In the terminology of Mercurial, the revisions, the snapshots within a repository are usually known as change sets. So each time you check in your code from the working directory, you're creating a new change set. Each change set is uniquely identified by a change set ID, which is generated as a SHA-1 hash of the content of that revision of that change set. And a SHA-1 hash is 160 bits in length, and so represented as hex is 40 digits long. But because a 40 digit long hex number is pretty ugly, Mercurial will usually display these IDs abbreviated to their first 12 digits. Now, the purpose of these change set IDs is that you have a unique identifier for each change set, which is unique across all repositories. So when this change set gets sent around to different repositories, it can reliably be uniquely identified. As a convenience though, every change set in a repo is also known by a local revision number. These are numbers assigned to the change sets in the order in which they are added to the repository, starting from zero. Just be clear though that these numbers only uniquely identify a change set within that repository. So the change set with local revision number 8 in my repository is not going to necessarily be the same change set with local revision number 8 in any other repository. By convention in Mercurial, the local revision number and the change set ID of a single change set are displayed in this form, with the local revision number first followed by a colon, then the short form, the 12 digit form of the change set ID. Every change set in Mercurial has a parent, the only exception being the special null change set, which is an empty change set and the parent of the first commit. So here in this diagram we're representing a repository where we've made three commits. The first with the local revision number zero and a parent of null. The second with the local revision number of one and the parent of local revision zero. And the third having the local revision number two and local revision one is its parent. So we have three successive snapshots of our working directory. So the user of this repository first created their project. They initialized the repository to create it. They did a bit of work. They added some files into their project and then they made their first commit. Then they did some more work probably adding more files, editing their existing files and made a second commit. And then did more work, made more changes and made their third commit. A very important concept in Mercurial is that the working directory is sort of like a pseudo change set itself. It's a change set in waiting that we have yet to commit to the repository. And very importantly, the working directory has a current parent, meaning if we were to then commit the working directory, the new change set would have the same parent and the working directory's parent would be updated to be the new change set. So the working director's parent is automatically updated every time you make a new commit, but you can also manually change the parent of the working directory, which is something you will do when you want to create a new branch based on an older revision. So here for example, we've updated the working directory's parent back to the first change set and so now if we were to commit, this would create a change set whose parent is that first commit is localRevision0.  It's the head with the highest local revision number. Before this last commit, the repo only had one head, revision2, and that also was the tip because it was the only head. When it comes time to merge two branches, we update the working directory to have two parents, not just one. In the working directory, we then go about the business of merging these two versions together into one and then we can commit our merge as a new change set which will have these two parents and as usual the working director itself is updated such that the new change set is its single parent. One of the most important concepts in Mercurial is that change sets are immutable, meaning once a change set is created it can't be modified and even more restrictive you can't even delete change sets. Once a change set is in a repository you don't get rid of it. The general reason for this is that the versions of the files in a change set are not necessarily stored in whole. Most of the time most files are stored as diffs based upon the previous version. The versions in the parent of that change set. And in fact in that parent there may not be full copies of the file either. There are likely just diffs. So when a particular version of a file is retrieved from the repository it is reconstructed from a bunch of diffs applied to the original version in the original commit. Though actually in some cases Mercurial will decide that in some later change set rather than storing a diff it makes more sense to sort that version of the file in whole for that change set. So what's stored in a change set is first a manifest of all the files, a list of all the files in that particular revision and then you'll have for some files in the manifest you'll have just a diff based upon some earlier version or you'll have a snapshot which is to say a whole copy of that particular version of that file. And then also in the change set of course is stored the parent ID or IDs if there's two which is the case when you're merging together two other change sets and then there are a few other pieces of media information like a time stamp of when the change set was created usually the name and email address of the committer, the person who made the change set and then also a commit message just a short textual description about that revision supplied by the person who committed it. The first two Mercurial commands we'll look at are init and clone. Init short for initialization is used to create a totally new repo whereas clone is used to create a repo which is a copy of some other existing repo that is a repo in which all the same change sets are present. As you'll see when we clone a repo the repo from which we are cloning is very often remote it's somewhere out there on the network. First though we'll demonstrate cloning a local repo a repo which resides in the local file system. So looking at the command line on my Unix system I have my user prompt here reading Brian at Ubuntu that's my username and then after the colon is the shell's current working directory and tilde is just short hand for my home directory so slash home slash brian. And for the first command here I write hg space init space foo hg is the name of the Mercurial binary the executable file located in my bin directory hg remember is the atomic symbol for Mercury and the commands called hg on Mercurial because hg is much more convenient to write. And the general pattern with the hg command is that the first argument is the name of the sub command we're invoking. Mercurial has a few dozen sub commands init and clone are just the first two we'll look at. So here when we write hg init foo foo is the argument to the init command in this case init is expecting you to specify a directory in which to initialize a new repository. So assuming I didn't already have a directory named foo hg init will create it and then in that directory it will create a sub directory called .hg and we demonstrate this by listing the content of the foo directory with ls-a foo. Recall that by convention in Unix files and directories beginning with a period are considered hidden directories and files meaning that the ls program doesn't normally list them. So we use the hyphen a option here which tells ls to list all the contents even the hidden files and directories. Now this .hg directory that is the actual repository that's where the chain sets and all the other information the repository needs gets stored. The directory foo itself is our working directory for that repository. So later inside foo we'll be adding files and committing them. So now having created this repository in our last command we clone it we clone it to a directory bar also in my home directory and as you can see once the clone operation finishes McAriel prints out two lines on the status of the new repository. So there's a bit of an asymmetry there when you use clone it prints out some status but when you use init it just does so silently without reporting anything. I guess because when you initialize a totally new repository it's just always just this empty .hg directory so there's never anything to report. To send chain sets from one repository another we have two commands push and pull. In a push you're sending chain sets from your repository to some other whereas in a pull you're bringing in chain sets from some other repository into your own. Pushes and pulls are probably most commonly done between repositories on separate systems over the network but it is also possible to push and pull between repositories on the same system. So for example with our two repositories foo and bar if I want to push from foo to bar I first change directory into the working directory of the foo repository because when you perform a push or pull the repository from which you are pushing or into which you are pulling that's not specified as an option on the command line it's taken from the current working directory of the McAriel process which is inherited from the shell process so that's why we changed the current working directory of our shell first. So once we're in the directory of the foo repository and we invoke hg push the only argument we provide is to specify as the path of the repository to which we are pushing and pull works the same way we specify the path to the repository from which we are pulling. Now the push and pull commands are smart in the sense that they will only copy the chain sets that need to be copied that is those chain sets which the destination repository does not already have and because we just cloned bar from foo before we invoked this push and pull well there are no change sets that one has that the other doesn't have actually both of these repositories currently don't have any change sets at all but the reason it says no change is found is because foo and bar currently have exactly the same set of change sets which just happens to be no change sets at all. Now it's important to understand that the idea with pushes and pulls is that we only exchange chain sets between repositories which are related meaning that one is a clone of the other either directly or indirectly if you have repository A which is cloned from B which is cloned from C or also related just indirectly. Now if you do have two unrelated repositories you can push and pull between them the problem is just that it just doesn't really make sense it's not something you generally want to do in fact it's something you want to avoid doing on accident because it means polluting a repo with all sorts of change sets not related to your project and in fact the way most people work with Mercurial it's common for a repo to push and pull exclusively with the repo from which it was cloned. So with this in mind when you clone a repository Mercurial creates a configuration file in the .hg directory called HGRC which stands for Mercurial Run Commands so for example in our bar repository which was cloned from the foo repository you'll see these two lines paths and underneath default equals slash home slash brian slash foo which is the path to the repository from which this repository was cloned and the significance of the default path is that if we invoke the push and pull commands without specifying any repo they will be assumed by default so I can invoke hg push and it pushes by default to slash home slash brian slash foo and likewise hg pull without any argument is pulling by default from slash home slash brian slash foo so you'll find most of the time when you invoke push and pull hg push or hg pull you don't specify any other repo so now we have the commands in it and clone for creating repos and then push and pull for exchanging change sets between them but what about actually creating change sets well the primary command for that is commit as in commit the working directory create a change set from the current state of the working directory and add that change set to the repo a critical thing to understand about how commits work though is that the working directory itself just like a change set has its own manifest that is a list of all the files which are included in this change set and waiting this change set yet to be so creating new files in our working directory and invoking hg commit is not sufficient to then get those files in a new change set we actually have to explicitly add them to the manifest of the working directory and only then will they be included in the next commit now you don't have to do this for every file included in the commit every single time you make a new commit because the working directory inherits the manifest from its parent change set so you only need to add the files which are new the files which are present now in the working directory that weren't present in the parent change set and lastly in the course of demonstrating these two commands we'll use the log command which lists the change sets of the repo in order of newest first so the log command doesn't actually do anything it doesn't modify anything it's just an informative command it just reports the current set of change sets in your repo so again at the command line notice we're in the slash bar directory so we're in the working directory of the bar repo and we're going to start off by creating a file in that directory called file a with the text content that just reads blah blah and we do so with the command echo which recall is a built in shell command which just echoes its arguments to standard output and then the greater than sign if you don't recall is a shell operator which performs redirection it's redirecting the standard output of the echo command to the file which is called file a which is newly created here if it doesn't already exist and so in the next command if we invoke ls it's listing the content of the bar directory which now has file a notice that .hg is not included in the listing here because we didn't specify the hyphen a option it's still there it's just not being reported in the output of ls here and now having created this new file in the working directory if we try invoking hg commit we get this error message saying nothing changed mercurial won't let us commit unless something has actually changed in our working directory relative to the working directory's parent which is currently the null change set the problem here as I explained is that the manifest for the working directory is currently empty there are no files in it so even though we have an actual file in our working directory as far as mercurial can see it's not supposed to be included in the next commit we can fix this though by invoking hg add and notice here I didn't actually specify which file to add I just wrote hg add and by default hg add will add all files all files which aren't currently already in the manifest so it tells us adding file a it's now there in the manifest and if we invoke hg commit this time it will work though notice when we invoke hg commit we have to specify the option hyphen m followed by a string reading our first commit that hyphen m argument is the message argument when you create a commit mercurial very stringently requires you the committer to actually provide a commit message so that when someone reads through the log they can see what these revisions are supposed to be and obviously our first commit is not a very helpful message but in practice you'd have something more meaningful like here's where we fix this bug or here's where we added a new feature something like that I highly recommend you get in the practice of really coming up with meaningful commit messages in any case so here hg commit succeeds and that creates a new change set consisting of just the file file a and so if we invoke hg log immediately after we can see it's reporting hey there's this one change set it has local revision number zero and its change set ideas starts with digit seven c zero bb eight nine b zero f seven one the tag business will talk about much later ignore that for now user is brand because that's the name I entered in a config file on my system so that's the default username any time I make a commit and mercurial on your system you should enter your name in the config file and then after that of course the date when this change that was created in the time and then the summary that's the commit message so in this example hg log is just printing out one change set because that's all we have we just have the one change set if we had three hundred change sets hg log would print out all three hundred change sets starting with the last one all the way back to the first one so just to be absolutely clear about what a repository now looks like we have this single change set seven z zero bb eight nine b zero f seven one the working directory now has that change set as its parent which itself has the null change set as its parent now when it comes time to remove a file from your working directory if that file was present in the parent change set you shouldn't just simply delete the file because then mercurial will be confused it will expect to find this file in your working directory that isn't there anymore mercurial will consider the file missing so instead of using just the rm command like you normally do in unix to delete files you should use mercurial's remove command which will not only delete the file it will remove it from the working directory's manifest such that it won't be included in the next commit when we demonstrate this will use the status command which shows the status of the working directory that is it shows which files have changed relative to the parent of the working directory which files are set to be added which are set to be removed and also which files are missing that is which files you've deleted without actually removing them from the manifest so resuming our previous example if we start out by using hdremove to remove file a that will remove file a from the manifest of the working directory and also actually delete the file from the working directory and then in the next command we create a new file file b and then next in the invocation of ls the content of the working directory is currently just file b there's no file a because we just removed it and now when we invoke hgstatus it reports that file a denoted with the r is marked for removal and file b is denoted with the question mark because there's no file b in the manifest of the parent change set nor in the manifest of the current working directory so material is not currently tracking this file as we say and now when we make a new commit the new change set doesn't include file a nor does it include file b in fact it's empty there's no files in this manifest so in fact if we now recreate file a and then invoke hgstatus what it reports is that both file a and file b have a question mark because neither is present in the manifest of the working directory nor in the manifest of the parent of the working directory the clear about the hgstatus command that it doesn't list all files in the manifest of the working directory by default it only lists those about which there's something interesting to say like is this file b added has it been modified since the parent is it set to be removed is it a now a missing file denoted with an exclamation mark that is is it a file that according to the working directory manifest is supposed to be there but for some reason is not and question mark again but basically means not tracked it's a file which is there in the working directory but is not being tracked it's not listed in the manifest of the working directory nor in the parent change set of the working directory to copy versions of files stored in the repository into your working directory we have two commands revert and update which serve quite different purposes the revert command is so called because the idea is that you revert some file in your working directory back to its state from an earlier change set and it does this by reconstructing the file from the diffs and snapshots actually stored on the repo and once the version of the file is reconstructed it's then copied into your working directory most commonly the revert command is used to revert a file back to its state from the parent of the working directory so in your working directory you're working on the next version which you're going to commit but you make some mistake you tie yourself up in knots and you decide well I'm just going to scrap these changes and revert this file back to its previous state so that's how revert is most commonly used and if you don't specify any particular revision for a file it will just by default use the revision in the parent but occasionally it is useful you can specify some early revision some other revision and revert the file to that revision instead of necessarily the parent of the working directory the purpose of the update command is quite different with update we're generally bringing the entire working directory in line with some previous revision we're putting everything in the working directory into the state it was in for a specified change set and very importantly the change set to which we are updating that becomes the parent of the working directory in fact this is the primary command by which we specify the parent of the working directory so anytime we want to go back to an old revision and make a branch off of that revision we first do an update then we make our modifications in the working directory and commit and that change set will be a new head effectively a new branch in the repo so for example if this is the state of our repository and we wanted to create a new branch off of the first commit well first we update back to that change set that puts all the files in the working directory back in that first change set and it also modifies the parent of the working directory now to now be that change set if we then do our work in the working directory and make another commit we've effectively created a new head a new branch so going back to our example on the command line remember that we've made a second commit but the manifest of that commit happened to be empty there were no files in it and yet our directory contains these two files file a and file b so hg status reports them with rx meaning that these files aren't being tracked and if we then attempt to update back to the first commit which is local revision 0 here the hyphen r argument stands for revision well the update doesn't complete we get this error saying that there's an untracked file in the working directory which differs from the file in the requested revision and that's file a because if you recall in our first commit we have a file a and so mccurals being cautious because if it's going to update back to that first and it's going to need to clobber that file and because mccurals knows that this file a the one we've newly created isn't in the repository it may represent work that we don't want to lose so mccurals being cautious here but assuming that we know hey we don't care about that file it's okay if we clobber it then we invoke update with the hyphen capital C option which stands for clean but what it really means is to if necessary clobber any files necessary even if those files might have work that has not been committed so the invocation update here reports that one file has been updated that is the file a has been clobbered with the version that existed back in the first change set and if we invoke htstatus then it tells us oh there's just one file now which is present in the working directory but is not in the manifest of the working directory or in the manifest of the parent and the parent again here is the original change set the first change set local revision zero but as the ls command makes clear file a and file b are both in the working directory htstatus doesn't report on file a because file a is currently in the precise same state it was found in the parent in the change set we just updated to so as far as htstatus is concerned there's nothing to report about it now if we then modify file a and we do so here using the echo command but with the append redirection operator which is the two angle brackets that appends blah blah to the end of file a so we've modified file a and then we invoke htstatus and htstatus tells us yes file a is marked with an m because it's been modified since the parent if we decide we want to discard those changes in file a we invoke hgrevert file a and that checks out again it checks out the version of file a found in the parent and then when we invoke htstatus it's not reported anymore because now it's back in the state where it's unchanged since the parent notice that when we invoke revert here we didn't specify which change set we want to revert file a back to so by default it assumes that we mean the parent of the working directory which again is local revision 0 if we wanted some other version of file a we could have specified a different revision with the hyphen r option


Introducing an action camera complete with the recording button and until I four-core processor Audio that does totally not sound witty.


Shalom and praise the Lord. Good morning everyone. Thank you for joining class. We'll begin. Can I ask any one of our online students to lead us in prayer please? Anyone? Yeah, I can tell you this word. Father, we just thank you for this time. Thank you Lord for this morning. We pray for your presence Lord over this class. We pray for your wisdom. I pray Lord that your word would speak to us and build us up Lord and we just submit this time. We just give a spirit soul and body to you. In Jesus name we pray. Amen. Amen. Thank you Sam Daniel. So we began looking at chapter 9 on Tuesday and we're looking at Jesus as the sinless lamb. We're looking at the title and role of Jesus as a sinless lamb and we're looking at the various sacrifices in the Old Testament that basically points out to Jesus as that sinless lamb of God who came to make that food sufficient and perfect sacrifice. And we also saw that Jesus is referred to as the, what is the first sacrifice we looked at? The Passover. So Jesus is referred to as the Passover lamb. So the Old Testament feast of the Passover was a type and the shadow of the redemptive work of Christ in the New Testament. And I explain to you what is the meaning of type and shadow. So we see that the Old Testament feast of the Passover is basically a type and shadow of the redemptive work of Jesus Christ in the New Testament, where he offered himself up as that Passover lamb for the sins of the whole world and he did it once for all. So we were looking at the Passover lamb and what was the requisite for the kind of lamb they had to choose? Yes, it had to be an unblemished lamb. Unblemished means what? It had to be perfect, spotless, whole and healthy. And that is what we read in 1 Peter chapter 1 verse 19 and 1 John chapter 3 verse 5. So can one of you please read 1 Peter 1 19 and someone else can read 1 John 3 5 please. Just keep it away from your first Peter 1 19. Word with the precious blood of Christ as of a lamb without blemish and without spot. Yes, so here it's talking about whom? Jesus Christ and it says that Jesus Christ the lamb without blemish and without spot. 1 John chapter 3 verse 5 please someone else. 1 John 3 verse 5, you know that he appeared to take away sins and in him there is no sin. Okay, so here we see that Jesus was manifested to take away our sins or he became man to take away our sins and in him there was no sin which means that he's a lamb without blemish because it says here that he was without sin which means he was perfect and he was pure. Okay, so we don't celebrate the Passover festival anymore even though God had instituted it and said that you need to do it throughout generations. Why? Because Jesus was that Passover lamb who made that full sufficient perfect sacrifice. But of course we celebrate the Lord's table in remembrance of what he has done. Okay, now we look at a few more sacrifices that were instituted by God in the Old Testament and how Jesus came to fulfill that, how he was a type and shadow of that sacrifice. So the next one is the morning and evening sacrifices. Okay, so there was every morning and every evening there were sacrifices that the priests made in the temple and this was basically for what sacrifice? Any idea what sacrifice was this for? Which the priest is to make morning and evening? Grain and drink offering. Okay, but for why were these offerings made or why were these sacrifices made? It was basically for what? Why would they make a burnt offering? Okay, why would they make a meal a burnt offering? Why would the priest make it? Yes, thank you Lucy for our sins, for the sins of the entire Israelite race. If you sin, then you had to go individually and make a sacrifice to God. But if the priest was making it, he was making it on behalf of himself and behalf of all the people. Okay, so here, yes, Andrew says to reconcile us to God. This morning and evening sacrifices were basically sacrifices for daily atonement for the sins of the people. And it was also sacrifice that was a daily consecration. They were consecrating themselves to this holy God who chose to live in their midst, who chose to come and speak to them. Okay, so let's look at this morning and evening sacrifices that God had instituted and what he says in Exodus chapter 29 verses 38 to 42. So can one of you please read Exodus chapter 29 verses 38 to 42 please. Can I read sister? Exodus 39. Can I read sister? Yes, please go ahead. Exodus 29, 38 to 42. Now this is what you shall offer on the altar. Two lamps of the first year day by day continually. One lamp you shall offer in the morning and the other lamp you shall offer at twilight. With the one lamp shall be one tenth of an effer of flower mixed with one fourth of a hint of breast oil and one fourth of a hint of wine as a drink offering. And the other lamp you shall offer at twilight and you shall offer with it the grain offering and the drink offering as in the morning for a sweet aroma and offering made by fire to the Lord. This shall be a continual burnt offering throughout your generation at the door of the tabernacle of meeting before the Lord where I will meet you to speak with you. Thank you sister get rude. So here God is instituting the morning and evening sacrifice. Okay. And he's saying that you know these daily sacrifices that were made by the high priest in the temple, you know spoke of daily atonement and daily consecration. So what were the sacrifices that were offered? What were the sacrifices that were offered daily? What sacrifices were offered? Two lamps. Okay. One in the morning, one in the evening. Okay. So it was basically a burnt offering. Okay. And it was also a grain and drink offering known as the meal offering. Okay. So we see that you know this burnt offering was a sacrifice that they made on the altar and the animal was completely burnt on the altar. Okay. And in addition to that they also had the grain and the drink offering. Okay. Which basically consisted of what? Grains. Okay. It was not a blood sacrifice. It was not something that was containing blood like the you know the burnt offerings that was made. So the burnt offering was basically atonement. What is atonement? Covering of sins. Okay. So the burnt offering was made as an atonement for sins. It just covered, it used to cover the sins of the people. And the animal was a substitute for, for people. Okay. The animal was a substitute for the people. The animal took the place of the people. The animal was made as the sacrifice for sins because what is the punishment for sins? Death. Yes. Okay. So the animal, the death of the animal, you know, took our place and was thus made the atonement possible. Okay. Now what was the burnt offering? Why did God tell you need to have this burnt offering? Basically the burnt offering spoke of consecration. Okay.  Because it talked about complete consecration. That means the Israelites were completely consecrating themselves to God. What is the meaning of consecrating? Consecrating means what? What is consecrating? Yes, dedicating themselves, setting themselves up, or setting themselves up, you know, for God, submitting to God. Yes. Thank you, Lucy. So we see that, you know, these burnt offerings spoke of complete consecration because the entire sacrifice was consumed by fire. And then what does the meal offering consist of? The meal offering consists of basically grain and some drink offering. Okay. It was basically people giving from there what they grew in their fields or in their gardens. Okay. It was just giving their first fruits of their labor. So therefore the meal offering spoke of consecrating one's life and substance to God. Okay. So it was talking about how they were, you know, not just giving the sacrifice as an atonement for their sins, but also the sacrifice spoke about how they were giving themselves wholeheartedly. Okay. Giving themselves in terms of their spirit, body and soul, completely consecrating it to God, setting it apart for God, dedicating themselves to God and submitting to his lordship and to his rule and reign in their lives. Okay. Now, why don't we make this morning and evening sacrifices? Why don't we make this morning and evening sacrifices? Look at it. It says in verse 42, this shall be a continual burnt offering throughout your generation at the door of the tabernacle of meeting before the Lord where I will meet with you and speak with you.  Okay. Basically holy means being set apart, sanctified. Okay. So here he's saying that you need to do this throughout your generation, but why don't we offer these sacrifices anymore? Yes, Jesus was that sinless lamp of God and he made that sacrifice. Okay. So how did Jesus connect with this morning and evening sacrifice? How can we connect Jesus's sacrifice to this morning and evening sacrifice? Or how can we look at Jesus as a sinless lamp who made that sinless sacrifice? How can we connect what he has done to the morning and evening sacrifice? What does a morning and evening sacrifice require? Two things. What are the two main things? One is why would the sacrifice is made? Why would the sacrifice is made? For atonement. Yes, for atonement. Thank you Sister Gettrudus. Firstly for atonement. Secondly for consecration. Yes, thank you. So consecrating themselves. So how did Jesus fulfill this even as he made that sacrifice? On the cross, yes. How did he fulfill it? He himself offered himself once for all, for all the sacrifices and for all generations. Yes. Thank you. So he made that atoning sacrifice for the sins of the entire human race. Okay. And he was that lamp who offered himself up as a sacrifice. Okay. And made the atoning sacrifice for the sins of the whole world once for all. First was he fulfilling the morning and evening sacrifice. Atonement was done. What is the other thing? Consecration. So how did Jesus fulfill that? How did Jesus fulfill that? I think the mic is weak. Sister, he is the high priest for us. Okay. Thank you. He submitted himself to God. Yes, he submitted himself totally and fully. He surrendered. He submitted everything, his will and just to do the father's will. Okay. He aligned his will to the father's will. And hence we see that he totally consecrated himself to the father. So does Jesus fulfill the requirements of the morning and evening sacrifice? Yes. Not just like was this, you know, the sinless Lamb of God, but also in terms of consecrating himself and in submitting to do the will of the father. We know in the Garden of Gethsemane, we read that Jesus was troubled. Okay. But what does he say? Father, not mine will be done, but yours be done. Okay. So let your will be done and not mine. So Jesus was going to take on the sins of the whole human race. Here was this God who is perfect and holy and pure, who cannot stand sin, who cannot come anywhere near sin and sin is so detestable in his side. But to take on the sins of the world was such a great grief and anguish for Jesus, but he was willing to submit to the will of the father. So he totally surrendered, totally consecrated his life. And hence we see that the morning and evening sacrifice, you know, came to an end in the sacrifice that Jesus made on the cross, right? We're able to understand. All of you able to follow? Oh, yeah. Sanjay says this once and for all he offered himself up according to Hebrews chapter 26 and 27. Yes. We're going to read that. Can somebody please read Hebrews chapter seven was 26 and 27. And someone else can read Hebrews chapter 10 versus 11 and 12. For such a high priest was fitting for us, who is holy, harmless and defiled, separate from sinners and has become higher than the events, who does not need daily as those high priests to offer up sacrifices first for their own sins and then for the people for this he did once for all when he offered up himself. Thank you, Lucy. Can someone else read Hebrews chapter 10 versus 11 and 12 please? Hebrews chapter 10 versus 11 and 12 and every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God. Amen. Thank you, Sanjay. So we see that here, you know, Jesus offered himself as a sacrifice for sins forever. And he did this once and for all. Okay. The reason why he could do this was because he was holy. He was undefiled and he was separate from sinners. Okay. We will also look at another way that, you know, Jesus fulfilled being the, you know, the sinless lamb. He became the suffering lamb. Okay. So another aspect of Jesus as the lamb of God, we see that he is the suffering lamb. We read this in Isaiah chapter 53 versus 7 to 10. He was oppressed and he was afflicted. Yet he opened not his mouth. He was held as a lamb to be to the slaughter and as a sheep before it's a sheriff in silent. So he opened not his mouth. He was taken from prison and from judgment and who will declare his generation. For he was cut off from the land of the living for the transgressions of my people. He was stricken and they made his grave with the wicked. But with the rich and his death, because he had done no violence nor was any deceit in his mouth. Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him. He had put him to grief. When you make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see history. He shall prolong his days and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hands. Amen. Thank you. Let's get rude. So here we see Jesus as, you know, you know, being prophesied as that lamb will be the suffering lamb. Okay. Who will suffer for the sins of the people who will die and make that sacrifice on the cross. And look at what 1 Peter chapter 2 verses 21 to 24 says. Can somebody read that please? 1 Peter chapter 2 verses 21 and 24. 1 Peter chapter 2 verses 21 to 24. 1 Peter chapter 2 verses 21 and 24. 1 Peter chapter 2 verses 21 to 24. For to this you were called because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example that you should follow his steps. Who committed no sin nor was deceit found in his mouth. Who, when he was reviled, did not revile in return. When he suffered, he did not threaten, but committed himself to him who judges righteously. Who himself bore our sins in his own body on the tree. That we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness by whose stripes you were healed. Amen. Thank you, Sanjay. So here the scriptures are talking about Christ as the suffering lamb. Who will be oppressed, afflicted. And when he was reviled, what is the meaning of reviled? When he was criticized strongly. Or when he was unpleasant, things were said to him. What did he do? He did not revile in return. So it describes how Jesus willingly and passively, which means willingly and very submissively bore the penalty for our sins. He did not fight against it. He did not argue. He did not do anything to stop it, but he willingly and very submissively he bore the penalty of the sins of the entire human race. It also talks about him as a suffering lamb who was stricken for our transgression because it was the will of God that Jesus should be bruised. Now when you look at this verse, I mean this phrase, it was the will of God that he should be bruised. What does it mean? What is your understanding? It was the will of God that he should be bruised. What is your understanding of this? What is the meaning of bruised? Like punished. You inflict wounds. Sorry? You inflict pain. You inflict pain. What else? So it says here that it was the will of the Lord that Jesus be bruised. What does it mean? Like the sense of the whole world was too heavy. Okay. So we are basically saying that it was God's will of the Father's will that Jesus should be wounded, should be battered, should be injured. Okay. Should be beaten up. So when you think about that, what comes to your mind about the Father? Aren't you all shocked? Say he loved the world so much. Okay. He loved the world so much. The sins of the world was too heavy as he is holy. So it had to be sacrificed to such an extent. Okay. So it says that when it's the will of the Lord or the will of the Father that Jesus should be bruised, punished, injured, inflicted all his pains. Are we looking at it or thinking or saying that, hey, God enjoys or took pleasure in seeing his son suffering on the cross? To show us how much he loved him. He loved us. Sorry. No, sister, because God is just and holy. Jesus had to bear this punishment in his body in flesh because sin is in the flesh. Okay. Thank you. Yes, it was not God's, you know, God does not take pleasure in seeing, you know, his son suffer on the cross.  He was just basically taking pleasure in seeing or, you know, when he's inflicting punishment on people in the Old Testament.  And so here also we read that, you know, he, he, it was a will of God, the Father to see Jesus being bruised. Okay. So like our inverse, the students said it was showing the extent of his love for us. But here when it's saying it is a will of the Lord, it's basically saying that this is how God, you know, had planned the sacrifice to be made.  But you see that, that animal suffering, right? Once they slit the throat, you can see the animal really suffering. So it was in a sense that God had planned it that way that, you know, the sins to take on the sins of the world, there was suffering. There was pain because sin causes a lot of suffering and a lot of pain. So it was not something that the Father was pleased in doing, not something that he was, he enjoyed doing, like some people can interpret, like some people can say.  And even the Son of God, you know, had to go through all of this. He went through all of it to take on the sins of the whole world. And that is the full extent of the Father showing His love for us. And that is also what sin brings pain and sin brings suffering. And it has consequences. Now look at the purpose of the suffering, you know, the purpose of the suffering of Jesus's suffering or the purpose of the sacrifice of the suffering lamb was that, you know, make His soul as an offering for sin. Okay. Make His soul as an offering for sin. Now the word offering here basically is referring to a trespass offering. A trespass offering is what is, you know, laid out for us or defined for us in Leviticus chapter 5, verses 14 to chapter 6, verse 7, and even in Numbers chapter 5, verses 7 and 8. Okay. Now Jesus was made as an offering for sin means He was made as a trespass offering. Now, if you look at this word trespass in the Hebrew, it basically means guilt. Okay. So it denotes guilt of disobedience. It denotes guilt of violating, which means destroying or disobeying the rights of others. It can be God or man. So when here it says that Jesus, you know, his soul was made as an offering for sin. It's basically talking about the trespass offering or the guilt offering. Okay. Because the word offering here in Hebrew means trespass. Okay. So trespass offering. So what is a trespass offering? Basically a trespass offering is made when somebody disobeys God. Okay. Breaks His commandments and also somebody who's violating or going or disobeying or destroying the rights of others, whether it is God or it is man. Okay. When we look at this trespass offering, what does God require of this trespass offering?  So the offering required or included restitution. Restitution means, you know, you not only just make the sacrifice to God, you go to the temple and make the sacrifice.  By offering a sacrifice than animal. And also it required a social restitution, which required that you, you know, make up for what you had done with the person you repaid that person. So here in this trespass offering, there were two things that were required.  We had done in addition to making the sacrifice to God.  So the trespass offering not only involved making atonement for your sin in offering that sacrifice, the atonement covered up your sin before God, but also involved social restitution, which means you had to pay back the person for the wrong that you have done.  Yes. So trespass offering required atonement and restitution. Atonement is when you're making a sacrifice to God and restitution is basically you're covering up for the damages.    Okay. So that is your restitution that you make. So we see that Jesus, you know, became that trespass offering. Okay. He made the atonement for the sins, but also he was he was he made a restitution by paying the debt for our sins, the sins of the mankind. He paid it to a holy God. When Jesus died on the cross, you know, he not only made that atoning sacrifice that covered up our sins once for all, but he also made that restitution for our sins. He paid for our sins. He paid the debts for our sins to this holy God, you know, who was wronged. We sin, you know, we wrong God. Okay. We hurt him. We wrong him. And so there was, you know, restitution that had to be made. So Jesus, you know, paid the sins or he paid the debt to a holy God who had been violated. And so we see that in the trespass offering that God had instituted, it was basically pointing out to Jesus. So Jesus came and he made that atoning sacrifice.   And thus he was able to reconcile a man back to God. Okay. All of you able to understand? Yes. So in the morning and evening sacrifices, what was, how did Jesus fulfill it? What are the two things he did to fulfill it? Atonement and consecration. And when we look at Jesus as the suffering lamb who made that trespass offering. Okay. What did he do to fulfill the trespass offering? Atonement and restitution. Okay. Yeah. So we see that he made that atoning sacrifice. Yes. And you said because the father and son are one, sorry, I can't understand. What did you mean by saying the father and son are one? No, pastor. I was just suggesting since when Jesus bore our sins on the cross, in a way it was God Himself who bore our sins and punishment through Jesus because the father and son are one. I was just drawing a. I couldn't hear you. Okay. So what I was saying was that since Jesus bore our sins and punishment on the cross, in a way it was like God Himself bore our sins and punishment through His Son because the father and son are one. So you're saying it was when Jesus was doing it, it was the father himself doing it? No, in a way because the Bible teaches the father and son are one. So when God sent His Son to suffer on our behalf, it was like God taking that punishment. I was just drawing a. I think that is not what we see in the Bible. It was when Jesus was taking on the sins of the whole world. He was taking it because he was a fully man. He was in our place. He was identifying and our representative. But yes, he was in fully God in the sense that he was sinless and hence he was able to make that sacrifice. And when he was making that sacrifice, it was not God. The father who was also taking the son because Jesus on the cross says, you know, when Jesus took on the sins of the whole world and on the cross, he says, you know, Father, why have you forsaken me? Okay. So he when he was, he took on the sins of the whole world. He was forsaken by the father because he was sin. He took on the both the sins of the entire mankind. So it was not God, the father also in one sense taking on the sins of the world. It was Jesus who was taking on the sins of the world. It was Jesus who was making that full sufficient, perfect sacrifice that pleased or satisfied this God who was holy was wrong. Who we had violated with God against. And so Jesus's sacrifice paid the debt to this holy God. And when he did so, you know, God, the father was pleased with that sacrifice. So how do we know that he was pleased with the sacrifice? And how do we know that Jesus's sacrifice atone for the sins of the whole world made that paid the debt in full was because Jesus was resurrected from the dead. So resurrection is also powerful and as equally important as crucifixion because resurrection actually proves that yes, what Jesus did was the God, the father was pleased and it appeased him. And he was satisfied with the offering with the debt that was paid through the sacrifice that Jesus made on the cross. Thank you, Pastor. Yes, this clarifies, clarifies. Thank you, Pastor. So it was not God, the father also with him on the cross doing it and taking on the sins of the world. But Jesus could take on the sins of the world because he was fully human. In that sense, that's why we see humanity and divinity coexisted in the person of Jesus Christ. And God who is holy cannot come near sin. Sin cannot touch him. Then he seizes to be God. He seizes to be God and he becomes like one of us. So I hope that clarified. I think that is sometimes again a wrong understanding and a theology. Yes, Pastor. Thank you. Thank you for bringing it up. So we see that, you know, Jesus made the atoning sacrifice on also the compensation of the restitution that was needed to satisfy God and hence he reconciled us back to the father. All of you would be able to understand? Yes. So we're seeing how Jesus is sacrificed, you know, actually corresponds to what God had instituted in the Old Testament, the sacrifices and how Jesus is a type in shadow and how he fulfilled those Old Testament sacrifice. We look at another aspect of the sacrifice that Jesus made. Okay. When Jesus was crucified, was he crucified in the city? In the city or outside the city? Outside the city. Outside the city. Why was he crucified outside the city? Okay. Look at what Hebrews chapter 13 versus 11 and 12 says. Can somebody believe that, please? Thank you, Lucy. Outside. So Hebrews 13, 11 and 12. For the bodies of those animals whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin are burned outside the camp. Therefore, Jesus also that he might sanctify the people with his own blood suffered outside the gate. Yes. So here we see that, you know, the writer of Hebrews saying that, you know, the animals that, you know, were sacrificed whose blood was brought and sprinkled by the priest. Where was these animals burned? Outside the camp. Okay. And so he's saying, therefore Jesus also that he might sanctify the people cleanse purify, sanctify means what? Cleanse purify, set apart the people with his own blood. He suffered outside the gate. Okay. So we see another aspect of the Old Testament sacrifice and how Jesus identified with it. Jesus was sacrificed on the cross outside the city limits. And so we see that, you know, he related with the animals that were burned that were offered as a sacrifice, but actually burned outside the sanctuary outside the camp. So in studying Jesus Christ as the sinless lamb, we see how, you know, the sacrifices in the Old Testament spoke clearly and specifically about the various aspects of Jesus Christ as that lamb of God. Okay. And it's important for us to note here that even as God instituted all of these Old Testament sacrifices or ceremonies, you know, it was actually God was foreshadowing or pointing out to someone who's going to come that is Jesus Christ, you know, who would make that full sufficient, perfect sacrifice and would once for all make an end to the sacrifices and would also be that perfect sacrifice. So by instituting all of these sacrifices, God was basically pointing out to the Messiah, to the Son of God, to Jesus Christ, who would be that sinless lamb and make that sacrifice. Okay. So the last aspect of the Lamb of God that we will look at is in the book of Revelation. So there's Revelation chapter 5 verses 11 to 13. In somebody read that, please. Revelation chapter 6 verses 15 to 17, Revelation 14 verses 1, 9 and 10 and Revelation 17 12 to 14. So different people can read these passages. Revelation 5, 11 to 13. Then I looked and I heard the voice of many angels around the throat, the living creatures and the elders and the number of them was 10,000 times 10,000 and thousands of thousands. Saying with a loud voice, worthy is the Lamb who was claimed to receive power and riches and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and blessing. And every creature which is in heaven and on earth and under the earth and such are in the sea and all that are in them, I heard saying, blessing and honor, glory and power be to him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb forever and ever. Amen. Thank you. Revelation 6, 5 to 17. Can somebody read that, please? Revelation 6, chapter 6 verse 15, and the kings of the earth, the great man, the rich man, the commander, the mighty man, every slave and every free man, hit themselves in the caves and in the rocks of the mountain, verse 16, and said to the mountains and rock, fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb for the great day of his wrath has come and who is able to stand. Amen. Revelation 14 verses 9, verses 1, 9 and 10. Can somebody read that, please? Revelation 14, 1, 9 and 10. Then I looked and behold a lamb standing on Mount Zion and with him 144,000 having his father's name written on their foreheads, then a third angel followed them saying with a loud voice, if anyone worships the beast and his image and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand, he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of his indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. Amen. Thank you, sir. Can somebody read Revelation 17 verses 12 to 14, please? Revelation 17 verses 12 to 14. The 10 powers which you saw are the 10 kings who have received no kingdom as it, but they received authority for one hour as kings with the beast. There are one mind and they will give their power and authority to the beast. They will make war with the lamb and the lamb will overcome them. For he is lord of lords and king of kings and those who are with him are called chosen and faithful. So here in this last section, what did you observe over the Lamb of God? Is it the same that we've been studying all this time as a suffering lamb, as a lamb that was going to be bruised and punished? Is it the same kind of example we see in Revelation? Yes, no. No sister. No. We see him, as Lucy says, as a king. This last section of the Lamb of God in Revelation is a little out of context, but of Jesus as a suffering lamb, the lamb that was crucified, the lamb that was made as a sacrifice. Okay. But we are looking at it because there are 28 references of Jesus as the lamb in the book of Revelation. You just quoted a few verses here, but there are 28 references to Jesus as the lamb of God in the book of Revelation. So in Revelation 5, 6 to 14, we look at Jesus as a triumphant lamb in Revelation who was the slain lamb that returns from the dead who is worthy to receive honor and power and might and wisdom and glory and honor and blessing. We also see in Revelation 6 verses 15 to 17 that he is a powerful figure who this lamb is a powerful figure who exercises a rock and who strikes fear in those with whom he comes into contact. Okay. It also talks about in Revelation chapter 7 verse 17, he is a lamb who is described as a shepherd of God's people. Okay. And in Revelation chapter 14 verse 1 talks about him as a lamb who stands triumphant on Mount Zion. Okay. And also in Revelation chapter 17 verse 14 talks about the lamb as one who would overcome in the midst of opposition and in Revelation chapter 22 talks about him who ultimately establishes his enduring reign upon the earth as a representative of God. So here we see that he talks about Jesus as the apocalyptic view of the lamb.  Okay. So when Jesus comes, he's no longer going to be that passive submissive and suffering sacrifice. You know, instead we will look at him as that lamb who's pictured as the triumphant, victorious and overcoming conqueror who is the king. So when Jesus came the first time he came as the lamb that was to take on the sins of the world was passive submissive, you know, and that suffering sacrifice. But when Jesus comes again, he would come as that lamb, you know, who we would look up or picture somebody who comes as the triumphant, victorious and overcoming conqueror. So it is interesting to view Jesus as this apocalyptic lamb. Okay. Apocalyptic basically is describing or prophesying complete destruction of the world. So he's come to, going to come and destroy the world and set up his rule and reign here on the, so two different pictures of this lamb of God, of Jesus Christ. One in the whole of the rest of the books of, you know, the Bible. Of course in Daniel we have a lot of apocalyptic literature that is also talking about this lamb but in Revelation basically talking as the lamb of God who's going to come to, you know, be that triumphant, victorious and overcoming conqueror. We'll stop here. Okay. Anyone has any questions? Any questions? I hope you're able to understand this lesson. Okay. And I hope it was interesting to look at the various aspects of the lamb, the sacrifice and how it was fulfilled in the person and work of Jesus Christ. Okay. No questions and we'll end class today's Friday. So thank you everyone for joining class and have a blessed weekend. I'll see you all on Tuesday. Thank you.


Okay, here we go.  So first thing you need to do is click on that make sure that's selected change from your modeling menu set to your rendering menu set and then the tool we're looking for is in lighting and shading and It's called transfer maps. So let's give that a little clicky wonderful, right the first thing I'll do is Reset this so that we're looking at the same thing right so because We had this selected when we open the tool it's loaded this in under the target mesh and whenever you're baking Normal maps your low poly mesh will be the target mesh because that's the thing you're looking to keep So that one goes in there in the source mesh I'm just gonna hide that one and bring back the high poly mesh and just stop it being referenced a minute I can click on it and I'm going to Click on add selected so that is going to be where it sources the information from and I can just Reference that again and bring the The low poly back as well Well, then you need to choose what kind of map you're after and I want a normal map And we're gonna change some settings. So click on the little folder. I Do want it my source images folder.  I would say to you always use tangent space I can't see a reason that you would use object space if anybody knows what that reason is feel free to leave a comment But I'm all about the tangent space. So we'll leave that as it is this bit here Connect maps to a shader And connected to a new shader what that will do is once we've baked the normals It will assign it to a lamb that and that lamb that will be placed on the low poly mesh So it means we can preview the results straight away. So I'll leave that where it is And then the Maya common output Normally you probably wouldn't want too high of a texture resolution on a barrel But because it's the only thing that we're interested in we're gonna go fairly high We'll do a 1024 by 1024 map and the sampling quality will do at medium Which should be good enough for what we're doing Okay, so that's most of the settings done the only thing we need to look at is What's going to be captured within this bake to check that you've got for your low poly barrel back up at the top you've got This little display section At the moment it's displaying the mesh, which is the actual low poly mesh And there's another thing called an envelope, which is this pink thing here. I Would say it showed both but basically what you need to do if it might for you start off something low But you can say when it's at zero percent It's not Everything needs to be encapsulated within this search envelope because that's what's going to be included in your bake So you need to make sure that basically you can't see any gray. You can only see pink So in my case that appears to happen at 3.8. I'm quite happy with that so That's now set up. I'm happy with that so what we can do next is Bake it. Let me just check in here. Is that right? Am I happy with that? Yeah, that's all good. So what we'll do is click on bake and close What will happen now is that is sampling and baking the normal data into an image file and sending that to a shader So when that's finished, we'll have a look at the result Okay, so my baker's just finished and I thought I would wait and we would preview the results together I Feel that will bond more if we do it that way so So let's hide the high poly mesh. You can see this is the low poly mesh which is There it is So what we'll do is that materials already applied but because we aren't showing Textures, we can't see it so you can either click on this icon here Which is textured or you can press six on your keyboard, which is what I'm going to do and You'll say that that detail that we had on the the other mesh is now showing through on this one and Let's see what it's looking like on top so you can see that there are now lines where the planks that we put were Okay, I think so I've got a dirty black line at the bottom, which is probably because It maybe sticks out a little bit too far there Which I could fix in fact, I will fix it Let's see if we can fix that so I'm going to go back into the high poly and We're going to get Let's take it our reference. Okay edge. We're going to get these edges. I think That one that one and that one and we're just going to scale them in Like that, what's the top looking like? Yeah, the top's okay, so I've brought that in to hopefully get a cleaner bake So stick that back into reference And now what I can do is I'll just hide that perform the bake again But I should get some different results out of it. So let's see I don't know how different but hopefully slightly better. So lighting shading Transfer maps everything set up as before so we don't need to bother going through everything again We can just click on bacon clothes and not replace a normal map. We have so I'll see you in a sec fingers crossed It'll all be brilliant next Okay, so that baits finished. It's improved it a bit, but it's not perfect. I think it's a Generally well, you've got quite a high angle on this By the time it's textured. It won't look as bad. So I'm happy with that We've now got a normal map that we can work with Okay, before we take this into Photoshop for text room. We're going to create one more map for it Which I'm going to call a color color ID map Which will make it easy to kind of place textures around a bit a bit faster So in order to do that and we'll just do it as quickly as we can we're going to apply some colored Materials take that a reference To Everything on this so what we'll do is we're just going to go to Back into model and we're going to go mesh and separate so everything's a separate polygon again and We're just going to bang some colors on this So I know that I want the metal to be a separate color So I'm going to assign a new material to that. It's going to be a Lambert And I just want it to have a color. Where is that? Lambert six, so I'm just going to choose quiet, you know Bold color, so I'll use red in this case Okay, and then I'm going to sign existing material to all the ones that are going to have the same material on this so Sign existing material Lambert six Sign existing material Lambert six Right, and then what I want to do is be able to break up the different Planks, so this first plank I'm going to assign a new material to which will be a Lambert And the color of this one will be yellow Why is that not worked? assign new material Lambert Yellow. Hey, there we go. Right, and then the one next to it. In fact, let's just assign This I'm going to do it to every other one Okay, so I've done that now. What I want to do is do the alternate ones with another Equally kind of contrasting colors. So let's assign a new material a Lambert and this time I'm going to use Green and now I'm going to apply that to all the other alternating planks Okay, and then I just need to repeat that for the planks on the top and the bottom and I'll be complete So that will make it really easy to pick out different areas of the the map when we're in Photoshop later So we're going to bake this out to another map so let's just Recombine this so Mesh combine I Want to give this the name? Hi underscore poly underscore barrel again and because this is now seen as a new object It won't be part of that high poly layer anymore So we're going to make sure it's selected Right-click and add selected objects and now I'll be able to hide that and Turn it to reference if I need to So let's just load in Transfer maps again So we're going to go to Rendering we're going to go to a lighting shading and the transfer maps I'm going to use a different type of map this time. So we'll get rid of the normal We're going to use a diffuse map this time and that'll bake the color from one to the other So the source mesh needs to be the high poly. So let's just load that in Then we can turn that off for a little while and Then we're going to choose diffuse and we're going to call this one color ID, but I don't need that capital L there. That's cray-cray and we're going to do a target again and click on save and Everything else should be set up fine from what we did before Which it is So now we're going to bake that from one to the other. Let's click on bake Okay, so the big just finished and you can see that it now looks ridiculous but The cool thing is we've now got a little bit of an idea of Where that metal would be if you look at the mesh without the texture? There's no indication. So even on the UV map. I wouldn't know exactly where to put them in the metallic parts of the texture But we can now see That that's where we'll go So that's really good. So if I can just show you What we've created in Photoshop? So this is the normal map there you go So you can see all that detail is on there that we created which is lovely and if we have a look at the color ID map as well and All the color ID map exists for is so that we can Sample colors and put stuff there so what we can create like masks using those colors It's just about being able to select different areas so We are now done With the modeling we are done with the texture baking All that is left to do is to create the actual materials in Photoshop so we're going to create the different texture maps So there'll be a diffuse or albedo map. There will be a roughness map. There will be a metallic map There will be maybe another kind of map that I'm forgetting But in the next section, that's what we will be covering. It'll be all about texturing So hopefully I will see you in the next section for that


Do you want to escape the friend zone? Then you need tactical soap, pheromone and pea soap for men, proud channel sponsor at 21 Studios. I'm Anthony Dream Johnson, and I've proved this soap. Order now to link below. Use coupon code 21C for 10% off now. George Bruno with the 21 report in Orlando, Florida. We're talking with Dr. Sean T. Smith. Author of the book, The Tactical Guide to Women. It's an interesting title, isn't it? How was your experience with the 21 convention so far this year? I was saying in my talk, I have never seen a group of guys like this. A group of 200 men who are focused, squared away, and working on their values. It's unusual to say the least in just a lighthearted crowd. I mean, just never met a bigger group of wonderful guys. They're hungry, aren't they? Yeah, they are. They are. Yeah. What is your main message? My main message with this book in particular is that if you're a man who has ambitions and motivations in life, one of the most efficient ways to make sure that you don't get there is to bring the wrong woman into your life. And so it's not really a message so much about keeping the wrong woman out of your life as knowing what the right women are to look for, the ones that have the bare necessities to be able to participate as a grown-up in a relationship. And it doesn't matter really whether you're just looking to increase your notch count or you're looking for marriage and kids.  And this isn't just an opinionated book. It's based upon research and experience because what you do for a living is... Well, I'm a clinical psychologist and I work with a lot of guys. I work with a lot of couples. So as they say, it ain't bragging if you can do it and you do this every single day. Yeah, do it every day. What is the most common problem that you see men dealing with when it comes to relationships? One of the most common problems, you know, there's the stereotypical stuff, all these stuff that you hear just in the popular media about the tensions between men and women and how men will not talk as much as women want and we will not have sex as much. But beyond that, the most common problem that I try to address is men attending to their own experience when a woman is showing her character at the beginning of a relationship so you can rule a man and rule him out based on what they're showing as human being. And we are very good at ignoring character and it's the most important question for a man to look at. And it's interesting because a lot of people are meeting through dating apps on their phone and there's not a lot of things that talk about character there. No. And I'm hearing from a lot of millennial guys and I'm an old guy in my 50s and I'm hearing from a lot of young guys that it is very difficult to assess a woman's character because there is this hookup culture and everything moves so fast and one of my messages is when you're bringing anyone into your life, particularly a woman that you're going to be connected to, you got to slow that process down so that you can have the time to see what kind of character shows up. It seems like in the swiping culture on these dating apps on phones, it's swipe left for no, swipe right for yes. And one of the things that came to my mind was you're always once swipe away from being replaced with these apps. Yeah, well if you choose women of character, women who are able to stay invested, you lower your chances of that obviously, but I feel bad for people who are having to navigate this sexual marketplace because of that component. I know not everybody participates in that component. I know a lot of young people completely stare away from that, but some ridiculous percentage of young people is participating in this and it's become a hookup culture where character is sort of the last thing you're looking for when you're looking at a picture on a screen and you're swiping right or left. Interesting. The common vernacular in many of the men's conferences and men's dating movements is shit testing somebody. Can we say that in a nicer way? Boundary testing is my best approximation of it and it's an old concept that when you're dealing with, let's talk about bullies, what do bullies do?  They got to test first. They got to find out who their victims are and even out on the savannah when a cheetah stalking their prey, they don't just run up on the herd because they're going to go hungry. They size up and they test and they prod and they poke and they'll get a reaction from the herd and then they know where the weakness is and they can go after the weakness and so shit testing between men and women, I don't know if I completely understand the term, but I do understand boundary testing and I see it, people do it all the time.  It's predatory behavior, not a big fan of it, but it's out there. It saves lives. It does save lives.  You don't need to give them that test and become their enemy and become the person that's out to see how they're going to respond because life takes care of that on its own. In the movie, The Bronx Tale, there's the classic case of the man opening the car door for the woman she gets in, he walks around the back and the older guy was teaching the younger guy if she reaches over and unlocks your door for you, she's in.   What are some tests that men can do to test the character of a woman? Well, I talk about traits to look for and traits show up when a person's in conflict with another person or when they're in a social situation. That's a great movie, by the way. Chaz commentary is one of my favorite movies. I'm glad you picked that one.  It's just watching her and how she behaves in response to the world. Traits to look for are, okay, how does this woman handle herself when she's in a disagreement with her boss? How does she talk about her ex-boyfriends? How does she handle a conflict with her roommate and her friends?   And that's because anybody can be on their best behavior for three hours on a date, the first three months, a year.  That's probably a fairly reasonable measure because there have been studies of how long people are on a honeymoon phase. And this actually is a chemically altered state of your mind where you're not seeing the world as it really is. You're not seeing her and you're not presenting yourself as you really are. And the studies say somewhere between nine, 15 months, somewhere in that is hard to pin down. After that, your brain starts to return to baseline and her brain starts to return to baseline. And then that's when the clock starts. That's when her character shows up and then you can start watching how she actually responds to you and the world. And so two years is not a bad amount of time to really get a sense of how somebody is. In fact, I'm rambling here, but the FBI takes about two years to decide whether or not they're going to bring somebody on board. So if that's good enough for the FBI, maybe it's good enough for deciding whether or not to bring someone into your life that's going to have a tremendous impact on your success. The choice of woman has such a profound effect, positive or negative on a man's life. Yeah. Yeah. And somebody out here on the elevator, one of the attendees described it to me as the force multiplier. Having the right woman in your life is the force multiplier that will take you further than you thought you could go. I've always said date long, marry slow and divorce fast. You're a wise man. What I have found in my life in dealing with men and women is that people are making decisions based upon emotions.  You just don't want to live there. Comment on something like that. Well, one of the big mistakes that men make in courting women is women have an urgency to keep the relationship moving. And I think that's sweet. I also understand that there's some genetics and biology behind it, but women are pressing generally to get the relationship moving toward commitment. Men, it's our job to slow things down so that mistakes aren't made. It's their job too. It's everybody's job to make sure that mistakes aren't made. But when you're in that honeymoon phase, where you're chemically altered, that's a terrible time to be making emotional decisions like, let's get an apartment together. Let's get a dog together. Let's do the things that are going to bind us together and make it very difficult for us to disengage if we decide to go our separate ways. Emotion is very present at the beginning of the relationship. Not a good way to base your decisions. You said a phrase that I hear all the time. When the honeymoon is over, it's a common phrase that people use when something happens the first time somebody passes gas in front of the other person.  Or the phrase, letting your hair down because you're on your best behavior with everything for a long time. And then reality kicks in. And then you start to see anger problems or a person is maybe messy or how they treat their parent or how they treat other people. How does that change over time as you get to know somebody? Well, what happens when that honeymoon phase starts to wear off and our brains come back to baseline and also we just get fatigued with the effort of putting on our best face all the time is that reality starts to show up and anyone, man or woman who can't tolerate the pluses and minuses of the person that they brought into their life, it's a bad sign because you need to be able to tolerate that this person is a three-dimensional person and they're going to disappoint me sometime and they can't be the point of origin for me, the point of my emotional regulation so that if they mistreat me, suddenly I'm having a bad day. I've heard it said that if you can't accept the person with all their habits as they are now, don't go into a relationship or long-term relationship or marriage expecting them to change. When a person expects another person to change or hoping that something is going to change, what is the danger of that? I don't have a lot to add to that other than you're right it's going to get worse. I don't know if you said that but I'm saying that if you're starting off at a bad point it's probably going to get worse and there are three areas sex money and children and if people are not in tune on those three areas and in fact if they're divergent in any of those areas that's a problem that's only going to magnify with the effect of time and so better to recognize those things out of the gate where you can still be polite to each other and go your separate ways. What is the percentage of marriages that make it now? I heard someone say 50%. I've heard people say 60%. What do you know to be true about? It's a complicated question because and I don't know the answer to it because there's a lot of statistics that go into it. The 50% statistic is a little bit misleading because I think what gets thrown in there is all marriages so second, third, fourth marriages and what we do know without question is that your second marriage if you didn't, well I guess you'd be divorced if you're going to your second marriage. Your second marriage is likelier to end with divorce than your first marriage was and your third marriage is likelier to end divorce than your second marriage was but that's just statistics. What statistics don't take into account is individual motivation so if you get divorced from your first marriage and you figure out what your role in that was, you figure out what her role is and you really create a coherent story about what happened and what drove you so that you don't have to do it again. Then the odds of your second marriage are good because you've done the work. You've learned your lesson. It's the people who don't learn their lesson. They jump into their next marriage and then they create the whole thing all over again. So what percentage? I don't know. The lesson here is learn from your mistakes so that you don't become part of that statistic. So don't focus on the fake statistics of half of all marriages end. Yeah, it may be real. It may average out to that. I don't know. That almost creates fear. Yeah. I heard someone say if you went skydiving and the instructor told you that this parachute is documented as only opening 50% of the time and that's a common scenario kind of a, I would say, I call it tongue-in-cheek but there are some people who say that seriously. Would you go into marriage if you knew that it only had a 50% chance of success and it's almost like asking, I mean that's a rhetorical question. The answer is no, I'm not willing to take that risk because there's a lot at stake, a lot at risk. Would you bet your future on a coin flip? But it's not a coin flip and that's the illusion. You have so much control over the variables that go into a successful marriage or successful relationship and it starts with who you choose and it starts with understanding your own patterns and your own history knowing what pushes you in the wrong direction so you don't get somebody who pushes you in the wrong direction. There's a lot of variables you can control that take that 50% statistic and lower it dramatically. I have a friend who's an officiant and works with a wedding chapel. You can just schedule your wedding there and it's like weddings in Vegas kind of thing. I wonder what these statistic are, the statistic is about these impulsive, like we went to Vegas and got married. You hear, I mean that's almost like a movie cliche now. Yeah, I don't know what the statistics are on that but here's an interesting statistic that the more ostentatious and showy a wedding is the likelier that it will end poorly. So a low-grade wedding like mine we went to the justice of the peace and then we took all our friends and family out to dinner and we spent a minimal amount of money but we had connection with the people that were important to us and we're doing great. Statistically we would fit that that when you're not showy about your wedding and your rings and the flowers and all that nonsense maybe that says something about the quality of the relationship. There's something to be said about that. My grandparents had an arranged marriage. What do you know about arranged marriages versus the modern way of getting married in western sieves? My understanding is that the outcomes can be pretty good and it has to do with the fact that if you take two people, it's an interesting experiment that was a couple years ago, if you take two people, you put them in a situation where they're going to become very familiar with each other very quickly and the way this experiment worked was they gave these two people a list of questions intimate questions and as they started discussing this they started finding their common ground and the number of people who said that they could love this person that they just interacted with was astronomical just because we are social creatures were made to connect and we can connect with the number of people out there most women are going to be wrong for you 99% of them are not the right fit but that 1% that's left over is a huge number and there's a lot of them that you could actually connect with and make it work. Very interesting. All right, I'm going to say a phrase and then you're going to tell me what you think about that. Love at first sight.  There's attraction at first sight. That's a good way to start. Okay. Because what is love? You kind of have to know something about the person to love them. Absence makes the heart grow fonder. That's an interesting one. I suppose it would depend on how connected you were to a person. Right now I've been away from my wife and daughter for a few days now. Yeah, I miss them. I'm actually looking forward to seeing them. I usually do. But there's a particular urgency. Yeah, I want to get home and check out what my daughter is doing. So my wife has been up to because they're entertaining and they make me happy. So I'd say there's something to that. Out of sight, out of mind. Men and women, this is something that men and women don't understand about each other. Men have difficulty understanding how women can have their family and go out into the world, go to the workplace or whatever they do and they still feel connected to their family is still on their minds like they never left. And women have a difficult time understanding with men that we can go out into the world and it's like they don't exist. Because we can go out and we can slay the dragon. We're built for that. Go out, slay the dragon. And if you're slaying the dragon, you better be paying attention to what you're doing. And so men are built to forget about what's going on at home, not permanently, obviously. But then when we come home, we're happy to be home. And so this is a point of contention that I wish I could get every man and woman to understand about each other is that there's a difference in the way we go out into the world. Hypergamy doesn't care. Hypergamy, the way evolutionary psychology uses it is that men and women try to get somebody that's at their level and we all know what our level is. I go very intuitive about that. Try to get somebody at our level and higher. The way it gets used in the red pill community, I don't fully understand. I'm going to be honest about that. I hear that phrase a lot. I haven't quite wrapped my head around it. But I think that the gist of it is that female nature will always default to female nature and that women have no loyalty is the way I understand this. I don't know. I got to think about that a little bit. Yeah. Yeah, that's good. There's a guy out there. He needs what you have to say. He needs your insight. He's had a number of failed relationships. He gave up that giving up is manifest in the way he looks. He feels hopeless. He might have written women off, which is a popular phrase.  I'm not playing that game anymore. The words of a hurt man, of a man who has failed. But we know he's only going to be miserable with that kind of life. Give him some hope about relationships, about himself. What can he literally do, like Dr. Jordan Peterson in his 12 rules for life said, make your bed. Something as simple as that. What would be Dr. Shawn T. Smith's first rule for that man? Well, it would be put your shoes on because, and I said that before the make your bed thing came along, that guys get depressed in a unique way. Guys get depressed. They get irritable. They get withdrawn. Women, when they get depressed, they fit more the medical description of depression that we're accustomed to. They lose their energy. They become sad. Men behave differently when they get depressed. And depression is interesting because the condition prevents the cure. When you're depressed, you don't want to move, but the cure is to get moving. That's the hardest part about it is the depressed person needs to move, but can't get moving. And so the simplest thing you can do when you're depressed is the thing that you should do, which is I know you have, you know what you need to do. Nobody needs to tell you, you need to hit the gym, you need to get walking, you need to get working, you need to get yourself moving and engaged in the world. That's the cure to depression. But how do you do that when the condition itself is preventing you from doing that thing?  So you put your shoes on. And if all you can do is go to the gym and go inside to the locker room and take a leak and turn around and leave, okay, you made it to the gym. You got your shoes on. And before you can even get to the gym, before you have to get to your car, before you can get to your car, you have to get dressed. And then after you get dressed, you got to put your shoes on. And that's the most basic thing to do is don't set your sights on, I'm going to go to the gym today and I'm going to do an hour on the treadmill. I'm going to get my shoes on right now. That's all I'm going to worry about for these next few seconds is get my shoes on. And then I'll do the next thing. I like that. Well done as well begun. This was a great talk with Dr. Sean T Smith. How can people reach you? Where can they find you? You can find me on Twitter, my handle is iron shrink and you can find me at docsmith.co. That's about all you need to know. Excellent. Yeah. George Bruno for the 21 report with Dr. Sean T Smith. Thank you, Dr. Thank you, George.


Now the question is what do I need to calculate to figure out how much paint I'll need and how much wood I'll need And they're actually different So when we scale this up all those surfaces are gonna be covered with paint and I'm gonna need more paint and all those Construction materials are gonna be scaled up and much bigger and so I'm gonna need more wood Now the wood goes as the volume the mass of the wood is its density Which is not gonna change times its volume and the volume is gonna go as the length times the width Times the height if this were exactly some kind of rectangular solid It would be exactly the length times the width times the height But because we have roofs and possible extra shapes around the back. It's only going to scale that way So if I double the length, I should double the volume if I double the width I should double the volume if I double the height I should double the volume and if I multiply each of them by a hundred Then I'm gonna get a hundred cubed times as much Which is a million times as much which we basically knew as soon as we realized we're after the volume Because remember the volume scale is the cube of the length and so if we increase our length by a factor of a hundred Then we increase our volume by a factor of a hundred cubed Now what about paint? Well paint just covers the surface of things and the surface of things is an area And so this area here is a height times a width this area here Is a length times a height and so on and we know that area scales as the square of the length And so we know that the area will go as length squared And so if we increase our length by a factor of a hundred then we'll increase our area by a factor of a hundred squared Which is ten thousand