? Is he already here? Is it going to be dramatic in the sky? And the big question was when, and most of them, uh, kind of agreed amongst themselves, without my prodding, that it was probably just going to be when the climate gets too warm, for humans to live anymore. And that we are going to once we destroy the world, that's when Jesus will come in. And so they were just talking amongst themselves about how bad it has to be first, before Jesus will come and set things right. And like the fact that this is the sort of casual conversation happening among 13 year olds, it was like a shot to the heart to me, because, you know, this is something that's deeply important to me as well. But when I was 13, I was certainly not thinking in these terms. Right? When I was 13, my, the limit of my understanding of the environment was that in all those six pack from soda rings, were going to kill turtles. You know, Captain Planet was the extent of my understanding of what we were doing to the world. But for them, they see this as a present reality. And I think the rest of us need to wake up to that.
 
Jim Stump 47:35
This is part of what has urged us at BioLogos. To make this to make this one of the core topics that we deal with the origins issues are interesting, they're important at some level, and have implications for things like how you understand scripture, and so on. But whether there was a historical Adam or Eve is not going to affect too many people's lives and livelihoods and caused countries like the Solomon Islands to have to relocate, right? I mean, there's a different sort of immediacy and importance to the topics of climate change that we've got to get this one, right, or it's not just going to result in splitting of denominations, it's going to result in inability to have a sustainable planet anymore.
 
Ian Binns 48:22
When you think about to, you know, there are still indigenous cultures out there that are completely cut off from the industrialized world, or the technological world, I guess you could say, you know, where they still live the way they've always lived. And we know they're there, but don't have any communication with them that those cultures and those communities, especially ones that are on islands will be wiped off the face of the earth, because of our actions, and then
 
Jim Stump 48:55
even the ones that aren't on islands, the ecosystems are going to change so dramatically already in Africa and South America, the kinds of crops that you can grow, and when you can grow them are changing pretty rapidly. And those kinds of indigenous cultures that have always done things the same way are not going to be able to keep doing those.
 
Ian Binns 49:14
Yeah, and it but it's very tragic that, you know, the Western world has to be has to know that its impact, at least the general thought seems to be that some believe that, well, it's not in my backyard. I guess that's the best way of saying that. Yeah.
 
Jim Stump 49:31
And that again, is part of this, like, that's part of the psychology that makes this so difficult to communicate because it's not immediate and in your face, it's off down the road or in another part of the world or something like that.
 
Ian Binns 49:45
Sure. And that's the loving others. Yep. Right. And so, you know, obviously if you identify as Christian, you can use Christian scripture to help you with that. But even if you don't identify as Christian or even if you don't benefit as a person of any faith whatsoever, you can still recognize the importance of loving others of caring about other people. So, to me, this is another Ask whatever your motivation is to help you care for others.
 
Jim Stump 50:13
This is another aspect of communicating to to two people that about these issues that again, span or try to at least span the culture war issues, that the theoretical side of this so we do this a lot in practice and have lots of stories to tell about trying to communicate to people in that regard. But there's a really fascinating theoretical aspect behind it. I don't know if you guys know that social psychologist, Jonathan Hite and his book, The righteous mind from a few years ago. And these moral foundations that people intuitively use to make their decisions and the research that he's done on the political left and the political right, primarily, and which of those moral foundations are most important to them. And you, you see pretty clearly that people who identify as liberal or progressive rank the highest on these moral foundations of care and fairness, and many of us that are on that at least lean that way, think that we can make these arguments just by appealing to Shouldn't we care about these other people? Isn't this fair, in order that the people who have, you know not caused this problem, they shouldn't have to be the one suffering from it. And the way you and I both just talked about this issue, that's what we were appealing to, whereas most people on the political right end of the spectrum rank way higher in these moral intuitions on liberty, and authority. And one of the challenges we face is how do we appeal to those kinds of moral foundations to talk about these issues? Because for them, they hear well, this isn't fair. Well, but their response is, well, you can't take away my liberty, you can't take away my choice. Right? Life isn't fair. Yeah, life isn't fair. Sorry, but or appeal to some other authority that they accept. So I think that's one of the big challenges for us in this business of how do we talk about these issues that are so important in ways that tap into the moral intuitions of people who are different than we are people who, who don't value is highly some of those other things that we value
 
Ian Binns 52:34
was obviously the last two years of this pandemic have made that that contrast even more, even more,
 
52:40
even more? You're right,
 
Zack Jackson 52:43
so we need a good alien invasion. Some some common enemy. So
 
Jim Stump 52:48
I'll tell you though, at the beginning of this pandemic, we at BioLogos said this is going to be what rallies the church to take science more seriously. We thought this is really the opportunity. And within a few months, it was no, the opposite of that has happened. Yeah. So
 
Ian Binns 53:06
yes, very tragic. Those witness.
 
Zack Jackson 53:10
Yeah, definitely solve those ideologies take over. And they made certain issues, political that I never imagined a million years could be political. And then I learned so much during that time about what it means to communicate with people and understand other people's values and try to communicate through them to find find some common language, not even common values, but a common way of communicating truth that I'm still working on very much. So
 
Jim Stump 53:39
there's another book if I can point it to. That's been very helpful for me in this regard to by a legal scholar by the name of John in NA zoo, the books called confident pluralism, which I think is really, really important. I actually just did a podcast interview with him about two months ago on our feed, you can find it but confident pluralism is he's coining this phrase to try to talk about how do we hold to our own convictions in a society where we can't, and probably shouldn't just impose them on other people. So the confident side is this isn't relativism, where we just say anything goes I really believe this is the truth. And I think it's really important, but the pluralism side is, I recognize that my neighbor down the road believes something different with the equal amount of fervor that I believe. So how do we in that kind of society have meaningful conversations? How do we try to break through these culture war bundles that that are there and the he talks primarily in terms of Supreme Court cases in the book because that's what he is. He's a scholar of the Supreme Court, Supreme Court, but really pushes us towards thinking within our communities. How do we move towards tolerance Where again, it's not just in some wimpy sort of anything goes, but rather, to be tolerant that I know other people don't all believe the same the way I do, and I shouldn't just exile them. And tolerance kind of plays off of certainty in a in a certain sense, where maybe toning down my certainty helps to communicate with people a little bit more, but he tries to push towards tolerance and humility and patience, that I think those are all really, really helpful ways of trying to engage people who believe differently than you do.
 
Ian Binns 55:36
I appreciate that recommendation.
 
Zack Jackson 55:39
Absolutely. Thank you for that. And we'll make sure to put those those links in the show notes, as well as links to your books that folks can can purchase and read, and all the resources that you've mentioned from BioLogos as well. Here at the end of our time together, first of all, I want to say a huge thank you absolutely half of the rest of our hosts and all of our listeners for spending this time with us. And before you go, what's coming up on the on your podcast that we can look forward to?
 
Jim Stump 56:12
Yeah, so this conference that we have coming up, we're going to do a live a live recording, which always sounds funny, because it's not like any recording isn't live, but we're gonna have a studio audience. That's what I should say, we're going to have a studio audience in front of us to record a conversation that I'll have with the artist Makoto Fujimura. To talk about creation, what does it mean to be creative, and to be made in the image of God? And what are the consequences that we find between science and art in some of those in some of those ways. We're going to do a whole series on climate change coming up in the not too distant, not too distant future. We did a we did a series last summer on what it means to be human that was a little different from the typical episode where I sit down and talk to somebody for an hour like we're doing here. But it's a little more highly produced, where we go out and talk to two experts in a number of different fields, and then have a narrative where we weave in, weave in quotes from from them. Throughout that. We are going to do a conversation with NT right about the resurrection for the week, right before Easter that will be coming up that I look forward to that we just recorded last week, an episode with Bill McKibben, who's one of the leading scientists, climate change activists, that was a pretty fun conversation than otherwise, we are looking toward the summer and putting together a couple of other series. One of them is related to a new project that I have going on. That is what I'm calling the spiritual journey of Homo sapiens. How did we become the kind of creatures that we are? And can we see in the journey of our species, something analogous to a spiritual journey of us as an individual, the highs and lows that we go through that helped to shape us and form us into into what we are today? So
 
Zack Jackson 58:21
we're looking at like, Paleolithic spirituality?
 
Jim Stump 58:26
How did this get started, I have a trip to Europe, hopefully, this next fall, where I'm even going to look at some of the cave paintings as some of these earliest sort of sorts of intimations of, of at least the records we have of our ancestors, looking at something else feel, you know, in a symbolic way of trying to figure out why we're here and who we are and all that. So I'm our series
 
Zack Jackson 58:53
on human evolution was one of them. It was my favorite series that that is where my, my brain is these days, and what gets me excited. So that's wonderful to hear that you're doing that as that
 
Ian Binns 59:03
sounds fascinating. Let me know if you need someone to go with you to hold your carry your suitcases. That just sounds fascinating.
 
Jim Stump 59:15
We'll see if it happens. That's the plan right now.
 
Ian Binns 59:18
Good luck with that. That sounds really interesting. Yeah. Yeah. And as that moves forward, if that does happen, we'll have to have you back on to talk more about that. Because that that really does sound interesting. I'd be happy to.
 
Zack Jackson 59:30
Yeah, well, once again, you can listen to that and 109 other episodes of the language of God podcast, you can find that on BioLogos or wherever it is that you find your podcasts wherever you're listening right now. You can also find the language of God podcast. So thank you so much, Jim, for being here today and for spending this time with us. was a really wonderful hour with you. Thanks, Zack.
 
Jim Stump 59:53
Thanks, Ian. Happy to do it. Thank you