No, so last day the last thing we looked at what we made loudspeakers really cool and nearly cool But before that we looked at the electric motor and we said this Amrit if you send a current through we called it the armature It was a loop of wire in the magnetic field Then you could actually get the loop to spin current could cause motion And there was a natural question that Faraday in England and Joseph Henry in the US asked They said well if current can cause motion can motion cause current What they were trying to do was to invent the generator, which is how we get almost all of our electricity So we're gonna look at some of the basics today, and then we'll go a bit 3d after that So the obvious question if a current produces magnetism can magnetism produce a current a bit of terminology recall This funky symbol here Hanna we used in the circuitry unit for voltage it stood for EMF It stands for the word Electromotive force and it's terribly named Madison because it's not a force. It's not measured in Newton's it's measured in volts It's an archaic word an old word that refers not to a force But to a voltage in a cell so voltage and EMF mean the same thing and in fact in this unit I'm often going to use the curly E because we're going to have an equation again Lowerly with V voltage and V velocity in the same equation So I'm going to get around that without the wings this time I'm going to say here's actually why we use the EMF symbol because otherwise you got two V's and Hannah. It's confusing Okay Here's what I'd like you to imagine Suppose we have a magnetic field. That's this rectangle. It's an external magnetic field Alex what direction is the magnetic field? What do I type over here? Okay magnetic field is into the page and I don't know your diagram might not a photocopy quite as clean or as neatly but Cody what I'm trying to show here is a metal bar and We're pulling it with a string Down the page or we're have little invisible angels pulling it or something is causing it to move Okay Now because it's metal Charges are free to move in it because it's a conductor So what we're going to do what I'd like you to do is draw one little positive lonely charge right in the middle Even though it's the electrons that technically move we're going to again pretend that the positive move because mathematics is the same thing Which way is this positive charge moving which way is the velocity of this whole bar Hannah? So this is a great right-hand rule review point your right thumb down the page Which way is the magnetic field according to this question? So point your thumb down the page extend your fingers into the page if I'm looking at the board It would be thumb down fingers into the page. Which way is your palm pointing? Palm is pointing to the right This positive will get forced This way all the positives will get forced to the right of this bar and Alex, you know which way the negatives will get forced To the left in fact what you've just done is you separated the charges Technically Madison what you've just done is Exactly the same thing that goes on in a battery except in the battery chemicals separate the charges They do work on the charges. They create a voltage here Movement is creating a voltage Since the charges have been separated which takes work. We have voltage because voltage is defined as Energy per Coulomb or work done on each charge if you really want to think about it The reason Matt you could run stuff from the battery was the chemical reaction Separated the charges it didn't work on the charges So each charge had some extra potential energy which when it went through the circuit it gave that to the electrical device We call this voltage induced by motion induced voltage or Motion voltage because the energy in this case came not from a chemical reaction like in a Duracell but from moving something and Eventually Ailish will build this into a three-dimensional model or instead of moving it will spin it Which is how every hydroelectric generator works and we'll show how spinning something can create a voltage as well and Man yeah, we've solved the energy crisis at least we can create cheap energy cheap electricity in other words Motion can induce an emf and Kim what's emf another word for voltage Here's the equation says find an expression for the amount of voltage induced by motion and it says first of all What's the definition of voltage? I said it was how much work per charge technically potential energy per charge Lorelie, but I'm going to say work per charge because there's somewhat interchangeable And then it says definition of work. What was the definition of work way back when from physics 11 work was what times what? Malcolm you're right Back when you did homework you had some game. Yeah, this is actually force times distance Divided by the charge except Malcolm I'm going to erase the time sign because it looks like an x. I'm really worried Which force? Well as it turns out Malcolm what's separating the charges is magnetic force, so I'm going to put FBD Over Q What was the magnetic force on a moving charge the magnetic force on a moving charge was Q V B? Oh?  They cancel This is going to give us by the way you might want your formula sheet up to you But this is going to give us the equation for induced voltage now Madison They use the emf symbol not the V symbol and I think they write it like this B V and instead of distance they use L for the length of the rod because that is the distance you're separating the charges is a BVL Or is it BLV? BLV oh and we have to add one more thing though all of these need to be perpendicular to each other otherwise You're not going to get much back to your buck Hey, but this is how you can create a voltage by moving a bar through a magnetic field It's a scalar equation because voltage is energy per coulomb, so it's a scalar energy is a scalar and It says here you only get volts when we're perpendicular It's measured in volts Tesla's meters and meters per second If the wire the speed in the field are not perpendicular, we only get a small voltage Example three turn the page. I'll show you so in the first example Cody in the first diagram. I made the bar horizontal and The velocity vertical so they were 90 degrees here I've got the bar vertical and the velocity vertical of this diagram once again Let's look at a single solitary positive right there in the middle It says indicate which end of the wire is negatively charged and discuss why little voltage is created So Madison, which way is this positive charge moving? Well, which way is the whole bar moving? So put your thumbs all of you down the page Which way is the magnetic field? What did I write on the side there? Into the page so extend your fingers into the page which way will that positive charge feel a force to the The problem is it can't go very far to the right before it runs out of room. Oh especially Imagine if instead of a bar. This is a wire a very thin wire I mean yeah, you're gonna have negatives going that way and positives going that way But we said the voltage was separating the charges. You're not really gonna separate the charges Try that again. Mr. Do it. Come on eraser small L so small Classic multiple choice question by the way, they'll give you four diagrams and they'll say in which of these would the largest emf be created I'll bet you three of the diagrams the bar is either parallel to the magnetic field or parallel to the direction of motion It's not that you won't get zero, but it'll be close enough to zero that that's the point So example four Find the induced voltage Created from motion across the ends of the moving wire. Okay is B L V Let's see. Let's look at this diagram is everything perpendicular. Look at the magnetic field Look at the bar and look at the velocity. Are they all 90 degrees to each other? Yep, so we will get a voltage Magnetic field 1.25 length 0.8 velocity Five point two five How many volts will be induced across this bar? What will this bar be the equivalent of as a battery? What do you get Carly? I think it's five point something if I'm doing the math right 5.25 okay 5.25 volts almost a six-volt battery not quite. Oh Which end would be positive which end would be negative once again? Let's put a little positive right in the middle What's the velocity this time? Oh, what's this symbol mean? Which way is the velocity? So point your thumbs into the page Which way is the magnetic field? I think I'm going to go into the page down the page. Oh, I Think this is going to be the positive end. This is going to be the negative end If I was setting this up in a circuit now Victoria right now The charges get separated and then they clump on the end and they're stuck there So the next question we're going to ask ourselves in a little bit is Hey, mr. Do it. What if you clamped wires onto the end? Could you get a full circuit? Yeah? And we'll start running stuff from it for example example five a Plane is sort of like a metal bar Says find the induced voltage across the wings of this plane. Okay The induced voltage the emf is BLV now. Let's double check my length is this way Why don't I use this length because that's parallel to the velocity I want to use the perpendicular length and I think if you're at 40,000 feet or 50,000 feet I think Cody it's reasonable to assume that the Earth's magnetic field is Downwards because it's kind of curvy, but I think when you're that high it's basically heading straight down to the ground probably You know, maybe 85 degrees not quite 90 degrees and pulse it up How many volts would be created across this airplane? With a point zero eight Tesla magnetic field a length of 60 and The velocity of 320 yet fairly big voltage. I Think higher than what comes out of a plug Point zero zero eight. Yes, it is. Thank you, man Otherwise you get a really high voltage Dan what'd you get or Kim? What'd you get? 154 yeah 154 volts more than out of an outlet I have been told that back in the 50s and 60s when they still had smoking on flights that this is what they ran The pop out cigarette lighters from Like they I've been told that they still they actually have a circuit where they bleed this voltage off and into the plane And they use it to power things and why not? It's there It's fairly easy circuit to set up. I gotta confirm that though, but so I've been told how could you set it up? Here's the most basic circuit. I can't just clamp it to something and let it freeze because as soon as it stops moving No more voltage the whole idea here Matt is it's the movement creating the voltage. So what you could do is you could have Maybe a metal strip that was really well greased. So very little friction and just lay the bar across it and Then if you had a piece of string and you started to pull this to the right or invisible angels pulling it to the right or If you put it on an angle gravity pulling it to the right or there's all sorts of different ways to do this Let's see what would happen. Here's our positive charge right here. Which way is it moving? to the right a According to this diagram. So it's all point our thumbs to the right Which way is the magnetic field this time? Out of the page. I'm gonna go thumbs right. I'm gonna fingers out of the page Which way will the positive get forced in the bar up or down? down in fact Kelvin I Think what we're really saying now is we have a current since we're connecting the ends the current Here's your resistor so they don't have a short circuit And now this is acting just like a battery Here's your chairlift not a chemical one this time a motion-induced one Here's your ski hill so that you don't short circuit back to the chairlift of zero and you've got a complete a complete circuit You could think of it as a circuit diagram Like that now not only that as soon as you have current flowing in this case clock wise as soon as you have current flowing Now these charges are moving in two directions Madison. They're moving sideways because they're part of the bar But they're also moving down the bar because they're part of a current so Here's our current Instead of focusing on the sideways motion. Let's focus on the downwards motion point your fingers down the page Which way is the magnetic field still? out of the page Which way will the bar feel a force to the what that means Gary is as you pulled you would feel something resisting you It wouldn't be there, but you would feel it resisting you. This is a magnetic braking system And I got a great demo to show you So I did my lovely demo there and they're talking about building this into also Amusement park rides for example a magnetic braking system, and I think there are some that already have this. Oh and Maybe if we reverse this process instead of a magnetic braking system, maybe we could come up with a magnetic acceleration system that we call a rail gun Well, let's look at that a little bit The final lesson of the year is on transformers not the cartoon, but the actual electric device so Let's suppose we have again a string Angels gravity whatever something is Causing this to move to the right Says the strip below is 12 centimeters long. It's moving at 4.7 meters per second The external magnetic field is 0.08 teslas and the resistance of the rail circuit is 0.025 ohms find a the induced motion voltage, okay induced voltage is BLV Double-check is everything perpendicular velocity is 90 degrees to the bar is 90 degrees to the magnetic. Yep. We will get a voltage The magnetic field is 0.08 The length of the bar is 12 centimeters so point one two and the velocity is 4.7. You're not gonna get a big voltage here This one's quite small When that cool hand it up like it's very like slow it down physics That's as close as all over come to a nice witchcraft kind of a demo with you guys by the way that one there I still remember the first time I saw that and I was just What do you get for a voltage point four five point four five or point zero four five point zero four five. Yeah, I was Saying I don't think it's that big 500ths of a volt. Yeah What does be want us to find Carly? So I'm gonna write down I equals question mark and I do notice they told me the resistance of the circuit This little resistor here assuming this bar is resistance lists which in our magic physics world will be what's the overall resistance of this circuit? point zero two five oh And what's the overall voltage of this circuit point zero four five now I can use Ohm's law V equals I terms are because remember Alex. I said V and this are interchangeable. So I can use Ohm's law The current is going to be The voltage divided by the resistance Even though we have a very very small voltage How many amps of current would this system generate? Kelvin I think higher than that. I think one point eight, isn't it? I think you divided by point two five is at a point zero two five. It's one point eight Which is a pretty good current like that would shock you that you would have felt Hannah see Hannah, what's the last thing it wants me to find on the strip or on an individual charge? Oh That's bill on an individual charge force was QVB a good review for the test on Thursday, but on a magnetic wire It's bill Let's see B equals point zero eight I Equals one point eight L equals point one two by the way this lesson is also some very good review for some of the stuff You'll see on the test What do you need to know on the test three equations F equals QVB? Oh, and if it's moving in a circle Madison FB equals FC and I can ask you to find for the radius or the mass or the Charter whatever F equals bill if it's a wire and then the magnetic field of solar and I'm Malcolm B equals mu naught the permeability of free space and I over L What do you get for magnetic force probably pretty small not Tesla's were Newton's point zero one seven Newton's by the way What if this guy was moving faster if this was bigger What would happen to this number here if the velocity was bigger Bigger and what would happen to the current if your voltage was bigger bigger and what would happen to the force if that number was bigger The reason this is nice for magnetic breaking is the faster you're going the faster It will decelerate you but it will decelerate you in a nice smooth gradual curve the slower You're going the slower the force so you'll come to like if you're going really fast You'll decelerate really fast and then not so and then slowly ease down nice and come to a gentle stop a lot of that idea Did anybody here Drive or parents drive electric car like a Prius or something like that See, I think this is what's going on with that whole regenerative braking. They talk about when you break You actually Gain some of the energy back into the battery. I think they're using this force not friction to help you break Cool Again, it's in three dimensions and spinning so Hannah. It's a bit trickier to visualize but the principle is there Then Faraday and Henry they both asked the next question. They said well What if instead of moving a single piece of metal? What if I move a loop of wire and so Faraday and Henry both they bent a loop of wire into a rectangle So this is a very thin piece of wire and they put it inside a magnetic field They moved it. Which way is the velocity horizontal or vertical? Horizontal which way is this section of wire horizontal or vertical? What about this bottom section of wire? You're not going to get an emf. In fact, just so to satisfy your curiosity if I put a positive there traveling to the right Fingers out of the page. He'd get forced down But he has nowhere to go because of this little thin piece of wire and same with here here and here you're not going to induce an emf Charles what about a positive charge right on the end here? Well, let's see now. That's a vertical stretch of wire So it is perpendicular to the velocity and it is perpendicular to the magnetic field. Which way is it moving to the? Point your fingers to the right, please. Sorry point your thumb to the right Which way is the magnetic field according to this question? So thumb right out of the page. This is going to get forced downwards That way if we're trying to create a current what about a charge at the very front? Well, which way is it moving Leslie to the? Right point your thumbs to the right. Which way is magnetic field out of the page? Which way will the charge at the front get forced? also Downwards and so they found this didn't work because you got opposing currents that cancelled each other out Remember in the circuitry unit we did one day where we had batteries facing each other And if this was six volts and this was two volts, what was my net voltage four volts? Well, if this is three volts and this is three volts if they're both identical, what's your net voltage? Zero what's your net current? Zero so they said okay, that doesn't work very well a loop in a wire No good. Sorry a loop in a magnetic field. No good. You get opposing currents both ease are in opposite directions So they Cancel it was a good thought then they said, okay, let's try something else Up until now Hanna, we've been moving the bar to get power Will power move the bar for us? So instead of putting a resistor and having this be the battery they said Malcolm What if I add a battery to the circuit will the bar start to move on its own? This is going to be the physics behind a rail gun You've heard the term in the news Saddam Hussein was trying to build one about ten years ago And there's there's still a fact. I think the US is pursuing this because in theory you could fire very large objects very fast Very very fast and if you want it to go faster just add more current which we can control very very accurately. Let's look So it says for the circuit below right now Find the induced voltage. Well, how fast is the bar moving right now? Zero so right now the induced voltage, which is B, L, V, Alex If V is zero, what's my induced voltage right now? Zero. Nothing, but we've got a battery here Okay Which way is the current flowing out of this battery up or down? Let's draw the arrow down Stroll the arrow in the resistor to the right Let's draw the arrow in the bar up and let's draw the little arrow on the top to the left And I'm going to call this clockwise or counterclockwise. Which way is the current flowing? Remember our abbreviation for that from the torque unit. Yeah, okay, let's bring that out again counterclockwise What did you say Cody? counterclockwise Now watch I guess that means that a charge starting here goes this way goes this way and Which way is it traveling as it goes through the bar? It is moving It's not moving to the right, but which way is the charge moving because of the battery Which way is the charge moving because of the current because of the battery will point your thumbs up the page then please Which way is the magnetic field according to this question? So thumbs up magnetic field out which way will the bar experience a force? It's going to accelerate. Here's your rail gun Okay, so we said this if you supply the motion amrit you can get a current or if you supply the current you can get motion What happens to the strip? accelerates okay, and Just to help us visualize. Let's put next to this battery. Let's put 120 volts Let's say we plugged it into a plug household outlet. Now. Here's the neat thing example 11 As soon as it starts to accelerate Madison Not only are the charges traveling up the bar because of the battery because of the current But now they're also moving to the to the right as soon as it starts to accelerate The charges now have two components vertical and horizontal they're moving to the right so as it speeds up What happens to the induced voltage? Well if the induced voltage is B? L V V is no longer zero the induced voltage is going to Increase What happens to the current? Well, let's look at a little positive charge sitting right here Now the battery is pushing it upwards. There's an Electromotive force pushing it up, but now it's moving to the right as well point your thumbs to the right Which way is the magnetic field out of the page? Which way will that charge also feel a force? It's feeling a force in the opposite direction of the battery There is an anti-current that we're going to call it a back current in the opposite direction of the source So the overall current I'm going to call that I net decreases By the way, what do you think the biggest this voltage can possibly get is? The max is going to be 120 volts Because that's our source It's sending a voltage in this direction Dan This is sending a voltage in this direction Eventually you're going to reach an equilibrium point where your net voltage is zero because you have 220 volt batteries facing each other sort of Then it'll stop accelerating Kim and just go at a constant speed Okay. Oh magnetic force on the strip Well since magnetic force is bill and We've already said your net current is decreasing What's happening to the force on the strip also? Decreasing it's accelerating less and less and less and less and less fast that eventually it hits constant speed when? When your BL your BLV equals 120 so it's decreasing and what happens to the speed of the strip? eventually Constant when when the net force is zero Hannah when does that happen when the current is zero? When does that happen when the net voltage is zero when does that happen when you're induced voltage exactly cancels out your source voltage oh? And you can solve for V and figure out how fast this rail gun will shoot things Which is probably what they're interested in Does that make sense? Says explain your answer using relevant physics principles. I think we just we just did this is not a kind of a question I would give you as a using principles of physics right to explain a question if I said hey if you double the current What will happen will it go faster or slower that would be a good question, but not the whole details So this setup has several applications the first is on the international space station They've talked about using this to launch the space shuttle from the space station after it's docked Because if the space shuttle is right by the space station like a meter away You probably don't want to fire your rocket engines if your engines are a meter away from the space station fire bad even in space So here is the thought You use the wings of the shuttle itself as your conducting bar You park the shuttle in outer space when you dock it on the space station You have it touching two very well greased metal rods like this or one metal you shape And is there much friction in space all cases probably work, okay? You have a big solenoid creating a magnetic field in this case into the page And then you run a current through this whole system from your solar cells So the current would go this way this way the space shuttle itself acts like the bar So in the space shuttle the current is going down the page point your thumbs down the page Which way is the magnetic field? What are these X's mean into the page extend your fingers into the page which way the space shuttle experience of force There you go. It will speed up and launch Not bad Any moving parts? Nope Fairly no maintenance. Yep, which is especially in outer space if you can build something it doesn't need maintenance So you don't have to do spacewalks to fix it. That's good Spacewalks very dangerous Even if you're doing all the spacewalk correctly those astronauts are taking cosmic rays by the Gatrillion Cancer risk the more spacewalks you do the more cancer risk you do There's a second Replication and it's gonna happen when we look at electric motors Yeah, as it turns out Electric motors do this same phenomenon out. It's gonna be in a 3d spinning situation What you're gonna have to we're gonna have to look at that dance specially because it's too complicated Just to wrap our brain around it right now, but the faster you rev an electric motor The more back voltage it generates until eventually when you're revving full speed The voltage that the motor is creating exactly cancels out the voltage from the plug Which means when an electric motor is running at full speed, you know how much current is actually running through the motor? Zero Which means if your electric motor is heating up, you know how you cool it off You rev it full because if you rev it full you have the least current in it the least electrons the least heat Very unusual for an electric motor if every any of you have ever used a power drill and you feel it getting warm Stop take it off of load and just hold the trigger down and in about 30 seconds if you let it rev with no load You'll holy smokes. It's gotten much cooler. You rev it up to cool it off It's the only motor out there that does that Nice feature we're gonna spend a whole day looking at back EMF or back voltage and some of the uses of it so as As the strip continues to speed up Although it's accelerating slower and slower so it's not speeding up as fast The induced voltage will continue to grow What happens when the induced voltage is equal to the supply voltage? What happens when? that Supply equals That remember what I said what we talked about A B C or D or sorry a B or C you hit a constant speed why your net voltage is zero Because they're two voltages in opposite directions therefore What's your net current zero? Therefore What's your net force remembering that magnetic force is bill if I is zero and there's an I in the force equation? What's your net force? Zero therefore if force is zero. What's your acceleration have to be because f is still in a And if your acceleration is zero, what's another fancy phrase for saying your acceleration is zero Constantly That would be the maximum speed of this rail gun Oh, I don't think I've ever wondered what do they call it a rail gun because there's two railings To rails Now it seems kind of obvious. I thought it was like with a train or something No says find an expression for the maximum speed of this rail gun okay the source Equals the maximum speed is going to be B L no, that's wrong. Mr. Do it get the lowercase B by itself This is why we don't use the two B's of the equation. Let's start getting the wrong B by itself Madison It's going to be your source voltage Divided by That let's try some with numbers example 14 For each instance below find a B C and D I'll draw the line down the middle And we're going to do each one at the same time, so let's do a the induced voltage at the same time now induced voltage Or emf is B L V It's B L V. How fast are we traveling right now? How fast is the bar moving? So what's the voltage just as we start to throw the switch just as we turn this battery on? What's the induced voltage? Zero now I crunched these numbers last class and they were kind of boring So let's crank this up a little bit instead of 8.0 cross that out and cross that out and Make it 80.0. It's moving. Is it even possible? What's my source voltage Is B L V with 80 bigger than 320 can we get it going that fat? Let's find out 0.35 times a length of 4.1 Times 80 how many volts will be inducing across this bar? Working against the initial source battery 115 yeah Anyone else it's Kim. Yeah, okay And Kim all that means is as long as we have a long enough railing And that's why I've ever seen the pictures. I don't remember that in the first Gulf War back in Holy smokes 1990 whatever it was three or four They stopped a ship heading to Iraq that claimed it was carrying oil pipelines and oil parts It had a bunch of long skinny parts and the US military figured It was rail gun parts because you do need a long railing to get it going that fast. It's not instant What's B want us to find the net voltage? What's the net voltage in the first situation? It's meant to be really easy 320 what's the net voltage in the second situation? Well, our source is 320, but we got 115 in the opposite direction 300 oh 205 so still some voltage left if we have a long enough railing this can still go faster see What's the current and direction?  So how many amps are flowing through here now? 24 three sick things 24.1 D Find the magnetic force and the direction Magnetic force on a wire or a bar is bill Magnetic force on a wire or a metallic bar is bill By the way, I'm pretty sure the direction is to the right isn't it because if it was to the left This would be a pretty stupid rail gun.  Although if you had it going towards well Okay, what was the magnetic field I've scrolled down 0.35 Okay 0.35 Current thirty seven point six L four point one What's the magnetic force when we start? 54 Newtons and partway through it's going to be point three five Twenty four point one Times four point one Once we're doing 80 meters per second how much force is on this bar? 35 Newtons is it still accelerating them must be there's an unbalanced force What's the maximum speed of this thing? Well, the maximum voltage is 320 so if I wanted to solve 320 divided by point three five times four point one That's the maximum speed that we can hit over this given distance or with with a bar of that distance rail guns Voltage created by motion induced EMF BLV What's your homework? You'll notice on purpose. I didn't attach questions to this instead your homework is going to be from the great big unit review You can do one six eight 1820 3543 and you can also work on last unit review and right-hand rule assignment Both of which are due Thursday studying and getting ready for your test. I Guess you can also work on amusement park physics if you haven't finished that here's what I would not do I don't think there's anyone here who is completely and totally caught up including the assignment that I just put there So I shouldn't see books closed or people standing and socializing and yacking and all that their stuff You got 15 whole minutes


You're listening to the Naked Bible Podcast. To support this podcast, click at nakedbiblepodcast.com and click on the support link in the upper right-hand corner. If you're new to the podcast and Dr. Heizer's approach to the Bible, click on newstarthere at nakedbiblepodcast.com. Welcome to the Naked Bible Podcast, Episode 202, Hebrews Q&A Part 2. I'm the layman, Trey Strickland, and he's the scholar, Dr. Michael Heizer. Hey, Mike, how are you doing this week? Good. Looking forward to getting back into these. Again, good questions last time. And I've seen the rest of the grocery list. These will be good questions, too. Yeah, absolutely. And again, I just want to echo what I said last week about, man, we got a great audience out there sending in great questions. We apologize. We couldn't get to every question. But nonetheless, we appreciate you sending in those questions. And yeah, these are the sorts of things that I would hope that there are plenty of doubters out there that, oh, people aren't interested in dark, or people aren't interested in this or that. Well, hopefully somebody out there that thinks that way is going to hear this because, and the last one, because again, these are good questions. They have weight to them. They're serious. And with that, let's just jump into our next set of questions and our next question is from David in Higanum, Connecticut. I know that for some, Hebrews seems to speak of one possibly losing their salvation. What if this is actually dealing with inheritance in the kingdom? Moses seems to be a good example of this. In the natural, he gets saved, baptized through the waters, sees the glory of Yahweh yet because of a failure of heart, he doesn't get to go into the promised kingdom. In the unseen realm, the verses and revelation are covered with regards to overcoming, not just being saved. Isn't that also inheritance speak? What if the lost spoken of in Hebrews is one of inheritance and not of just of salvation? Yeah, I think the verses and revelation about overcoming are about believing. You endure to the end. You believe into the end, despite all the terrible things that the visions of revelation are showing or that are happening to believers or potentially are actually happening. I don't dichotomize those two things, but let's try to go back to the beginning here. What the question means to say is that the warning passages in Hebrews, or it's asking if the warning passages in Hebrews are about loss of reward in the kingdom and not salvation itself. Well, first, I would say you can't lose your salvation. You can only refuse to believe the gospel. Nothing you do, behaviorally, is going to result in the forfeiture of salvation. The only way you're not going to have salvation is if you don't believe. It's just clear cut. If you believe you are eternally secure. If you don't believe, if you turn to unbelief, then you're not. There are no unbelievers in heaven. That's all I'm saying by this. There are no people who turn from the gospel in heaven. There are only those who turn to the gospel in heaven. Again, it's really not that complicated, even though it might sound unfamiliar, I realize to a number of folks in the audience. My problem, more broadly though, with equating the Hebrews language to only kingdom reward, is that it suggests there are kingdom residents who have no reward. I don't think that's really coherent. I think Paul like Paul says in 1 Corinthians 4, everyone's going to receive his or her commendation. You're going to be commended in some way, but we're also going to suffer loss. I don't think it's coherent to have kingdom residents that have nothing and have no reward. I have a problem there, but I also think that while some passages in Hebrews might be read the way the question implies, that others can't be read that way. Let's go back to Hebrews 3, go back to this again what I thought I think is kind of a pivotal passage here for the book. Hebrews 3, 12, we'll read 12-14. Take care, brothers, lest there be in any of you an evil, unbelieving heart leading you to fall away from the living God, but exhort one another every day, as long as it is called today, that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin, for we have come to share in Christ if indeed we hold our original confidence firm to the end. Again, sharing with Christ, this speaks to membership, not just reward. Earlier in the same chapter, Hebrews 3, 6, but Christ is faithful over God's house as a son, and if we are His house, and we are His house, if indeed we hold fast our confidence and our boasting and our hope against membership, a little bit after the Hebrews 3, 12-14 passage, Hebrews 3, 16. For who were those who heard and yet rebelled? Was it not all those who left Egypt led by Moses? And with whom was he provoked for 40 years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the wilderness? And to whom did he swear that they would not enter his rest, but to those who were disobedient? So we see that they were unable to enter because of unbelief. Again, I think if you take that idea, this entrance idea, and these other passages, again, let's just speak of membership, I think that's kind of the point that a lot of the language in Hebrews speaks of membership in the family of God, not just reward that extends from or is related to membership. So for that reason, I don't think that the trajectory works really well. Another one, Hebrews 10, 23. Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering for he who promised is faithful. What's the confession of our hope? What was promised? It's not just rewards that are promised. Membership is promised. Membership in the family of God, eternal life as a member of God's family. And elsewhere, not just in Hebrews, but elsewhere in the New Testament, this idea that of Jesus' faithfulness, that theme, clearly speaks of membership in God's family. I'll just do one example here. First Corinthians 1-9. God is faithful by whom you were called into the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord. Again, what the salvation that God had planned, he's going to keep that. God's going to be faithful that because of Christ's faithfulness. And that involves more than just reward in the kingdom. It involves being called into the fellowship of his Son, membership in God's family. So I don't think that these two things are neatly equatable or in many passages even equatable at all. So for that reason, that's how I would approach the question. Becky has our next question. I am finding myself uncomfortable in looking for a better, simpler explanation for substance. Hypostatic, hypostasis. I have found flesh. Body are various other meanings. In Bible College many years ago, I was taught and accepted it was something about who the action was coming from, Christ Jesus or Jesus Christ, and the approach to humans. Now, I don't quite see how that fits in. Can Dr. Mike please address that phrase concept in more detail? Yeah, well good luck for finding something simple. Let's just start this way. Hypostasis doesn't really refer to an action. It's not a verb. But again, I'm either not parsing maybe what the questioner is saying, what Becky is saying, or maybe it's hard for her to express what it was she was remembering. But it's not an action. So this whole part about coming from something I'm not following, that doesn't seem to be even part of the issue. If you read, I'll give you a definition, for example, like Erickson, and I recommend this book, The Concise Dictionary of Christian Theology. It's a little slim, handy book, but the definition of hypostasis there, it goes like this. From a Greek word for substance or nature, the real or essential nature of something as distinguished from its attributes. In Christian thought, the term is used in reference to any of the three distinct persons in the Trinity, and especially Christ, the second person, the Trinity, in his divine and human natures. That's the end of the definition. So it's a short definition. The term actually has a really long and convoluted history. And its meaning, again, it's a noun, it has something to do with nature or essence. It's meaning depends on who's using it and how they're using it. And that's the case with all word meanings. Context is the big thing. Context is king when it comes to how a term is being used. Now I would also recommend, if you want something longer, I'm going to read a couple things here. The first one is from the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, which is a peer-reviewed site, and it's really good. Their entry on Trinity, and if you just go up to Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, I mean we could post the link too with this episode, but their entry on Trinity says this, I'll read part of it. The Nicene formula, the Nicene creed, Nicene formula declared that the son was Homo ucias of the same substance as the father, which was elaborated by the Cappadocian fathers in the dictum that the persons of the Trinity were one ucia and one substance, but three hypostases. This knocked out Arians on the one side, those who said there was a time when the son was not. That was one heresy, the Arians, and the Sibelians on the other. The Sibelianism was essentially modalism, to be technical, modalistic monarchianism, that God is one being, one person who successively takes on different forms or manifestations, different modes. The Nicene formula sort of knocked both of those out of the ring, and the way it was worded that the son was the same substance, Homo ucias as the father, but the persons of the Trinity were three hypostases. Now the Nicene, this is continuing with the entry, the Nicene Homo ucias formula inherited a bit of ambiguity here. Understood one way, the claim that the persons of the Trinity were Homo ucias of the same substance, said that the persons were the same individual, skating dangerously close to the Sibelian claim that they were of one substance, but again these different modes. Understood in the other way, it said merely that they were of the same kind, an interpretation compatible with tri-theism. So there were some problems with the way the Nicene creed worded things. It got picked at after the fact. The Cappadocians, back to the entry here, the Cappadocians attempted to clarify and disambiguate the Nicene formula by employing the term hypostasis used earlier by Origen to capture the notion of individual identity rather than identity of kind. By itself this did not solve the problem. First, apart from their revisionary theological usage, ucias and hypostasis were virtual synonyms. As a solution to the Trinity puzzle, this formula was rather like saying that the persons of the Trinity were one thing but different objects. Secondly, one ucia, one substance, still failed to rule out tri-theism, three different gods. Indeed in non-theological cases, one ucia and many hypostasis is precisely what different individuals of the same species are. So just to stop there, if you're going to use these terms, someone could say, oh that's great, we got one substance, all people are human, but the people are different. They're different peoples, they're different humans. And so if you're going to use this kind of language, ucia, essence and hypostasis, substance, then we've got tri-theism. They're all the same substantially, but they're three different gods. So there was still this problem back to the excerpt. Homo ucias as intended of one substance and the same substance ruled out the doctrine that the father and the son were merely similar kinds of beings. Homo ucias would be the other wording, but it did not rule out they're being distinct individuals of the same kind. That's the tri-theistic problem. The Cappadocian dictum, however, provided a framework for further discussion of the Trinity puzzle. The Trinitarian persons were to be understood as being the same something, but different something else's. And the substantive theological question was that of characterizing the ways in which they were bound together and individuated. That's the end of the excerpt there. So again, I like the way it puts those things. You know, Erickson in his Christian theology, this isn't the same book I just quoted, this is his third edition, Christian theology puts it this way. It's clear that the orthodox formula protects the doctrine of the Trinity against the danger of modalism. You have one essence and then God just appears in different forms. Has it done so, however, at the expense of falling into the opposite error, tri-theism? On the surface, the danger seems considerable. Two points were made, however, to safeguard the doctrine of the Trinity against tri-theism. First, it was noted that if we can find a single activity of the father, son, and holy spirit that is in no way different in any of the three persons, we must conclude that there is but one identical substance involved, and such unity was found in the divine activity of revelation. Revelation originates in the father, proceeds through the son, and is completed in the spirit. It's not three actions, but one action in which all three are involved. Second, there was an insistence on the concreteness and indivisibility of the divine substance. Much criticism of the Cappadocian doctrine of the Trinity focused on the analogy of a universal manifesting itself in particulars. To avoid the conclusion that there is a multiplicity of gods within the Godhead, just as there is a multiplicity of humans within humanity, Gregory of Mesa suggested that, strictly speaking, we ought not to talk about a multiplicity of humans, but a multiplicity of the one universal human being. Thus, the Cappadocians continue to emphasize that while the three members of the Trinity can be distinguished numerically as persons, they are indistinguishable and inseparable in their essence, or substance, or being. Now, again, this is lots of theological jargon, but here's what it comes down to. In other words, all of these people, the early church fathers, the people post-apostolic year, the people who received the New Testament and heard New Testament preaching received the New Testament content written down, all that stuff. These guys are just struggling with what terms would best characterize the phenomena of the biblical text, specifically the New Testament. How do we talk about what we see in the New Testament? You could say in the Bible, but since we're talking about Christology, it's really a New Testament sort of focus. The Bible doesn't come with an instruction manual on how to parse its language or what words to use in your language to express what you're seeing in the text. It just doesn't. The Sola Scriptura idea isn't really helpful on points like this, but at least it does seek to place the biblical text as the ultimate touchpoint for what we're talking about. Again, this is the spirit of what we do, the naked Bible. We want to understand the text in its context. What's the context for hypostasis language? My answer is the Old Testament, the Second Temple period, and the wider Ancient Near East. Now I think summer's work on the bodies of God, that book I've referred to it a number of times, is particularly helpful here, even though the way he talks about some of his examples sounds modalistic. Summer is a Jew. Summer is a Jew. I always want to put that S on the end of his name, but it's Benjamin Summer, S-O-M-M-E-R. He has really good examples, but sometimes the way he talks about them, he sounds like a modalist, but I don't think he's really caring because he's Jewish. I'm thankful for his examples, but I just want to note that they don't have to be understood modalistically. They can be understood in a better way. Now I would say had the early church fathers known about some of the stuff that summer ferrets out, they would have been helped in their discussion about the vocabulary to use. So the goal here isn't mere theologizing. We're trying to take note of the text in context, then trying to express what's there and what ancient literate readers would have fought and just as a little aside here, if modern Unitarians don't like that, well, so be it. I want to read a couple of things from Summer's book just so that you know kind of what I'm talking about. If you have the book, let's just start on page 13. He starts his discussion early on what he calls the fluidity of divine selfhood in Mesopotamia. So what he's going to do in his book, it's called The Bodies of God. How God was thought about in ancient Israel. He's going to start in Mesopotamia, the wider ancient Near Eastern world and he writes, I refer to a type of fluidity we might call fragmentation. Some divinities have a fluid self in the sense that there are several divinities with a single name who somehow are and are not the same deity. If you've read Unseen Rome, that language is going to sound familiar. Then he starts going through some examples from Ishtar, stuff set about Ishtar to make that point. If we go to page 23, he gets into this a little bit more. He says, on the other hand, there are some hints that the divine image, he's been talking about idols, divine images, celem is the Hebrew word for image and salmu is the Akkadian word. So he's been talking about images and their relationship to the deities. He says, on the other hand, there are some hints that the divine image could come to be seen as a god simply known as salmu. Akkadian texts refer to a divinity known as salmu, who seems to have been identical with the sun god. The apparent contradiction between two understandings of the divine salmu, namely that it was identical with a particular god in heaven, that it was itself an independent god, falls away in light of the notion of the fluidity of divine selfhood in Mesopotamia. That salmu was a body of the god. The image, this is me breaking it here, the image he's saying, the Mesopotamians could conceive that you had the same deity in different places. The image was itself a god. He likes to use the phrase, it was a body of the god, but it didn't exhaust that god's being. This is a phrase that Summer uses a lot, that you could have the deity in a localized place and here in this case an object, but that didn't exhaust in the Mesopotamian mind the being or the essence of that deity. That deity could be any number of other places at the same time. There's this fluidity. The god could be in this body, in this object, but it didn't exhaust the god's being. It was itself a god, assimilated into the heavenly god, yet physically a distinct thing that could lose its divine status at any moment, like if you destroyed it. Should the deity choose to abandon it or if it's destroyed? It follows then, page 24, that what we saw earlier concerning the complex self of a god also applies to the god's physical presence. The divine body, like the divine self, can be fragmented, yet somehow remain unifying. Any one body was part of the god, but did not exhaust the god's fullness, just to say god's self was not confined to one person. In short, god's bodies paralleled god's selves. Now he goes on to talk about the angel of the Lord. He goes on to talk about the glory. He goes on to talk about the name, these Old Testament concepts that if you've read on scene realm should be very familiar to you. And what I'm saying is, look, people who just don't like Trinitarian doctrine, it's not biblical, I can't find a verse. It says, well, no kidding. No duh. All right. You can't really find a verse for any doctrine where all aspects of the doctrine are confined to one verse. So that's just silly talk. All right. So dispensing with that nonsense, what I'm trying to suggest to you is that this theological language, this theologizing that the church fathers entered into, to try to come up with a term, whether it was Oceos or hypostasis, that's a legitimate pursuit. What they're trying to do is come up with vocabulary that captures what they see in the text. And again, to use ourselves as an example, naked Bible, what I'm going to suggest to you, what I have in Unseen Realms suggested to you is that look, the idea of having God as one unified person, or one unified essence existing in three different persons and can do that simultaneously, that's an Old Testament idea, and it's even deeper than that. It's an Old Testament idea that would have been familiar to the ancient Near Eastern mind. It is not an invention of Nicaea. It is not an invention of the church fathers. It's not an invention of fill in the blank. It's not. These are concepts that are reflected in the text and that are comprehensible and valid in the context of the ancient Near Eastern world in which the Bible was produced. Okay. And again, if you don't like that, oh well, then just don't like it, but it's true. It's actually true. So back to the question. If you're going to use a word like hypostasis, you should realize the history of it. It's kind of a convoluted history, and it does show up in early church language. It's not perfect, but again, they're trying to figure out what terms best capture what they're seeing in the text, and to go back to Erickson's concise definition, hypostasis is really, again, you could use a word like substance or nature or essence and try to attach those other words to hypostasis to try to help you understand hypostasis and then ultimately how a term like hypostasis gets used in Trinitarian discussion. There you go, Becky. All right. Ken has a question. In the last podcast on Hebrews 13, you mentioned judgment for sins of both believers and unbelievers to come. Concerning the believer's judgment, does that mean sins committed by believers after they have accepted Christ unto initial justification, even if repented of before physical death are judged in the eschaton? Now I have to admit that the wording of this question is difficult, unto justification before physical death. What I think the question is asking is, are sins that believers commit after believing, are those sins judged in the eschaton, like at the judgment seat of Christ or something in the last days? Are sins that believers commit after believing judged later on? My answer is no, sin was judged at the cross, my sins, I was born in 1963, my sins were covered by the sacrifice of Christ, my sins were all future with respect to the cross event, but it still covered them. I was born long after the cross, the sacrifice of the cross isn't therefore bound by time. If it was, passages like John 3.16 and 17 are bogus, and so is most of the biblical talk about the cross, since it is written to post-cross event people. So we don't have a chronological or time limitation to what's going on at the cross, sin was judged at the cross, period, that's when it's judged. A sinning now is a reality, but again, all of my sins, and they were real, and still are real, they were all covered by the cross event. The fact that I was born long after the cross doesn't matter. So sinning now is a reality. Again, 1 John 1, 10, every believer still sins. Sin does not result in the loss of salvation, because salvation wasn't gained and couldn't be gained by sinlessness, and that which cannot be gained by moral perfection cannot be lost by moral imperfection. Rather, sin now results in what it has always resulted in, self-destruction, harm to other people, plus additional factors created by being in relationship to God through Christ. It results in being unuseful to God, in God's plan, so we become tools that don't get used. It results in a loss of blessing. Again, I like the word blessing instead of the word reward, by the way. To me, being blessed in eternal life, in the context when I get my life review, that sort of thing, when we're with the Lord, to be blessed just feels a whole lot more, just feels better than I'm going to get a prize. I just like the word blessing. Maybe that's my own hang-up here. Again, we will know then how God wanted to use us and how we could have been used, but we weren't. So we will suffer some loss, but again, every man will receive some commendation in 1 Corinthians 4 verse 5. So that's how I would answer that question. Janet has a question about Hebrews 12 1. Since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, is witness here in the sense of someone testifying in court or in the sense of a spectator of an event or both? Are those saints of old watching us? Can people in heaven see us? Are they watching me take a shower, Mike? Well, I hope not. Yeah, I would say the answer to all those questions is a qualified yes. Now, I don't think they're all equally in view, but all of them are in view in some way. I'll try to quickly explain what I mean by that. So we have no reason to suspect that residents of the spiritual world can't see what happens here. For example, angels show John in the book of Revelation all sorts of things happening on earth in the book. The angel isn't wearing a blindfold. He's not guessing. He sees things that are going to happen or are happening. He sees the events as well as John. That's one thought. Angelic mediation. It's an Old Testament concept. I get into it a little bit in unseen realm. I'm going to get into it more in the book that'll be out in the summer or fall on angels. But angelic mediation requires that angels know what's going on in our lives. Now, that's about angels, Mike. We're talking about departed Christians. Well, that's good. Good. So am I, because glorified believers are like Jesus, will be made like him, 1 John 3. It stands to reason that their ability, an angel's ability to see what's happening on earth, isn't going to be greater than those of us who are made like Christ. I think we're going to at least be equal and honestly better, because Christ is superior to angels. If we are made like him in glorification, then I think we have every reason to think that, yeah, we could see what's going on on earth. On the other hand, I think we also have good reason to suspect that we'll be more interested in what's going on in God's world than on this one. In other words, I would rather be spending time with the Lord or with somebody like some believer I'd always wanted to meet or something like that, or a loved one on the other side than watching Trey take a shower. I really would. I think what's going on in the heavenlies is going to be a lot more interesting than what's going on here. So that's why, again, I have this qualified yes kind of thing. I think the primary focus here in the passage, this great cloud of witnesses thing is to part of what the question touched on, and that is this idea of a witness specifically. We're surrounded by believers who have finished the course and who have inherited what was promised. They are witnesses to the fact that they have an eternal address in the household of the counsel of God. They testify, they witness, they bear witness to God's promise being fulfilled.  You know, gods were penciled in in treaties, and they were listed in treaties as witnesses to a covenant being made. So there's some relationship to that. In the biblical instance, this kind of language occurs in several places. I think personally the most interesting one is Psalm 89. And I'm going to draw attention to an article by Atheodore Mullen. Now, that for those of you who are really into the Divine Council, you're going to recognize that name right away. It was Mullen's Harvard Semitic Monographs book, I think, published in the 80s. Yeah, I think it was like early 80s on the Divine Council that really, you know, sort of started, you know, interest in the Divine Council study, you know, outside things like a dissertator. I mean, it was a really important book. And again, I referenced it in Unseen Realm a few times and in other places. But he also wrote an article called The Divine Witness and the Davidic Royal Grant in Psalm 89 verses 37 through 38. By the way, those references are in Hebrew. In English, it's going to be verses 36 and 37. That was from the Journal of Biblical Literature in 1983. And I'm going to post that article in the folder for newsletter subscribers. But I want to quote a few things from it, just so that you know what we're talking about here and how it applies to Psalm 89 that I think ultimately the Hebrews 12. So in page 208 and 209, Mullen writes this, within the context of the recent scholarly emphasis placed upon the use of treaty forms in the ancient Near East, the relationship between the Mosaic Covenant and the Davidic Royal Grant, the Davidic Covenant, has received great attention. While the Sinai Covenant is most commonly associated with the Hittite-Suzarenty-type treaty, the best parallel to the Covenant with David is found in the royal grants, which depict the unconditional promise of the king to the vassal as a reward for faithful service to the suzerain, to the king. Then he writes, our focus in this article will be Psalm 89, 37 through 38. Again, the English verses are 36 and 37. And here's what it says in English. Now, verses 36 and 37, it says, his offspring, again, the Psalm 89 is largely about the Davidic Covenant, his offspring shall endure forever his throne as long as the sun before me, like the moon it shall be established forever, a faithful witness in the skies. Okay, those are the two verses. Now, back to Mullen. He says, this passage presents a motif not found in the Oracle of Nathan, 2 Samuel 7. That is the concept of a divine witness to the Davidic Royal Grant, the witness in the heavens, the aid bashakak, witness in the clouds, witness in the skies. Verse 38 is the guarantor of the grant. And as such, places the poetic promise to David in Psalm 89 solidly, both within the mythical religious concepts associated with the Covenant motifs in the ancient Near East in this period, and also within the legal requirements associated with royal grants. Now, I'm going to rabbit trail from Mullen for a moment here. Do any of you recognize the in the clouds phrase shakak? Again, if you've read on scene realm, if you've heard me lecture, you should know where that comes from. The other time that phrase is used is also in Psalm 89 a little earlier in the divine counsel scene. Divine, you know, Psalm 89 verses six and seven, for who in the skies bashakak can be compared to the Lord, who among the b'nei eilim is like the Lord, a God greatly to be feared in the council of the holy ones. So, you know, we're going to come back to that because the same phrase occurs two different places in Psalm 89. One is clearly divine counsel and you have this other witness in the clouds thing going on. So back to Mullen on page 214. He writes this, the parallelism of verse 38 would tend to equate the witness in 38b with the moon in 38a. This is the identification made by Delcor, who notes that the image of the moon as a faithful witness evokes the juridical imagery of treaties in the ancient Near East where the sun and the moon are named as witnesses. These two heavenly bodies along with heaven and earth represent natural opposites of creation which preserve the covenant with Israel or David. These opposite pairs or olden gods in ancient Near East are often cited as witnesses in the rieve that is the lawsuit genre in the prophetic works. And he gives a few references and they have a twofold function. Not only do they ensure the efficacy of curses or conditions but they also guarantee the stability of the covenant itself. Hence, if this witness in the heavens of verse 38 is to be identified with the moon, the very nature of the universe guarantees the stability of the covenant grant. The promise that the throne of the offspring would be before Yahweh like the sun, in other words eternally, further connects this concept with that of the treaty witness in the ancient Near East. But Mullen says on 215 to 216 he says, yet this identification of the witness in the heavens is not wholly accepted and he doesn't accept it either. This is why he transitions here. He writes this, in attempting to identify the witness we should note that verse 38 does not specify a definite figure. The phrase denotes a witness not the witness. In the same manner it should be recognized that this witness in verse 38 is compared to but not identified with the moon. Just as the throne in verse 37 is compared to but not identified with the sun. Both words employ the preposition khet in Hebrew which means like or as. This places the witness in the heavens on a level comparable to that of the sun of the moon in status and function. Perhaps a further clue to the position of the witness is contained in Psalm 89.6 through 9. This is the divine counsel scene so here he goes. The depiction of Yahweh in his heavenly court. It is most interesting that the phrase bas-shakak occurs twice in this Psalm once in verse 7 in the form of a question and once in verse 38 in the form of a promise. Both occurrences presuppose some figure who stands before Yahweh in his court. If verses 6 through 9 and 37 and 38 are seen as integral parts of the Psalm as a whole and its imagery, we would assert that both introduce the concept of the covenant into the legal realm of Yahweh's assembly of Yahweh's counsel. That's the end of the quote. Now Mullen goes on and he starts giving parallel data from Ugarat where L is the lead deity and Baal is the co-regent, the vizier. Now again if you've read Unseen Realm, if you've read any of my journal articles, this is going to become important. Baal at Ugarat is the witness to decrees of L. Now I use this in my dissertation along with my discussion of the witness in the clouds as indicating look Baal is the counsel co-regent. I use that to argue that the witness here in Psalm 99 is the second Yahweh in Israelite thought because in Israelite religion the head of the counsel wasn't L and then Baal as his vizier, his co-regent, his co-ruler. In the Israelite version it was the invisible Yahweh and the visible Yahweh. They occupied the two slots. Yahweh occupies both slots. So you have the second Yahweh as the witness. Well who's the second Yahweh? That would be Jesus. So what you have here is you have Jesus, the second person of the Trinity, the Son. You have the Son being a witness to God's covenant with David. In other words you have the eternal messianic Son bearing witness to and therefore validating the covenant of his own earthly kingship and it fits in really well with Hebrews 6 verses 13 through 19 and we can't cover everything in these episodes so here we go with this. We read Hebrews 6 13 through 19 for when God made a promise to Abraham since he had no one greater by whom to swear he swore by himself saying surely I will bless you and multiply you. Verse 15 and thus Abraham having patiently waited obtained the promise for people swear by something greater than themselves and in all their disputes an oath is final for confirmation. So when God desired to show more convincingly to the heirs of the promise the unchangeable character of his purpose he guaranteed it with an oath so that by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie we who have fled for refuge might have strong encouragement to hold fast to the hope set before us. We have this as a sure and steadfast anchor of the soul a hope that endures into the inner place behind the curtain. Now for our purposes again back to the plural witnesses look at what you have here you have God validating the messianic covenant the Davidic covenant the Messiah is the Son of David it's it's completely tied to the to Psalm 89 the Davidic covenant you have God validating his promise to David by means of a witness himself just the second Yahweh figure and that second Yahweh figure is the same one that became incarnate as the Messiah so you have you've God and Jesus promising certifying fulfilling and validating everything between themselves and they can't lie God can appeal to no higher authority now that gets real interesting because in Hebrews 12 we have plural we have the plural witnesses back to the question for our purposes going back to the plurality there we should read the plurality of Hebrews 12 the great cloud of witness again that the witnesses in the clouds great cloud of witnesses we should read that against the backdrop of Hebrews 2 what's Hebrews 2 that's where Jesus presents us presents believers to God and presents God to us in the congregation in the council this is Hebrews 10 or Hebrews 2 10 through 12 we read that scene it's it's us in effect it's believers you know who are in glory in the council being presented to God and God presented to them and Jesus says look these are my siblings he is the guarantor of the covenant so we are the witnesses in the clouds or we will be bearing witness to what original you know what the original witness in the clouds accomplished through his own obedience after which he sat down at the right hand of the father I mean the imagery is pretty dramatic and when you when you really get down to it and so the cloud of witnesses idea it it does have you know real hooks back into divine council thinking and if you take it back to Psalm 89 God can promise by no higher authority than himself and it's the son who is the witness to that covenant he fulfills that covenant the messianic covenant and then by virtue of his becoming incarnate to fulfill that covenant we become his siblings and in glorification we are part of the witness testimony so again it's a really it's a theologically you know saturated passage just that one phrase and it has deep ancient naryster roots Mike are you sure that they don't want to watch me take a shower you you don't know you can't say that Elohim aren't watching me take a shower you have no yeah I'm gonna go out I'm gonna go out in a limb and say that's correct you have no idea sir you have no idea what you're talking about because hey there you go like I said I will go out on that limb all right all right this sounds good but what what great questions again we appreciate everybody that sent in those Hebrews questions next week we're gonna get back into some regular Q&As so I'll be looking forward to those questions and then we've got some interviews coming up Mike can we just want to thank good ones yeah we want to thank you again everybody for sending in those questions and we want to thank Mike for answering those questions and I want to thank everybody else for listening to the Naked Bible Podcast God bless thanks for listening to the Naked Bible Podcast to support this podcast visit www.nakedbibleblog.com to learn more about Dr. Heiser's other websites and blogs go to www.brmsh.com


What's going on, everyone? Sam here, relating sports cards. There's been 22, 23, Thompson Wafa Club competition, Stadium Club, Chrome, Soccer, Hobby. Six box break. Number one, random team style. There's a look again at your random results. As always, you can find those on the website under the results tab, as well as the link in chat. That's good luck here, everybody. Let's do it again. Just nine to go in pristine. That's the next break. We've got to fill up nine teams remain. Projections, yeah. Yes, all cards ship. Wonderful. All right, here we go. Let's do it, everybody. Good luck to you all. See some, yeah, see some big hits. Art of Goulash, obviously, the big guy we're chasing here. Or there's a Stefan Vicetic to 75 on the Blue Wave Rookie Auto. Nice one there for Liverpool. Ronaldo and base Bellingham. That's a, I'm going to say, Sepia to 75 of Robert Lavandowski for Barcelona. Nice one there. Comevinga, Cain, Odegard, Osala, Vino Gittin, base, base, base. These look nice, man. Yeah, man, on Stadium Club this year. Goal force, Neymar Jr. I believe this is a new insert this year, the goal force. I believe I could be wrong on that, but I believe it's one of the newer ones. Base, five cards in that. Pink, Martin, Odegard. That's going to be the exclusive one per box on those for Arsenal. Pereira, base, base, base. Say Refractor Rookie of Basetic. Basetic. Goal force, Santiago Jimenez for Fener. There's a championship contributions of Makalo Mujik. Nice insert there. I think you could just do like if there's like a gold or under, and if it's Ducan Blahavich, goal force for Juventus. I'll just, if there's something I want to throw in the recap I'll just let you know as well, but I would say any any golds and under. Pink Wave, Kaka for AC Milan to 150. Nice one there. That's cool. I'll file it out. Zidane, Legends of Europe. We've got Georgino Refractor. Ealing Jr. There's an Ealing Holland. The Holland card's sick, dude. Look at this thing. That's cool. The Holland base looks great, man. Hungman Sun, championship contributions for Tottenham. There's a gold, glimpses of gold, Alejandro Baldy. They're super easy to open, which I kind of like, too. Cristiano Ronaldo, goal force, Real Madrid. Nicolau Barreia, championship contributions to 199 on the Pulsar. Much easier to see the numbered cards this year, too, which is kind of a huge addition, in my opinion. That is a gold, 10 of 35. Hotaf for Celtic. Let's see what that is known as. 35 is Black Gold Electric Charge. That's what that is known as. Black Gold Electric Charge. That is the electric charge, I believe, as a new insert on this one. There's glimpses of gold on my rededic. Refractor at Luca Modric. Base base and more base. And last pack of box one. Good luck, everybody. So here we've got, that is Kiyogo Futahashi Refractor and base. All right, box two. Yeah, to 75, that's Sepia. That's the Sepia Prism. That's what it is, Sepia Prism. Luis Vigo, Legends of Europe. There's Vigo again for Inter Milan Refractor. That is a Martin Odegaard to 50 on the gold prism, I'm assuming that is. Yep, gold prism to 50. Nice one, Arsenal. Martin Odegaard. Kevin de Bruyne. Carboni, Cobbimeno. That is a Gold Force, Marcus Edwards, for sporting and base. This is a Fatahu Isahaku to 275. That is going to be known as the Aqua Wave Refractor for sporting. Nice one there, sporting Aqua Wave. Marc Casado, Refractor Rookie, going to Barça. Auto, Warren Zaire Emery for PSG, nice one there. The Refractor Rookie Auto, congrats PSG. Nice one there. The autos are nice in this too, because of the photography. Stadium Club is always fantastic. That is a Charles de Cattelari for AC Milan on the Gold Force. Ling-Hallen Gold Force, Man City, Sean's Boy, Santiago Jiménez, Fener, Refractor. Green, Electric Charge, Cody Gacpo to 225, for Liverpool, throwing Nunez and base, all base. When it's just the base pack, I'm just going to go through it. I'm not going to stop on anything. Pink Gavi for Barcelona, Pink Electric Charge, not numbered. Base, Papakai Osaka, Gold Force, Rome Buscat to me already here. Alejandro Garnaccio to 350, that is the, but I'm assuming it's Black and White Prism. Yeah, Black and White Prism, it says it's the 350, or 399 on the checklist, but at that one it's the 350. Maybe it's Select Players. Clemson's Gold Alejandro Baldi, base, base, base. Refractor of Gavi, Garnaccio and base. Refractor of Gavi for Barcelona. That is a Killian Mbappe, championship contributions for PSG and base. All right, box two is a memory now, on to box three. Yeah, stuff looks good so far, for sure. Stuff's definitely looking good. Bunch of spots came in. Stephen Dee with a spot tomorrow, Derek with a Luminance spot, Chris M with some Bundesliga, Christian L with a 10 box, three spots in Hobby Jumbo and one in Pristine. There's Zach with three in Hobby Jumbo and Cameron with a spot in Hobby Jumbo. Cameron, are you in chat right now? I gotta tell you a funny story, if you are actually. It's a Martinelli to 125, nice one there for Arsenal. The 125 is gonna be the green, yellow electric charge, green, yellow electric charge prism.  The biggest hit I would say, Lionel Messi, is gonna be like any of the big, big name autos and then Arte Goulash. Arte Goulash is the rookie for Fenner. Gonzalo Ramos, he is the big rookie, does not have base in this, he only has autos in this, but he would be, in my opinion, the biggest rookie auto for sure, outside of the, you know, the Messi's and Rinaldo's and Pink, Samuel Elling Jr. for Juventus, Pink Electric Charge, that is a goal force, Mosala, Hungman Sun, base, base, base. Ronaldinho, Legends of Europe, Refractor Joshua Kimmich, base, base, base. Kiyogo Furahashi for Celtic, Celtic, right, yeah, Celtic and base. This is Dan Headbutt, this is Leroy Sane for Bayern Munich, but I don't hold my breath for it. Green Gonzalo Ramos, 299, goal force for Benfica, a Thiago Silva, Chelsea Refractor. These are pretty nice, what do you think? So far, pretty nice looking, photography is great. Yeah, glimpses of Golgi Malmuziala, their stadium club, I mean, all across the board for every sport, vinegorship, itchip, contributions is always going to have the best photography, for the most part, I would say that's a pretty, pretty across the board, everybody will agree with that, Ansu Fati, especially for baseball, and then they started stadium club Chrome Soccer, I believe last year or the year before, Killingen Bappe, they had it for Bundesliga, they had it for Champions League as well, there's Otto Kodigakpo, nice one there, Liverpool, love Kodigakpo, he was a stud in the World Cup for Netherlands, absolute beast, a green electric charge, Kodigakpo, 225, base, base, base, goal force, Uusveen Dembele, and base, base, and base, and last back to box three, we'll be halfway through everybody, Zappy has been, really? Wow, yeah, you were right, that is nuts, dude, Ravens have waved, what's it called? Ravens wave James Prochet, that's good, oh, I agree on that one, Stephen for sure, yeah, I mean, there's, I don't think anything is going to get close to the stadium club baseball, like even when they make, I'm sure they'll make stadium club basketball and football eventually, but I agree, I don't think it's going to be as good, again, nine to go, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine to go on pristine, let's get that sold out, yeah, I was pumped, they caught Melvin Gordon, I couldn't deal with him fumbling, I couldn't deal with his fumbling, Charles de Cattelari, Schlitter, gold, Santiago Jimenez, the 50 for Fenner, let's not recap it anymore, yeah, he'll go somewhere, Bukai of Saka, depends where, I wonder, but he'll be like a legitimate backup somewhere, I have to imagine, there's Marcus Edwards, what a fall from grace that was though, that is a green yellow electric charge to 125, Pedri, yeah, I'm happy the Ravens caught Melvin Gordon, there's Karim Benzema, he's, he's, he doesn't belong, a black and white Prism Mateo Tonlongo for sporting to 350, yeah, now the dude fumbles every freaking run, it's like enough, enough dude, Alvaro Rodriguez, Riyama Dre to 150 on the pink wave, and some more base, glimpses of gold, a Mardetic, base, base, there is a Erling Holland base, more base, again, like I said, we're just going to go through the base packs, I'm not going to stop really, Marcus Rashford Refractor for, man, United, a Mo Salah Refractor, Liverpool, right, got Liverpool, it's a green auto of Jamie Kerriger, that is going to be 13 of 99 for Liverpool, nice one there, Liverpool, Jamie Kerriger, we do have a Mo that works here, yeah, Cody Gakpo, pink electric charge, one per box, I kept saying, me and Dylan kept laughing about that yesterday when I was sorting, every, every like hour or so it'd be like, Mo, Refractor of Ronaldinho, we'll see him tomorrow, Refractor of Luca Modric, Robert Lavandowski, a Ronaldo R9, base, base, base, and Las Pacquiao, yeah, Lavandowski, Erling Holland, they did do them wrong with that picture, jeez, oh boy, on to the next here everybody, again, got to get Pristine sold out, once that sells out, we only have a couple of baseball breaks left in the night, got to get into football as well, Usmin Dembele, football as well, again, three more soccer breaks to go of this, Erling Holland green to 225, green electric charge, Graz Mansi, very nice, never going to say no to a Holland color, what I'm saying is up gold is Lucas Ucic, say, goal, goal force of Mbappe, man, where's the shtick I want to do, we need a certain parallel for the shtick here, Kiyogo Furahashi, pink wave to 150, nice one there for a Celtic on the insert, I have such a great shtick for this dude, such a great shtick for this one parallel, Yaya Tore for Man City, Legends of Europe, that's Kaby Meno, rookie, Refractor Matias Sule, Juventus, love that hungman son picture, that's awesome, famous last words, that is Mikhail Moutrik on the pink electric charge, one per box on those, Sean's pumped for the new shtick, I know that, there's Jamal Muziala, he told me before he went live, he's like, man, I cannot wait to hear your new shtick, cannot wait, Santiago Jimenez, goal force, said, man, I hope we get it in the first pack, and I hope we get it in every pack, goal force, Ronaldo, Cristiano Ronaldo, cannot wait to hear it, that is a 125 green yellow electric charge of Pedri for Barcelona, these look good man, oh it'll be great dude, it's gonna be awesome, if you're a big video game fan, there it is, Bravo Six going dark, Hugo Ekatike on the night vision parallel to 199, if you're a fan of Call of Duty you will understand that reference, Bravo Six going dark and you turn your night vision goggles on, so there we go, Bravo Six did in fact go dark on that night vision parallel, Warren Zaire Emery at his glimpses of gold, Fabio Moretti for Juventus, Diego Jota, nice one there for Liverpool on the refractorado, thank you Andrew, Andrew if you make the trash list I will go to bat that it's not legitimate, Cristiano Ronaldo, I will go ahead and challenge it, Hungman Son, to explain it, to explain it, I decided to explain it to enhance the experience for everybody, that's why I decided to, oh there was plenty of enhancement, or plenty of enhancement, what did you say? Samuel Illing Jr refractor rookie, that is a Antonio Silva, red 4-5 for Benfica on the glimpses of gold, congrats on that Benfica, going to Noah, let's go Noah, congrats buddy, nice one there, got some more spots coming in, Tyler with a hobby jumbo spot, Austin with the Bears tomorrow, Steven with a hobby jumbo spot, Brad with two hobby jumbo spots, Steven with two 10 box baseball spots, and Hank with a spot on Friday, so thank you all again, again we got to get Pristine filled up, just nine teams remain on Pristine everybody, glimpses of gold on Sufati, Andrea Perlo, AC Milan refractor of Nicolò Borea, is another Cody Gagbo auto, congrats Liverpool, love Cody Gagbo, he is a beast, congrats on that on the refractorado, Foa Levehur, and Rafael Liao, see a super out of this today, that'd be cool, I bet the supers look great in this, that is a green yellow electric charge, Jota 2-1-25 for Celtic, again a lot of new parallels, the electric charge being the new pattern this year which is pretty sweet, I will say, Yusofa Mococo or Dortmund, glimpses of gold, Gavi, Cristiano Ronaldo, base base, that is a green glimpses of gold, Matisse Tell for Byron Munich to 99, nice one there, congrats Byron, he's another stud, got a Karim Adiyemi for Dortmund, West Ham, the Hammers play again on Friday morning, pump, 9 a.m. baby, Erling Holland refractor, let's go Hammers, Hammers had a big dub, big dub against Brighton, Chavi Simons, but he's Bournemouth, Bournemouth this year, I still don't know who, I gotta ask Kyle who is team, is Robert Lavandowski, I don't know who is, because you have Man City, Lane Tatatum fan, I don't know who Kyle is a fan of, that's the one I'm interested in, Gonzalo Ramos for Benfica, he's gonna be like, no, I like players, Kevin de Bruyne, pink electric charge for Man City, Manu looks so, Manu's been horrible the last few years, Lautaro Martinez, they've been a disaster man, that is a pink wave, Alejandro Garnaccio, rookie 2-1-50 for Man United, congrats on that, Manu, last pack of the break, good luck everybody, here we go, let us see, that is gonna be a base pack, very nice, do a quick recap of a couple of our nicer hits, we had a gold prism, Martin Odegaard for Arsenal to 50, red glimpses of gold, Antonio Silva for Benfica, 4-5, Autos, Cody Gacpo for Liverpool, Diego Jota Liverpool, Jamie Carragher for Liverpool, Cody Gacpo again for Liverpool, Warren Zaire Emery for PSG, and Stefan Batsatik for Liverpool as well, Liverpool with 5-6 Autos, not bad, that'll do it for the break guys, thanks again for the film, up next number two.


Now, the director of the Indonesian Trade Promotion Center, Andrew Jonathan, said Nigeria exported goods worth $700 million to Indonesia last year. Explain that while Nigeria's total export to the Asian country was $700 million, its import from Indonesia was $300 million. He described the trade volume as a positive growth sign for both countries. Jonathan disclosed this at a briefing in Lagos to announce the equipment and manufacturing West Africa 2021 exhibition. He further stated that for Indonesia to close up the trade balance with Nigeria, there is a need for the country to export more commodities to Nigeria.


Hello, my name is Pat DeAngeles and I am running for a District 2 Town Council seat. I hope that by taking a moment to view this video you'll find reasons to support my candidacy. I moved to Amherst with my partner Carol and our son Jesse 25 years ago for two very important reasons. The quality of the Amherst public schools and our desire to live in a diverse and collaborative community, the Pomeroy Lane Cooperative, which was conceived by abodes whose members were parents of physically and cognitively challenged adults. Our family along with 24 other families moved into the co-op. We were intentionally diverse. Our households were labeled low income section 8 and market rate. We were Asian, European, African and Latinx Americans. We were gay and straight. We had varying degrees of understanding about issues of social, economic and environmental justice. We were ordinary people embarking on an extraordinary adventure and along the way we changed. The assumptions that we held about each other were blown apart and we began to see the strength and creativity inherent in our community. We learned to see and acknowledge our differences and find ways to collaboratively solve our problems that arose. This experience, this community showed me what Amherst could be, provided lessons I have carried forward into my work as a teacher, an activist, a town meeting member and now a council candidate. We face a variety of issues as a town, perhaps the most challenging being the divisions that have occurred over our schools, our form of government and who gets heard, divisions that need to be bridged. As candidates we talk about appropriate development, sustainability, social justice, funding capital projects and preserving the character of our town, but we often mean very different things. We talk, but we need to start listening. We need to find what binds us and build out from there. So how would I look at the challenges we are facing as a town? What values would support my decision making and ability to collaborate with other councilors as we look at economic and development issues, create policies and procedures that foster sustainability, focus on the quality of our schools while balancing issues of social, economic and environmental justice. One of the most important lessons I learned living in the co-op and also as a classroom teacher was the need for all voices to be heard, for all ideas to be considered, researched, analyzed and reconsidered. I expect to be actively involved in using citizen advisory groups composed of the people who would be most impacted by our decisions as well as other stakeholders. The goal of the committees would be to truly reflect the values and meet the needs of the community we serve. My son Jesse went through the Amherst Public Schools finding himself challenged, listened to and taken seriously, which was not the case for all of his classmates. As a teacher and learner, I care deeply about the educational, emotional and physical spaces where our children learn. As an educator, I hope to be involved in meetings with the school committee, teachers and administrators and most importantly our students and their parents to get a clear understanding of need and to find ways to provide that need. I feel strongly that we need to continue to develop downtown areas and village centers so that they meet the needs of homeowners and renters, students, young families and the elderly as well as residents who are physically challenged and residents who are homeless or find themselves in need. And I believe that we can work with developers, business people and neighborhood people to both preserve the character of our town and make sustainable changes, changes that are green, creative, long lasting and that benefit all the members of our town community now and in the future. And what I will bring to the council is curiosity a willingness to research issues in multiple ways and a belief in collaboration. I am a person of integrity and determination who will foster progressive change in Amherst, change that rests on the best of what we have already created and the ways we are growing and challenging our community. Thank you.


Can you expand from, and that's a good point, you guys have a good brand on delivery, being able to deliver, but Track Record matters. Talk about some of the things that people need to know about around what you guys have done in your Track Record because this SLA kind of vapor that's out in the cloud is elusive for a lot of companies don't have a lot of delivery capabilities. There's a lot of cloud washing out there or as cloud washing, people say they're cloud but they're not. Can you talk about that Track Record and what makes that CSC formula work and how does that fit in the cloud and big data? Right, but one of the things people don't know about CSC is that within the $16 billion company we've got a $2 billion software business. So one view of the Rubik's Cube, if you will, is we've got an SAP within the company where we have the business model is largely software license and maintenance. And these are vertical applications, predominantly in the financial services and the healthcare industry. So with that insight, think of an SAP and Oracle business model, we're actually transforming those businesses. The leaders of those businesses are trying to figure out how to deliver their business critical applications which support mission critical processes in a more effective model, i.e. through cloud. So we're living the business model transformation and we're also living the experience of using our own infrastructure and our cloud strategy to transform these business models internally. And as we do that, as we drive this enterprise transformation we'll share those insights with our clients, with other ISVs. And this goes back to the, again, been there, done it, doing it. We don't do it arrogantly, but there's a lot of rich learning that we're able to share with our clients. And that's really what we're doing around the cloud, around applications, software as a service, and then business process as a service. In those models, the final point is we're actually been in this business for about five years now, we're on the BPO side, where we get paid by the outcome. So when you think about insurance claims transactions, you think about banking back office transactions, we're actually offering services to clients, mainframe based today, where forget SLA's and a quality of service, we're getting paid by the business outcome. And we think that's the future of cloud and everything we're doing today is to take that knowledge and understanding of where the market needs to go, where it wants to go, and to begin to build their starting today. So it's clearly a journey. That's a real.


Have you affected fire? Have you affected fire? Use! Set the pace! Pick up the right! Whatever is 3, fire! Team, base of fire in your position. Hold fast. Hold fast. 0-4-2-7-3-7. Danger close. How copy? Yes, sir. With 1-3.


I want to address in this video the specificity of PIN assayment on the STM32 which are based on Cortex-M33 with Streszone activated. In this context, each generation of configuration will generate a secure project and a non-secure project, and you have to assign the PIN, when you define one, to the secure world or to the non-secure world. Let's start with the basic GPIO configuration. If I select PA8, I left-click on it, GPIO output. Now, when I right-click on it, I've got an additional item in the menu, PIN reservation. If you keep it free, there is no initialization code that will be generated in the both projects. That means your PIN is not configured in the code. So you have to select secure or non-secure. For example, I will take secure. I can double-check the configuration in System Core GPIO. I've got the PIN context here, and I can also modify it here. This is for just a basic GPIO. If you select it secure, it will be only configured in the secure project. But if you select non-secure, in the secure project, there is a code that will declare this PIN as non-secure and the initialization of the PIN will be in the non-secure project. Now regarding the initialization of an IP like Usart. You can activate a show context, which shows the context of all the IPs. And in the connectivity, I can select Usart1. Then I can select secure or non-secure. When you select secure for the Usart, the PIN will be associated, will be of course declared as secured. But this is automatically. That means you can configure it by yourself. You right-click on it, you don't have the reservation here. As previously, you can still click on control, press the left button, and change it to alternate function if you need. But this is not specific to secure and non-secure work. This is what I want to address in this video. Thanks for your attention.


I like the halter geltings 1342 where I choose to start with the sleek and balanced one and end with the individual that is the least complete in two. Beginning with 1 over 3, I appreciate the sorrel's modern and athletic look. He is evenly divisible into thirds with a more ideal angulation in the shoulder and hip.  I appreciate that the palomino is slightly more refined in his muzzle. In my middle pair of 3 over 4, I praise the palomino for being more structurally correct. When viewed from the front, I find him to be more square and stronger through his knees and down his cannon bones with a straighter way of going while tracking. I grant that the bay is more petite in his ears. In a bottom pair of more structurally faulted geltings, 4 retains an advantage over 2 in his quality in muscling. He is more refined and shorter from item muzzle and carries more adequate muscling throughout his frame. This is especially noted when viewed from the rear where he is more rounded in appearance over his croup. I found no obvious grants in 2 over 4. Today, I easily found the blanketed brown last. He is the narrowest and coarsest mate of the class with the lightest muscling. To me, his structure should concern any practical horsemen. His left fore deviates outwards and when I step behind him, I notice that he bows out at his hawks, resulting in him winging in as he tracks. Thus, he is last in my class today. Thank you.


So, it's now time to train it. We initially thought that we could make alpha 0 fast enough that you could easily run it within a few minutes and play Othello. It turns out that it takes a relatively long time to train it. It takes a few hours. I don't want to keep you here on the collab for hours. So what I want to ask you right now is just run it for a few minutes, and see that it actually runs, and then you will be able to use pre-trained model just saving you the time that would otherwise produce like a rather boring time between now and you being able to see how well it works.


First on chat, you're friendly priest, your energy is really cool But I have to say that I thought this was about politics. It is. It is. Well jump around. It's open discussion. So We talk about food. As the saying goes everything is politics right now. Your body has become political, right? Our health has become political. Political. Food is political. Drink is political. Education is political. Everything is politics right now. Everything is politics right now.