Who Wrote the Gospels? Christian vs Agnostic Debate | Agnostic Bible Study

Most people can name the four gospels in order. Far fewer can explain why we think those books were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John in the first place. We pick up part three of my conversation with Pastor Cole and put gospel authorship under a bright light, with Matthew as the main case study and the synoptic problem as the pressure test.

We talk through the claim that the gospels were originally anonymous, how later headings like “according to Matthew” may have been added, and what that does to everyday confidence in authorship. From there we trace the earliest external evidence: Papias and his puzzling line about Matthew compiling the logia in a Hebrew dialect, the fact that our surviving Gospel of Matthew is a Greek narrative, and why it matters that Papias is preserved through later quotation. Then we move to Irenaeus and the first clear naming of all four gospels, asking whether that looks like independent confirmation or a tradition that solidifies once a major authority says it out loud.

We also get practical about historical reliability and textual criticism: Markan priority, why Matthew seems to use so much of Mark, what shared Greek wording suggests, and how additions like the virgin birth appear in only two New Testament books. Finally, we zoom in on “eyewitness” language and the many scenes no disciple could directly observe, exploring how oral tradition and community transmission might explain the details we read today.

Subscribe, share this with a friend who loves Bible history, and leave a rating or review so more people can find the show.

Transcript

Quick Setup And Format Change

SPEAKER_00 0:00

What's going on, and welcome to another episode of the Agnostic Bible study. I'm your host, Joe Teal. And today is going to be a little bit different for our Tuesday episode. It will not be a verse-by-verse breakdown. I had a double ear infection. My throat's all jacked up. And I just haven't had time to shoot the regular breakdown. So I dug back in the vault and I'm going to give you part three of my conversation with Cole. This is a deep dive and debate into gospel authorship and Matthew specifically. I hope y'all enjoy this conversation as much as I did. And now, part three Pastor Cole. Let's get into it.

Why Gospel Authorship Is Debated

SPEAKER_01 0:36

So, all right, next thing to talk about is who wrote the gospels? And that for me, this was interesting because I think my entire life, if somebody would have asked me who wrote the gospels, I think my immediate answer would have just been like, oh, but the dudes they said they did. Yeah. Matthew, Mark, you're on easy. Easy. Next question. And we'll move on. I didn't know that there was like a debate about this. I didn't know that there was like, and then as I started pulling threads, I didn't realize that there was like a like a quite a significant debate about this. And lot and so many different ways to think about it, really. You know, we talked about the synoptic deal and we've we've we've talked about dates and stuff. So I guess there's a couple precursor questions to ask you before we get into this. Uh which one do you think was wrote first? Which gospel?

SPEAKER_03 1:20

Yeah, I think traditionally most people agree that Mark was probably written first. And then probably Matthew, then Luke, and then latest John. But again, a lot of that's still debated. I read another scholar that to today or yesterday that uh actually argued for Luke. And I was like, I don't know that I'm not.

SPEAKER_01 1:37

I don't hear that very often. Sometimes you hear Matthew first. Well, a lot of the early church fathers thought Matthew wrote first. But there um so so when this idea was first presented to me, someone was like, Well, you know the gospels are anonymous, right? And I was like, Well, what do you mean anonymous? Like it says according to Matthew. Like easy peasy, we're done. Yeah, but those likely, you know, were added. Like Matthew didn't write his or on the original document and say according to Matthew at the top. Yeah, I don't think that was there. Is there anything about Matthew specifically? Like I we'll we'll we'll talk a little bit about all four gospels, but I want to talk about Matthew. Is there anything specifically about Matthew that makes you think this is written by Matthew?

SPEAKER_03 2:14

Um, you know, I'd I'd have to look at the specific references. Uh I think uh I'm blanking on the the chapters, maybe Matthew 22. There's several chapters that has language that uh, at least in the original uh language of verbiage and things that are that are recorded, uh, that seem to be written from someone who is very familiar uh with the tax process. Uh so there is there are several things uh about taxes, money, and things that are recorded within Matthew's gospel that are not recorded in the other gospels, which is interesting. But but even beyond just you know the generalized.

SPEAKER_01 2:51

Yeah, well, I and I I again I'd like to. Do you mind if I look that up? I don't want to be like fact-checking you on the scene or not. No, but I would know and I would very I would like to see that.

SPEAKER_03 3:00

Yeah, and I would love to send them to you. And um, and so some of the some of the verses, there's at least two, I want to say one's in Matthew 22. I don't remember exactly what verse, but when you go to the original language, there's there's specifics on on coins and amounts and different things that you know some scholars at least would argue that uh would only be referenced from someone who is familiar with the tax process.

SPEAKER_01 3:25

Okay, Jesus went from there. Obviously, 99 is interesting. Uh, but this says 546. If you love those who love you, what reward do you get? Not even a tax collector is not are not even the tax collectors doing that. That's not that's not nothing. Uh tax collector.

SPEAKER_03 3:41

But there's more references to tax collectors and all that stuff in the gospel than the other gospels, but also specifics. And I again, I don't remember the original language, but when you look at the original language, that's when it comes to life.

SPEAKER_01 3:53

Right. Okay. So you think that's the one. Do you do you put any stock in the uh it being the only one they call call in Matthew instead of Levi in Matthew? Do you think that does anything for you?

SPEAKER_03 4:04

No, I I don't think so. Um, you know, it just as far as the the gospel days, I I do think there's a little more of a debate on some of the, you know, pastoral epistles and some of those things. Uh I think that's where you you could kind of get more in the weeds. I I feel like uh historically the gospels have been a little more solidified than some of the other like epistle letters and Pauline letters and things. I feel like those are way more heavily debated. Yeah, we get into that too.

SPEAKER_01 4:27

But but I do, but Matthew specifically, um, what was the question? I hate that. I didn't mean to cut you off, man. But I'm sure. No, you're okay. Um so when you say early church, uh the early church had it had uh transmitted it, do you think that there's a clear line from Matthew to like like now?

SPEAKER_03 4:45

Matthew to now. Yeah, well, I so one, I mean, as far as the the gospel authors and and you know, this would include Matthew just generally, but uh but but there's been a widespread consensus until about the last 150 years with modern like textual criticism that the the church tradition, you know, up to first and second centuries after the gospels uh were written by those that they claim, you know, on the face of the gospels. And right and there are even ancient reasons, uh, you know, ancient styles on things, and why, you know, people kind of argue why, say, Matthew didn't include himself uh within the body of the text. And that's uh stylistic of their time. Often there would be an included like cover letter or something. And so uh a lot of people just say that they, you know, would stand that of the time there was probably a heading or something on the cover that we don't have that equates this, you know, gospel being written by the city.

SPEAKER_01 5:42

On the papyrus, which we never had the original, it's probably gone forever.

SPEAKER_03 5:45

Yeah, yeah. And so, but a lot of people argue that that's how, you know, a lot of these writings in this time would would have been transmitted. And so uh and then there's kind of an argument too, you know, about the gospels, how quickly they were widespread within the churches, uh the these letters were sent out. Um a lot of people, you know, kind of argue too that uh because they were so widely accepted so quickly um within the churches and all of those things that they they uh they you know heavily argued that uh there was they they know who wrote them. Like that they wouldn't let some letter slide in that they're gonna affirm spread throughout all the churches that they would not have fact checked. Uh because there's a there's a chain of command, there's lots of uh really a system of checks and balances that they had within kind of the ancient church world. Um and so anyway, I don't know how much more you want me to talk.

SPEAKER_01 6:35

I can cause it unless you push back a little bit.

Papias And The First Matthew Claim

SPEAKER_01 6:37

Oh, it's respect on so earliest reference to Matthew seems to be Papias of Hereopolis in 130. So 50, well, depending like uh uh if your date's longer, if my date's shorter, so um I would say Matthew is probably written somewhere around 80, so I'm gonna say about 50-ish years after we have Papius saying, well, and well, I'll give it, I may even go back to just to be fair to 120s, 130th, would you agree? But Papius probably was it was around that time when he references Yeah, probably. I I don't remember the specific date, but so Papius is the first person to ever mention that Matthew did anything. He says that Matthew compiled the logia in the Hebrew dialect, and the people interpreted the best they could. That's the first mention of Matthew. Yeah, we have earlier references to people that were probably using the gospels, but they don't put a name on nothing. So we see like they'll mention things that were in Matthew or other things. We have um uh we have where is that list? Oh no, it's in a different spot. Let me look. Well, I can tell you, I can tell you, I know this. Um, Clement draws from the gospels, never gives them a name. Yeah, um Ignatius draws from the gospels, never gives them a name. Polycarp draws from the gospels, never gives them a name. It's it's a pattern here. And there's more. And there's a bunch of them in this missing time between when they're written all the way up to Papias. And Papius, we don't even have Papius' words. We have Eusebius quoting Papias from the 300s. Then you have Papias that says in 130 that Matthew compiled the logia, which is sayings, of Jesus in the Hebrew dialect, which what we have now, a lot of people, which I know you'll probably push back, but a lot of people feel like this was written in Greek. Right? So we have a Greek narrative, whereas Pete Papius is saying we have a sayings gospel in Hebrew. Yeah. So that's my first, like, maybe Papias isn't describing the same Matthew that we're talking about. What would you think about that?

SPEAKER_03 8:39

I mean, I guess that's possible. And and it might even make sense if the original, you know, say Matthew recorded his gospel if it's intended to a largely Jewish audience that it perhaps was written in Hebrew. Uh I mean, some of that stuff could could make sense, you know.

SPEAKER_01 8:53

Well there's no surviving one of all, not a fragment, not a nothing. And everything we have is Greek. Everything seems to and and you know, obviously there's there's debates in scholarship, but the the from my from what I've looked up, it seems like the majority consensus is that it was, it seems like the syntax seems to make it seem like it was written in Greek originally. Okay. And so, but I mean, then we're then we're at the well then we're using a scholar battle at that point. But like from what from what I see, it seems like the furthest we can go back, with evidence-wise for sure, is that we have a Greek narrative and we have Papias talking about a sayings in Hebrew. Yeah. Another thing that makes me think that Papeus may not even be talking about the same thing is goes back to our buddy Judas. If he's talking, if if Papius right here is saying Matthew wrote down the sayings and he's like, okay, that means he must have a copy of Matthew, right? Or at least he or we're thinking they may have just heard about it. Because if he has a copy of Matthew, he clearly doesn't understand how Judas dies. And in Matthew, it clearly says that he hung himself. Yeah. Papius has this wild story about Judas swelling up while he was alive, while he was alive and being ran over by a chariot and bursting. That's pretty hardcore. Yeah. So it's like Eusebius is and and Eusebius actually calls Papius dumb, basically. Yeah. Or not Eusebius, Irenaeus, which is the next guy we'll talk about in a second. But Irenaeus calls Eusebius dumb, but still uses him when he needs him and then dumps on him when he doesn't need him. But so he doesn't understand this guy, Papias, 130, the 130-ish, the earliest mention of Matthew, this guy doesn't know about Judas for sure in Matthew. So that's interesting. So he's giving me a description that doesn't necessarily line up. And now he's telling me that he doesn't know some of the things in there. And you might say, well, but if he's gonna take the time to write about Judas, you think he would look at, well, what did the gospel writers say about Judas, right? Yeah. So that's interesting to me. And so the papias, for a lot of reasons, it just doesn't cut

Irenaeus And Naming All Four

SPEAKER_01 10:54

it for me. Um, so then we get to Irenaeus, right? And Irenaeus is a very famous dude. He's the heresy hunter. That's the dude that's after folks. Uh Irenaeus against so-and-so. Irenaeus against so-and-so. He was against more people than he was for, probably. But uh, I mean, and you could argue this guy was the one, one of the main people in charge of like making sure the version of Christianity that one out made it. I mean, he was fighting the Gnostics, he was fighting the Marcionites, he was fighting everybody. Anyone wanted to throw hands, he had hands, he wanted to fight. And so that's when we get the mention of all four. That's our earliest deal. And that is in 180. And so that's a hundred years after my dating, and that's probably somewhere closer to 110 or 20 to your dating later. Yeah. And so when I look at them, when I see people have referenced the gospels, but they don't say nothing about it. Even Justin Martyr says, when he when he says the memoir, the only time he meant he mentions them somewhere in between there, and he says something about the memoir of the apostles. But like Luke and Mark aren't apostles.

SPEAKER_02 11:54

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 11:55

So like there, so like I'm not seeing the I'm not seeing the clear from here to here transmission that that so after Irenaeus, he's a big dog. He's a he's an important fellow, and he plays a big part in the stuff that wins out the wins. Because Gnosticism is a form of Christianity, it's just wrong one to a lot of people's opinion. So I mean after that, heretical. Yeah, heretical. Yeah, after that, he gets um oh do what did I just say something heretical? No, no, I was saying Gnosticism is. Oh, yeah, heretical. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I thought I said something heretical. Oh my god, I'm going to read Usibius again. Uh no, uh, that'll get you right. But uh, after Irenaeus, then we have a steady line of transmission from there. And it was like, but but but that's the thing. If this important church father does finally name him, it it gets less impressive to me that now everybody is saying that. Yeah. Because it's like we not now we're not getting this independent deal. It's one guy that's important said it. Then it catches on. Then, okay, then everybody else after that, if I make some type of it's like Einstein. Nobody would have done like the theory of revit relativity. Once he said it, it's like, okay, yeah, now everybody knows about it. It's gonna get quoted all the time. So I'm not necessarily seeing this um from A to B basically transmission to be so smooth as it's like, well, the early church fathers just knew it was Matthew, right? But I'm saying, like, where?

SPEAKER_03 13:24

Yeah. So I uh a few things that I would just add and and kind of push back on that a little bit. So the the reason why so many people claim that there's a a kind of like a smooth transition here of them knowing what what the gospels are written is is because throughout church history and other historical writings, we we just have no other really debated claims of authorship. Like the primary authorship are the claimed authors of the gospels. And so uh that's why they often act like it's a clear-cut thing, because we don't really have a lot of evidence-based uh history to claim otherwise. And so any of that uh to make claims, you you could kind of speculate maybe about a few of those writings or whatever. There, there's no strong evidence to suggest otherwise. There's not a debate early on, and then you're you're taking away uh a lot of the checks and balances that they would likely have within the church themselves. So um, you know, kind of like the early church fathers, you you look at Paul and some of the apostolic authorities, they're they're gonna be headhunting false theology, false letters. They knew that that stuff was was happening. So it sounds like, you know, your view is is maybe that Matthew is is pseudographical, like it's it's written by her perhaps a false author.

SPEAKER_01 14:33

I'm not even saying it's a false guy. I'm just saying that it being attributed to Matthew was a later thought. Oh, so it just might not be Matthew, we just don't know. Yeah. Okay. So I'm saying it it would seem like an educated Greek guy wrote that, but maybe a Jewish background.

SPEAKER_03 14:46

Well, and and and well, and it's possible that he had a scribe, uh, which which I would argue that a lot of the letters.

SPEAKER_01 14:53

Matthew, because I mean Matthew probably would have been illiterate. Uh yeah, we can go the tax correct route. I don't you know how tax collecting worked back then, right? It was uh, you know, the Romans would would uh give out tax contracts. And so a wealthy, a wealthy Jewish guy would go and buy a Roman tax contract, yeah, and then he would go contract out workers to sit and boost. So I mean we find Matthew, he's not, he's probably not in any way, shape, or form uh doing very much anything with the Romans at all. Um he he probably has someone above him that he answers to, yeah, and he's just a dude in a booth, you know, and he's the one collecting taxes in the booth. Yeah. Right. And so hated for sure. And hated for that. Yeah, because yeah, but that intensifies that. When I learned what tax collectors actually did, I was like, dang, I know they would hate it if they were. But there's a system to where along the way each person gets paid. The low men get paid, the the dude that bought the tax check contract is definitely getting paid. And so it's like you're internally, your people are making money off of the people at the bottom. They're already over tax, they're already living under oppression. It's already a terrible thing. So it sure is.

SPEAKER_03 15:59

Well, I, you know, I think to go back, I guess, to clarify on the gospels, I, you know, I think that there were ways that they would um that that they would kind of check, you know, some of that system as far as what letters they're receiving and then what would be transmitted throughout the churches. And so, uh, you know, kind of like a lot of the Pauline epistles, like they're gonna send a lot of these letters, one, uh, if not delivered them in person, they're gonna send them with someone that would be familiar either to that church or be a familiar person of interest uh to, you know, someone of authority. So if you have some random guy who's showing up to the church delivering some letter who's supposedly by Paul, some of that stuff might not make as much sense. And and Paul begins uh specifically, and we could argue in some of the dating, which which of his letters were written before the gospels or whatever, uh, your dating might play into my favor on this argument, but that Paul's writing it even in Galatians, uh, he's going against what is typical of this time of antiquity of writing letters. He begins to sign his name and documents and all those things because he knows pseudographical works have been trying to be infiltrated into the church. So they begin to mention themselves within the body uh of the writings and Paul before I would put all Paul's letters likely before the gospel.

SPEAKER_01 17:11

A lot of, yeah, yeah. A lot of them, at least. Trevor Burrus, Jr. Well, I mean, I think he dies in 64. And I like I say, we're we're not ever gonna meet in the middle. But yeah, I mean, somewhere in there.

SPEAKER_03 17:20

Yeah. But you know, like so him noting that, it it makes you recognize that the early church knew that this was happening, that this was a danger. They're already a watchdog on theology.

SPEAKER_01 17:28

So they're gonna just put Matthew on there and follow Paul's example.

SPEAKER_03 17:31

Well, yeah, and perhaps this could have been before that became a little more of a widespread practice within the church. But at some point, uh a lot of those things began to take place because they were putting in this system of checks and balances. So I would just likely argue they're sending a letter uh to a church, probably through an individual that they would recognize the authority uh and and receive it from. Otherwise, uh they're probably gonna begin to throw away some of this stuff. And especially if it doesn't add up theologically. That's where you know you really begin to uh to kick out.

SPEAKER_01 18:03

Yeah, they start throwing out like the Gospel of Thomas and the proto-gospel of James and the emphasis gospel of Thomas. For sure. And then it takes a long time for some of these to get kicked out, like the Shepherd of Hermes or the DK or the um like even First Clement almost made it. There's a lot of these things that that's later on.

SPEAKER_03 18:18

And some of it depends on the region and where they were, you know, kind of being uh transmitted, and some of that stuff comes into play too. And they might not have been it's spread out once the Gentiles get it.

SPEAKER_01 18:26

It's so spread out. It's like how that's that's but I think that might be a part of my counter argument, is that I think that these checks and balances get harder and harder as Paul spreads all the stuff out.

SPEAKER_03 18:36

Well, I think you're right. That would that would be to your detriment, though, the Gospel of Matthew, if it's written particularly to Jews. So this would likely be spread out.

SPEAKER_01 18:44

I think they would be spread out after the temple was destroyed. So they would be in the diaspora at this point.

SPEAKER_03 18:50

If so that would be if you're yeah, if your dating's correct, possibly. Right. But but if it's not, then this would be under close-knit apostolic authority that would be fact-checked by probably some of the most prominent leaders within the church. Right. And and I I think too, you kind of get into in some of these things.

SPEAKER_01 19:06

Um and this would you you didn't necessarily necessarily make the claim that this was like pseudographical, but I don't think I don't think he I don't think it was see, it's my butt yeah, my my personal claim is that I don't think it was written in his name. Yeah. Like where I think Second Peter was written in his name, and I don't think that's from Gotcha, gotcha. And that's pseudographical. And I would say that. That that that that writing is like that. Yeah. I think some of Paul's letters are, I think six of them, there's a chance six of them ain't.

SPEAKER_03 19:29

But well, and yeah, Paul's Paul's letters, that's way more prominent, I feel like, today than that's why I wanted to have an interesting one.

SPEAKER_01 19:35

We could just do the same thing, but I'm like, let's do it football.

SPEAKER_03 19:38

For sure. Yeah. Well, I do think it's interesting. I just, yeah, I feel like sometimes though, we we can look at some of the datings and not recognize that that there were there were systems in place. You're not just receiving random mail and then like, oh, this is God's word. You know what I mean? Like, now let's transmit it to everybody in the world. And uh, there was a system in in place in a in a lot of these things. And I feel like we kind of miss some of that. And then the the gospel of Matthew.

SPEAKER_01 20:05

It has to be like a like a like a the opposite of that too, though.

SPEAKER_03 20:12

What system would you have in the ancient world?

SPEAKER_01 20:14

You know, saying that it's so spread out that that that that there just can't be this type of a system, but it could be.

SPEAKER_03 20:20

Well, and and I think they came to recognize some of that stuff, and you have the you know, kind of the tensions of uh of canonizing scripture and throwing out some of these letters, and they realize, hey, some of this stuff in in these far-out regions and things, letters have infiltrated that we don't think were actually written by these authors, and that's why they were dismissed.

SPEAKER_01 20:35

Well, I mean, even like Eusebius in 300s puts so many on the disputed list, and he's in the 300s. He puts, I'll list them out. He puts 2 Peter, James, Hebrews, Jude, Revelation is on accepted and disputed. He put it in both because I think he was torn over it. I'm confused. I'm confused by Revelation too. So um Eusebius in the 300s has a third of the New Testament is disputed. For sure. And so that's why like, you know, obviously the gospel's where, but I I feel like it has to do with Irenaeus locking them down, and they decide, okay, these are the four, and that's where the because then they cut out all the other ones to or attempt to. But so okay, so but I get you. And and and I think I'll move into more pushback in a second, unless you want to finish, yeah, finish your thoughts.

SPEAKER_03 21:19

Well, the only other thing that I would add, and and this might be what you're gonna ask about, just some of the other letters. So I don't know that I would I would even argue as clear of a line for for Matthew as I would, you know, most people want to disregard John because of its theological implications, how how it changed. There's a lot of I think reasons you could maybe rationalize some of those things. Um, but say like John's gospel, for instance, like he had close ties to to Polycarp. Polycarp.

SPEAKER_01 21:43

Um but polycarp quotes stuff from them and doesn't say John. He could have just said, my buddy John.

SPEAKER_03 21:48

Yeah, maybe. Uh but but but some of those things were off also typical of their time, especially if they would consider that their writers would be familiar with the writer or their readers would be familiar with the writer. And and Paul does that, you know, when he's uh I mean he's quoting orators and poets and things of old throughout scripture. He doesn't name drop them. He just uses the quote everybody in the audience knows who it is. It's like, dude, if I start dropping maybe not scriptural quotes, but like office quotes, I know most of my friends are going to start giggling and know exactly what I'm saying. And I don't have to say, you know, that it's it's from the office. And so some of that stuff, I I think uh I don't know. I I think there's a little bit of an explanation, but but the gospel of John particularly, you know, Polycarp was a disciple of John and was appointed bishop over a church by John. And they think that there's like a heavy relation there. And so uh some of those things, you would just likely assume uh that there's some fact checking, like checks and balances between some of these people who had close ties on this one to two generation gap or you know, a hundred-year gap, whatever one of claims. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, um, but but you know what I mean, at least a couple of generations gap, we we could probably go back and at least on a number of those letters, you could probably pinpoint a couple of early church fathers who would who would likely be in relation to apostolic authority. Um, and so I think that's why a lot of scholars just say, hey, we have a pretty clear line here, because in this time we have no debate of this. Not until 150 years ago was this much of a debate at all. Right. And so all of this that uh is kind of being discussed is a modern thing that we would say 2,000 years later we know better than the people who were 50 to 100 years after the letters were written. And dude, I just I think that's almost laughable, just to be honest.

SPEAKER_01 23:33

Well, I I mean I I think I would push back on that a little bit. It's like we have look we we do have resource, some resources, and we I know we clearly think different than they do. For sure. And there wasn't no textual criticism. There wasn't a lot of that stuff. And uh there wasn't a we're talking about guys that didn't have a library, you know, like they couldn't just go to the library, like I have the internet, like even though the internet could lie to me, obviously. But I mean, we're resource heavy, more resource heavy. We learn more, we with more misinformation than any time before, though, too.

SPEAKER_03 24:03

Yeah, facts, facts. So more but yeah. Well, and and just uh I'm trying to regain my thought here. Uh I think another thing that I was just gonna mention, so the the writing styles of, say, like the different Pauline epistles, all of these letters, that that stuff gets um while while we try to, I guess, invalidate a lot of these letters uh because of the difference of vocabulary and writing, a lot of these things are happening in in different places. Paul's in different circumstances, using different scribes, people that are helping him write. Like it makes sense that this dude probably doesn't have the same vocabulary as the other one who's helping him write the letter before. Uh I mean, all of these things are kind of happening and it's moving target. So uh, and a lot of these, like you said, I mean, a lot of the apostolic fathers were were kind of uneducated guys. These weren't the sharpest dudes in their culture. God chose them. Yeah, John or God chose them. I mean, and it's it's really a mighty message that he, I mean, that God selects the unqualified to use for mighty purposes, um, but but that they would have to rely heavily on other people to help them write the gospel. So there's often, you know, it's it's assumed that there's a kind of an oral transmission going on in several, I believe at least a couple of the gospels, they're even language like inclusive language. Like we believe we write, we uh there's an inclusive language almost as in this assumption.

SPEAKER_01 25:21

I think there's some B line. Yeah, that that we're writing this and is writing X because of the B lines.

SPEAKER_03 25:27

Well, and that we're writing this kind of together and getting our thoughts together. So, so that there's kind of a few people at least, we would assume, that are pulling together and trying to help bring this work together, I guess.

SPEAKER_01 25:37

So let's, yeah, I like that. I like that. That's interesting, super interesting.

Markan Priority And The Synoptics

SPEAKER_01 25:41

Uh more on Matthew, because I'm not done. Yeah. Uh let's think about this. Okay, if we think Mark wrote first, right, and if we look at the percentages of how much of Mark is in Matthew, if we look at like if we start to look at the synoptic problem, right? The synoptic problem that Matthew, Mark, and Luke are all very similar, and yet there are places where they are almost perfectly lined up. There's places where there's stuff that's just in Luke and Matthew. There's places where there's just stuff from Mark and Matthew, Mark and Luke. You start trying to draw arrows and trying to figure out who used who as a source. I'm pretty confident from I say confident, this is just from what I've been studying. Um, really going in on the synoptic deal, it really seems like Matthew and Luke use Mark as a source because they don't not, it's not necessarily just the timelines and just the words, but um sometimes the Greek is the same. Sometimes Matthew keeps some some Greek that's not all that clean and he just copied Mark. And uh I think it's interesting to think about why they changed certain things and why there's this and that and why there's not. But to zero back in, if Mark wrote first and Matthew is an eyewitness, why the hell is he to 90% of Mark into his deal? And obviously, I'm not saying word for word, sentence for sentence, but there are instances of word for word. Oh, yeah. And there are sentences. There's a high percentage of what Mark's gospel. 90% of Mark is in Matthew.

SPEAKER_03 27:07

And that's the only basis that we really believe that Mark's gospel came first.

SPEAKER_01 27:11

Like when you begin to study this, it's yeah, but it doesn't make any sense because if Mark looked at Matthew first, then he was like, ooh, virgin birth. Yeah, nah. Sermon on the mount? Yeah, that doesn't cut it.

SPEAKER_03 27:21

Yeah, unless he wanted to write a more summarized version of it. Which I mean, just leave out the best parts about it, don't you, man?

SPEAKER_01 27:26

Leave out the Sermon on the Mount, the virgin birth, and the resurrection appearances. I mean, I think me and you would ag uh would you agree that six that Mark 16, 9 through 21 is probably added?

SPEAKER_03 27:36

Uh yeah, it could be. I mean, it's it's definitely debated, and uh it probably depends on what you mean by added and what what the biggest is.

SPEAKER_01 27:42

Well, I mean it wasn't in the earliest manuscripts, so like Vaticanus or Sinatus.

SPEAKER_03 27:46

Yeah, possibly. Or you know, I guess to address that briefly, I I mean, there are a number of you know, passages throughout scripture. Like my Bible, uh you usually read from the ESV. Like it notes all of those. All of the SV. Yeah, so I mean it notes all of those. So like I don't have like, oh, I'm surprised. You know, like no, it's it's saying that you know some of these things are kind of under a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a writing in a stand likely wasn't in there. Yeah, and and so a lot of those things uh when when it says it's added, uh mean it's it's uh it's present in various manuscripts, but not in others. And so a lot of people believe that there were questions about those texts. So scribes and things throughout the tradition, a lot of these writings, uh, there were notes in the margins of these texts to help explain then to churches as they're sending these letters out, and that eventually a lot of those just got copied into the the body of the text. And so the argument, I guess, for for most scholars' sake is not uh, do we have uh the scriptures? It's it's really it's that we have like 110% of the scriptures. They're like we have the body there. Yeah, plus the variance. Yeah, and some of those. So they give you the extra. You know, this might be commentary, this might be added, this might not should be viewed exactly, you know, as the same as some of the others. Yeah, like drinking poison and handling snakes is probably not on your priority. But it yeah, but it it certainly adds some. When I read that, I was like, damn, that's crazy. I'm afraid of snakes. I'm not getting anywhere close to that.

SPEAKER_01 29:11

Well, Jesus said that Jesus said after he uh he said that you could drink the poison and not die and handle snakes. It's in Mark 16th. It's it's fun. Uh, but no, I'm just saying, like, if so Mark cuts off there. I personally believe that it was, you know, I think that was Adelaide. I don't think Jesus told them to drink poison and stuff. I just don't think that. Yeah. But so I think Mark's gospel ends with the the ladies running away from the tomb afraid, and then it just the end. And I think that when Matthew saw that, he's like, oh hell no, you know, and not necessarily didn't say that, but yeah, that's my translation, the Joe Till translation. Do not buy that Bible. Um, but then you know, then there's more, there's more appearances later and and and that. But so like if Mark wrote first, he saw the appearances of Jesus and was like, no, I'm not writing that part. And I think that that's why a lot of people tend to feel like Mark goes first. But then that makes the question, why? Why? So, like, okay, so think of this analogy. So, like if I walk in a bank, right? And uh I'm a journalist and I walk into a bank and I'm there to make a deposit. But while I'm in there, a dude comes in with a gun and is like, hey, get on the ground, bow, bah, pow, start shooting into the sky. Everybody's like, ah, they get on the ground, he starts separating people. He goes up to the lady, he makes the lady uh give him all the money, she takes him to the safe, and he he, as he's leaving, he takes two shots, bang, bang, and then he leaves, right? And then so I saw it, I eyewitnessed it. We have a lot to talk about, I witnessed it for sure. But I witnessed that when it's time to write my story, that would be like me saying, Let me go find another journalist that wrote that didn't witness it because Mark was not an eyewitness, he was possibly of Peter. Where do we get that from? Shout to Papiists. We don't trust papiers. I don't trust papius. So that's our first mention, that's the first ever mention of Mark being tied to Peter in in that way, and that Mark wrote down the preachings of Peter the best he could remember, is basically. And that and Papius says that they weren't in order. So Papius just flat out says, this is the Jesus story through Mark from Peter out of order. Yeah. And that's papius, anyways. So, but that would be like me going to find another journalist, me taking 90% of what he said, a lot of his sentences, some of his words, some of his exact English, because I don't write Greek, we're not Greek journalists. Yeah. And then that's my story. Now I add things, I add a few things in there to make it cool. Yeah. Like I add the mask and I add what was on the mask, and I add that, um, you know, that he shot two times at the end, where the guy in the middle just said he just shot at the end. And I give a little bit more detail, possibly because I'm on the inside. But why would I take 90%, 80 to 90%, let's be fair, of what this other guy didn't see. Yeah. So what would you say to that?

SPEAKER_03 31:53

Well, yeah, no, and it seems like in the synoptic problem that Mark probably is written first, that Matthew and and Luke at least, you know, likely heavily utilize that within their text, at least, and and so we don't know exactly why they would do that. But perhaps Matthew does this for chronological purposes, like trying to follow the flow of of Mark. He does that for sure. Uh yeah, and so some of those things we just don't know. And maybe, you know, I mean, I don't know that I would say it's for recollection purposes, but but struggling to try to put some of these things together, and then, you know, some of it could be, hey, people are asking more questions and want to know more details about these stories and what's happening, and Matthew wants to recount some of them and he wants to give uh give more detail because he was there. I mean, I I mean, all of this is speculation. I don't know, you know.

SPEAKER_01 32:38

Well, there's like there's 25, there's 27 books of the New Testament, and only two of them have the virgin birth in it. Yeah. So it's like things like that. It's like, why did Matthew put that in there? Was that a tradition that was floating around? Why does Paul not say anything about it? Why does Peter not say anything about it? Why does none of the none of the other, you know, that's 25 different opportunities to say, oh yeah, and he came from a virgin? But Matthew looks at Luke and says, Oh, you know, and I'm not saying that he made this up or nothing. I'm just saying that that's something he added. There's something as he's looking at Mark, he's like, we need to put this story in. Yeah. Maybe he got it through oral tradition, maybe a separate tradition, maybe there's some cyber source. But Mark doesn't seem to know that Jesus was born of a virgin.

SPEAKER_03 33:20

Yeah, I mean, I that's kind of just an argument from silence. But yeah, we we don't know if he if he knows or not. And if he's in, you know, being dictated to or kind of translated from, say, Peter, then Peter knows. You know, I mean, he he he knows, but for some reason. Yeah, I now now that I don't know.

SPEAKER_01 33:38

But even when you say argument for silence, I thought you can always say that in debate, but I'm like, then we have to think of like probability and possibility, right? Is it possible that Mark just decided not to? Or like, why, like if I'm thinking about what's probable, why is there only two places that they say it? You call that argument for silence, but like at the same time, like like percentage-wise, it's like more people are saying that more people don't mention it.

SPEAKER_03 34:02

Yeah, well, so I, you know, I think there's, I mean, some things that we could kind of speculate towards for sure, but um, you know, we we we don't know exactly why, you know, they write some things and some don't, and what the developments were that were happening within the church. And perhaps there were questions or poor theology being raised, um, and especially even today, like understanding the divinity and yet humanity uh of Christ. Like some of these things become more of a foundational belief. Like they might have come to understand more the importance and significance of some of these things. And so they begin to include that, not necessarily a development over time, but they perhaps could be seeing, hey, this is this is more important because this has been disregarded and it needs to be a part of this narrative. Okay. Um, and so I mean, again, all of that is speculation just because we don't know what was happening within the church, what questions were being posed, what false teaching they were trying to address, what message he was trying to communicate to his audience. I mean, there's just so many so many factors. Right. And I'm not saying I'm right here.

SPEAKER_01 35:01

I'm just saying that that like I just I wanted to think more than just that's an argument from Silence. And I get that you that that you can say that. That's fine. I can't say that that's not. Yeah. It is in a way, but it's like I just want to think more about it.

SPEAKER_03 35:13

Yeah, but I uh if yeah, if the the author is Mark and he is being, you know, kind of or rated too from Peter, then Peter knows, you know, uh better than anyone. Yeah. Better than yeah, I I would say Peter knows better than than anyone, you know. Um but but anyway, yeah, no, I think I think it's interesting for sure. And yeah, there's just and and again, you know, all of that is coming from this assumption, too, that we have the synoptic problem figured out and that all of it has happened in correct order.

SPEAKER_01 35:42

No, I don't have the the pro I don't claim to have the synoptic problems.

SPEAKER_03 35:44

Well, but that's that's what I'm saying, and that's why it's called a problem. We try to make the best of it. But to say if Mark was not the first gospel, then a lot of what was just you know argued is like, oh that doesn't, you know, mean squat. Uh right. And so some of it uh But do you think it's probable that Mark wrote first when you look at all the evidence? I mean, just because of scholarship says so, yeah. I mean, I would I would agree. Uh, but again, you know, I I don't know. And what would be nuts, and let's just say if this was possible, if Mark didn't write first and a lot of those quotations and things were the same. That would be insane.

SPEAKER_01 36:20

That wouldn't you just say that Mark had Matthew as a source and the quotations are the same? Yeah, yeah, possibly. And we and how about the what about the spots where the quotations are almost the same? Like where they intentionally seem like they've choose a different word or so. Yeah, and it could just be, yeah, from from the scribe or translator, whoever is helping writing, you know, is used to different language or it could also be a different, like, like, like I know this is a bad example, but like blessed are the poor in spirit in Matthew, and then blessed are the poor in Luke. Yeah. What made like, are you saying that that's was transmitted differently, or did Matthew or Luke make a decision in that moment to say, blessed are the poor? No. Blessed are the poor in spirit, or vice versa. Blessed are the poor in spirit, no. Blessed are the poor. Yeah. So I mean, they that seems like uh, and there's tons of those. You know, you have you have double tradition, you have triple tradition, and you even have those few things that are in all four of them. Yeah. Um, like the cleansing of the temples in all four of them, even though John's is out of order. Yeah. Uh-huh. John's has to be out of order. John's the order just has to be out of order. There's no way that Jesus, before his disciples cleansed the temple, survived, and then somehow later cleanse the temple twice. I don't think do you think Jesus cleansed the temple twice?

SPEAKER_03 37:30

Uh no, I I doubt it. Um, but I mean it's I guess it's possible, but yeah, I mean, according to the the other gospels, it seems to kind of happen. Yeah. I mean, kind of leading up to passion and all of that stuff. So yeah.

SPEAKER_01 37:42

Well, three, yeah, because three of them. So like when I I don't know, man, because what what I'm saying is is some of the claims uh they don't like when like of some of these claims don't feel like they're four separate claims. A lot of the claims feel like three claims interpreted differently. Right? So like I don't know if I get three different vibes from reading like a triple tradition in in the gospels, in the synoptic gospels. It's like if one person said it, these two didn't create this new thing or hear that separately if they did copy them. Yeah, for sure. So then that's just like Well, I would agree with that.

SPEAKER_03 38:18

Yeah. Yeah. Well, and and then but but they're trying to transmit this to a different group of people, maybe using, you know, different language and and and ideas that would be more significant to, you know, to their culture or whatever. Um, and you know, one thing, you know, even with uh blessed are the poor, blessed are the poor in spirit, it it kind of comes back to like inerrancy being about truth. What's the truth really deep down trying to be communicated here? Is it talking about the poor who just don't have any money? Those are the ones that are blessed, or are the poor in spirit who are walking in humility and they find themselves yearning, looking to God. And so I think the message in both of those could really, the heart of it could be the same.

SPEAKER_01 38:56

Yeah, but if you didn't know Matthew, you just read that, you might read Blessed is the poor. You might interpret that as Blessed Are Poor People.

SPEAKER_03 39:02

Yeah, perhaps. And and and that's one of the instances too, where I think I would want to go and look at the original language uh and see if there's uh a little bit of a deeper meaning to that word. Uh just uh just for instance, because and this is one of the reasons too why preachers use the original languages all the time, because a lot of those things are lost in translation to the English. There's just a lot more of a depth uh in the original languages. There's you know, kind of a multiple meanings. There's there's kind of a uh kind of a well-roundedness and and solid interpretation that comes. And so I I don't do that as much in youth group, probably. Uh but yeah, I mean, pastors do that all the time. And there's a reason for it because a lot of times when you go back, it kind of clarifies some things.

Eyewitness Limits Inside Matthew

SPEAKER_01 39:42

But that would be interesting to look up and just see if that kind of how much of this do you think uh Matthew eyewitnessed himself?

SPEAKER_03 39:50

How much did he see of of Jesus and his ministry? I mean, I would think the majority, the majority of the biggest.

SPEAKER_01 39:54

Okay, so so do you think the order is wrong when they mention Matthew at chapter nine? Yeah, I don't know. Um because that would have him missing the Sermon on the Mount, that would have him missing uh the pigs going off the cliff. Uh that would have him mentioned, that would have him missing a lot of things. It's interesting that Matthew doesn't get mentioned until Matthew chapter uh nine, verse nine. And then uh there's just just the deal where in the other ones it's like Levi the tax collector, Levi the tax collector. Then it's the exact same wording basically in Matthew talking about itself, but he changes Matthew. Yeah. But I don't think it's I typically I still don't think it's Matthew, but possibly it doesn't matter. Then in chapter 10, they get sent out on missions. Right. So I've got Matthew showing up in chapter 9. Yeah. And then by chapter 10, he's out on missions. And then we don't see him back together. And like you said, you can say this is from silence. This is just an observation. We just have to, like I said, think about it. We don't see him back together with the gang until the like chapter 26. Right. So obviously he could have, you know, we don't we don't know when he came back, right? But like if I'm holding to the Bible and I'm saying, okay, what can I gain about how what parts of the story Matthew was there, looking directly at the Bible? I see him entering the scene at nine, I see him leaving the scene again at 10, and then I finally see him back together with the gang at 26. That would have him missing the majority of all the action.

SPEAKER_03 41:16

Just because particular he wasn't particularly mentioned in text in between. Is that what you're saying?

SPEAKER_01 41:20

Right. And you can get out of it by saying he came back from the missions, dude. But what about before?

SPEAKER_03 41:25

That the disciples come back and give report to Christ. So I mean, I mean the assumption obviously would be that he's a part of those groups. Now, I don't know particularly where I would say in Christ's ministry that that he was called. That's an interesting question I've ever been asked before, and I would be interested to know where he comes into play if you mention at all in the other gospels. In the other gospels, is it called Levi? Yeah. And so I would no, I'm just saying I would be, I would be interested to know where in the chronology.

SPEAKER_00 41:49

Oh, okay, in the other ones.

SPEAKER_03 41:50

That's very interesting. Let's ask. I would like to ask that. Is that cool? I have no idea. So I've never I've never been asked that question before.

SPEAKER_01 41:56

But well, see, I was I was listening to Matthew in the car the other day, and I was like, um, and I'm I'm preparing for all this stuff. I said, man, I'm gonna ask all these crazy questions. There is, and then I was like, it's like Matthew chapter nine. I was like, okay, cool, they get to read it. And then it's like, then they came upon a man, Matthew, a tax collector. And I was like, chapter nine? Yeah. Like the Sermon on the Mount, the pigs, like all the stuff. I'm like, what do you mean? They didn't, they, they do, he's missed some and very important things. Yeah. Feeding the 5,000, he's missed a bunch of stuff. Um where is Matthew introduced in the timeline in the other gospels beside Matthew? Is that how you would ask that? I don't know if I asked that right now.

SPEAKER_03 42:39

Yeah, we'll see what they spit out.

SPEAKER_01 42:41

Uh okay, so yeah. That's interesting. That's very interesting. And Market has it in chapter two, so that actually seems to make more sense.

SPEAKER_03 42:48

But yeah, you would think Matthew would want to mention himself a little earlier, maybe. Exactly. Yeah. But you you never know, too. I mean, it might be part of the reason if, you know, we're right on the synoptic problem why Matthew's maybe using a little bit of Mark to get some of the things that he missed. I mean, I I don't know. Um maybe so. Okay. That's a hey, that's a that's an interesting thought.

SPEAKER_01 43:05

That's a very interesting thought. Cool. Um, and then chapter five, another one.

unknown 43:09

Yeah.

SPEAKER_03 43:09

So that's interesting, yeah. But so like in his own one, though. But and we also mentioned this earlier, but we know that a lot of the gospels aren't in chronological order, that they're just bringing these up to theologically like kind of make a point. And so, yeah, some of that we would have to go back and try to try to put it in order, I guess, and figure out where we think it would actually happen.

SPEAKER_01 43:27

So I like that. What do you think about all the spots where Matthew couldn't have possibly been there? When you say he's an eyewitness, you you trust that if maybe someone else with Jesus comes back and tells them what happened, you take that too as eyewitness. Technically, in those moments, he would be an eyewitness of an eyewitness. It's interesting they never even claims to be the writer never even claims to be an eyewitness in Matthew, which is interesting. Yeah. But like in the moment, if if Matthew doesn't see a story, he's not technically an eyewitness, he would be the eyewitness of an eyewitness at that point, right?

SPEAKER_03 43:58

Well, I think that might be true of the other. Gospels as well. That they they write just to include things though that are eyewitness details. And I think that's one of the things that scholarship has pointed out over a lot of those letters. They've gone through and counted how many details would have to be communicated from someone who would have been there unless it was just completely made up. Oh, I could think of 20 of them. Yeah. And so that's why I think a lot of those things they they pull in from eyewitness. And and I mean, say uh Mark and a Luke would be some of those instances, which Luke at the beginning of his Gospels makes that kind of argument. And he doesn't he doesn't say that he's an eyewitness. He's saying that I've done my research, I've gone and talked to all these people, I'm writing to you. Pretty much so you have assurance of faith in all these things that you've heard that you know that they're true. And so he just flat out says it at the beginning.

SPEAKER_01 44:43

He's definitely not an eyewitness.

SPEAKER_03 44:44

Yeah, and he he just says that. And so I don't know that they necessarily have to be, you know, for the gospel writers for this to be true.

SPEAKER_01 44:51

Because you'll be arguing with somebody, although you won't be, but I will be arguing with somebody, and they'll be like, Well, how are you gonna argue with the eyewitness? I say, Well, well, let's well, what do you what do you mean? Like that word, like Matthew didn't eyewitness the entire thing. Matthew didn't witness the transfiguration. They would have to come back down the mountain and tell him. Yeah. He couldn't have been there for the secret meeting of Herod. There's no absolutely no way. How are they all gathered in the Garden of Gethsemane? And um, how do they even know what Jesus prayed while they were asleep? How do they know the secret meeting of the of the high priest? The high priest is sitting there scheming on him, and their whole group is over there. How can he know that? How could he know there? I mean, there's there's a billion of them. There's not a billion of them, not that many, but there's a lot of instances where Matthew can't just be the eyewitness. And I'm fine with him saying that he's an eyewitness of an eyewitness. Yeah. But I think I would just challenge that blanket statement that I get hit with a ton. Yeah. How are you going to argue with the eyewitnesses? Yeah. It's like, brother, he couldn't have eyewitnessed some of this stuff. You have to agree on that.

SPEAKER_03 45:46

Well, yeah, and I think that's a possibility. And I'm sure for all of the disciples, there were likely little moments, you know, that they missed. But by and large, you know, the assumption, I think, historically is that they practically lived together for three years and followed Jesus. So like so you think it was three years? Well, you kind of have to with John, don't you? Yeah. I mean, well, most for the most part, I think that's the general view. When you read the synoptics, too, how long do you feel like it is? I mean, just reading through, probably not that long, but um, but again, I'm sure there's, you know, when you read through a chapter or whatever, you don't you don't really know how much time it's taking place, how much time it's taken them to get from, you know, Jericho to Jerusalem and like all this. You just don't know. And so they're gonna they're gonna cut some of that stuff out. If you're watching a TV show, you know, with every one of these long, I'm brushing my teeth this morning. I know you just you cut some of that stuff out because nobody wants to watch it, you know. Right.

SPEAKER_01 46:33

What about the trips to the Passover? Well, there's more in John. You think that that that just wasn't the concern? Like they went to Passover and it was just regular, maybe at the other ones, and it didn't stir up a bunch of trouble or getting get in trouble and stuff.

SPEAKER_03 46:45

Yeah, I I don't know. I mean, I I certainly believe like the disciples, then they they kept the feasts and all of those things. I mean, that they they showed up when it was time. Uh, I think that they honored God and remembered, you know, all the things as they were commanded to do. I don't know about the specific number of of instances, but yeah.

SPEAKER_01 47:01

I think there's three in John, and that's why people think his ministry was two years.

SPEAKER_03 47:04

Probably so. And I think that's even in rough, you know, you just roughly say three years because of that, but it could have been, you know, a little shorter um or a little longer. I don't know.

SPEAKER_01 47:12

But um Yeah, but we get like the 15th year of Tiberius to set up, and Lucas saying possibly that Jesus is about 30, and the 15th year of Tiberius is like 29. And you know, Jesus dies somewhere between 26 and 36 for Pontius Pilate. Yeah. So you're kind of creating a window. I think we like Passover full moons happen at like 30 and 33. So it's like he either was had a one-year ministry and died in 30, or had a three or four-year ministry and died in 33.

SPEAKER_03 47:38

Yeah. Well, and and a lot of that too, like the ancient Jewish calendar was like pretty accurate as far as like lunar calendar and how all of that stuff like operated, which is not really doesn't seem like how our modern calendars operate at all, uh, which is which is confusing. But uh, but anyway, no, I yeah, I think all that's it's pretty interesting stuff, uh, for sure. So yeah.

SPEAKER_01 47:58

Let's see. Did I hit all my points? Was that at least interesting? But I at least No, yeah.

SPEAKER_03 48:02

I mean, I think there's a lot of things to consider uh within the gospels, but uh yeah, but by and large, I I think the assumption would be that a lot of them were there for at least the majority of those things, and perhaps, you know, for the things that they weren't there before they they were told and and taught, you know, especially if these if these letters were written, you know, however many years, you know, after the the resurrection of Christ, how how long have they set under teaching and they've discussed this? And, you know, Peter and John and some of these folks, like they're they're talking about the things that the three experienced that the rest of the disciples didn't experience. And I mean, so they're being around and engulfed in this for some time before they record. And so they would be familiar with all of those things, I think, by the time they write the gospels, even if they weren't first hand eyewitnesses of every single event.

SPEAKER_00 48:51

Right.

Closing Challenge And Housekeeping

SPEAKER_00 48:52

Thanks again for hanging out with me on another episode of the Agnostic Bible study. I really hope you enjoyed this conversation as much as I did myself. And my weekly reminder don't just take my word for it, don't take Cole's word for it. Go engage with the sources. Read, learn, chase all this stuff down on your own, and most importantly, know why you believe what you believe. If you're watching on YouTube, like, share, subscribe, do all that cool stuff. It really helps. And if you're on Spotify or Apple Podcasts, please follow and rate the show. Once again, I'm sorry, I was so sick, but the show must go on. I'll find a way to make it happen. So we'll see y'all next episode. Never stop learning. See y'all later.