Good morning, everyone. The recording has started. Welcome to today's session on the New Testament survey. Today we're going to study on the second book of the New Testament, that is the Gospel to Mark. Even before we could start with our session, can I request one of those to please lead us in prayer? Can I request Brother Isaac to lead us in prayer, please? Father in heaven, we want to thank you this morning for bringing us together to attend this class and news estimates of you.  We ask that what we are taking in or what we are about to learn will grow in us, will become a seed that will multiply. Father God takes it in our heart. We want to bless you for the life of our lecturers, our pastors who are imparting knowledge in us. I want to thank you for the life of all of us who are attending class, our families and for our relatives. We want to thank you for this opportunity, giving us to all people's college. We thank you for everything that you are doing for us and everything that you have to do for us. In Jesus' mighty name we pray. Amen. Thank you and Brother Isaac. So I hope everyone would have gone through the notes of the Gospel of Mark. Have you all? Would you take some time to go through the notes? Because there's a lot of information in the notes that we would not be able to cover it in the last time. But then I request as we study, let it benefit us. Let's take this time to go through the Gospel of Mark. Well, the Gospel of Mark was the first accounts of the life of Jesus. And early historians' tradition links this book to the Christian scribe named Mark or John Mark. His name means polite or a big hammer. He was a co-worker with Paul and also very close partner with Peter. In fact, some scholars say the Gospel of Mark, they call it as Peter's Gospel. And in fact, an ancient church historian named Papias, he recalls that Mark had collected all of these high witness accounts and the memories of Peter and then he shaped them into an account. But Mark didn't just randomly throw all the pieces together, but then he has carefully designed the story of Jesus. And in the first line of the book of Mark, Milsus' claim about Jesus says, It's the beginning of good news for Jesus, the Messiah, the Son of God. And interestingly, this is the only time where Mark is going to tell us a story that what he thinks. And then later for the rest of the book, it's going to inspire us by simply putting Jesus' action and his words in front of us and showing us that how other people reacted to Jesus, to his teaching, to his word, different kind of reactions. Even when we studied the Gospel of Matthew, we saw not everyone who followed Jesus except in the teaching. But then each one followed for their own personal reason. But then now Mark has designed this Gospel saying the story of Jesus in a drama format. We can put it across like three acts. In the very first act, we see one set in Galilee and in the second, we see Jesus on the way from one place to the other. And in the third, we see that Jesus is in Genesis. And each of these acts focuses on a repeated thing. For example, in Act 1, we see that everybody was blown away by Jesus and they were wondering who is this Jesus? And in Act 2, we see that it's his own disciples now. And they are struggling to understand what it means for Jesus to be the Messiah. Who is this man? They're trying to understand him. But then at the same time, they're very scared to ask any question. But then they're allowing the time so that they can understand exactly. Even though the words that Jesus was speaking may be far away from their understanding. But then they were scared, yes, to ask Jesus. Second, they thought that they will understand in time. Not everything I'll be able to understand now, but in time, I will understand. They gave them some time. And also, Jesus knowing that, Jesus also knows about his disciples that they are not able to understand everything. But then he gives them the time to understand. Same like the disciples, even we may be today. Not everything that we read, we study, that we share in the class, we are able to understand. But then we allow ourselves to go through it so that in time, we will receive the understanding of his word of the Spirit who's dwelling in us. And here we see the act three. We see the surprising paradox of how Jesus becomes a messianic king. Okay, so keeping these background in our mind. We need to study the gospel of Mark so that we can understand it better. As this class is only the survey, we'll only be studying about the author, the background, and certain important incidents or the events from the gospel of Mark. But then I would encourage you. We meet only two days in a week. That is Monday and Tuesday for about an hour. I request each one to please go through the gospel of Mark and Mark for us to understand better. Because in the class, we would have gone through the background. We have gone through certain historical incidents that happened. So keeping all this in mind when we read these gospel, the revelation would be much greater and better. So one suggestion could be, yes, we can read the Bible through. The other way that we could do is use the audio Bible. Use the audio Bible two, three times when you play it. You can understand each chapter by chapter and use different colors to highlight it and study and have a deeper relationship. But God, by understanding this flood. Any questions so far? If I could move ahead or you would like to add on anything? Dance is very quiet. Yes ma'am, you can go ahead. Okay, so when we talk about the author, what do you know about Mark or John Mark? Anything that you know about this author of the gospel of Mark? Please feel free to share anything. What is, what do you know about the author? It can be anything from next class onwards. I would request you all because all the answers are in our notes and much deeper. I request you all please go through the notes. Okay, well, I'll just give you share a few background, a few background of the author of the book of Mark. The author was John Mark and we know his name. What does his name mean? Can anyone say? I just repeated a few minutes back. I just shared a few minutes back. For light or big hammer? Yes, yes. His name means for light or big hammer. Well, his name, the full name of Mark was John Mark. How do we know? Can I request one of his turn to Acts chapter 12 verse 12? Acts 12 verse 12, please. Acts chapter 12 verse 12. When he realized this, he went to the home of Mary, the mother of John Mark, where many were gathered for prayer. Yes, thank you. See, here in Acts 12, 12, we see that his full name is being mentioned. The mother of John, whose surname was Mark. So this is a combination. John Mark is a combination of Greek and Latin or a Roman name. So it may suggest that his father was a Roman and his mother was a Greek, in which case he was most likely a Roman citizen. So here we see that the details of his mother is given in Acts 12. We see that his mother name was Mary, a little bit about his family. We see that. So little is known about her, except her name. And she had a home that was large enough for the gathering of a church. They met there a week after week or very often. And the early Christian community also say that the upper room, maybe it was about their house. And also in Acts 12, 12, when we read, it also says that apparently she was a person of wealth. So there is no mention about his father here. So the scholar suggests that maybe the father was not a Christian or a Jew. But then, and he was no longer in the home, possibly maybe he was dead. So the emphasis was seemed to be given in the relationship between the other relationship we see here with John Mark is Barnabas, who was his uncle or cousin. There's a relationship between John Mark and Barnabas. When we read the book of Colossians, we see that in chapter 410, that he was the cousin, he was a relative to John Mark. And the early life of Mark was a little bit is known about his childhood, but it is most likely that he was used to being around very important figure in the early church. One reason could be because they had this Christian gathering at home. So maybe that was one of the reason. And he was most likely very close to the ministry of Jesus because his mother was in faith and she walked very closely with Jesus so that she impacted her son. So some historians suggest that this home where John Mark lived was the ministry center for Jesus. They often met there. And they also suggest that, as I said, the upper room was the place where Jesus and his disciples celebrated the Last Supper and the Last Supper and where also after the ascension of Jesus where the outpouring of the Holy Spirit happened the day of Pentecost, some scholars say maybe it was the upper room where John Mark lived in their house, the upper room. So we are not sure just the scholars say about the situation and the openness, the meeting that they had. Maybe it was in his place. And he is not named in the Gospel that bears his name. But most scholars feel that it is most likely that the unnamed man in the book is Mark. Because there is certain culture that they used to follow before the authors who write the book. It was accustomed for the authors to leave off their name out of the book when they are writing. So that would have been one of the reason why John Mark has not mentioned his name. And the main theme when we study the book, the main theme of this book is Christ, the tireless servant of God and man. Christ, the tireless servant of God and man. So the whole book is portraying Jesus as a servant of God and man. So keeping this in mind, we need to study further. Some of the experience that John Mark had, we can see through the book of Acts when we read. So in Acts 12, 25, can I request one of us turn to Acts chapter 12 verse 25? Another person, please turn to Acts chapter 13 verse 4 to 5. I'll just type few scriptures. Acts 12, 25, and Barnabas and Saul returned from Jerusalem when they have fulfilled their ministry and they also took with them John whose surname was Mark. Thank you. The next person read Acts 13, 4 to 5. Another person take up Acts 13, 13, 4 to 5. The two of them sent on their way by the Holy Spirit, went down to Seleucia and sailed from there to Cyprus. When they arrived at the Salamis, they proclaimed the word of God in the Chilis and Agrocs. John was with them as their helper. Yes. Thank you. So in the first verse Acts 12, 25, we see that Barnabas and Saul returned from Jerusalem and when they fulfilled their ministry, they also took with them John whose surname was Mark. So we see that he returned to Antioch from Jerusalem with Barnabas and Paul after they presented the church with the relief offering. And in the second verse which is Acts 13, 4 to 5, we see that John Mark accompanied Barnabas and Paul on the first missionary journey to serve as their assistant. So what happened? Do anyone remember what happened to John Mark after this? The first missionary journey. Any incidents that you're able to recollect after the first missionary journey. There are certain incidents that happened. It was not very easy for John Mark. Maybe he was not very matured enough or grown and fit or it was too tiring for him. This many reason or he was homesick. There are many reasons that he could not continue the journey with Paul and Barnabas. So he leaves and met up the way and returned back home. This upsets Paul. This upsets Paul. We see that in Acts 15, 37 to 39, we see that John Mark leaves the team and he goes back home to Jerusalem early on the journey and this was interpreted by Paul. Paul feels like he's taking it very serious, very negative. What is this young guy? He could have continued with us but then he left in middle. He's not having any kind of good report on John Mark. Even in future, when he comes back and Barnabas say, can I call John Mark along with us for the ministry, Paul rejects it. Paul says no. Last time he left us in between. He had homesick and it's difficult for us when we go out on ministry to have someone not cooperating or being helpful to us in the journey. So I don't want to take him with the past experience. But then there would be a sharp conflict between me. Just a disagreement between John Mark and Barnabas. So when they go in the next missionary journey, Paul drops John Mark. But Barnabas encourages to take him in the ministry but then because Paul is disagreeing, so this is what they do. Barnabas and Mark pair up together and they go to share the word in different place and Paul will join stylist and they will travel together. But later what happens? We will study it. Some of the reason, yes, as I said, Barnabas being his uncle, he is the man of encourager. Barnabas was the man of encourager. Yes, despite what John Mark did. Barnabas gives him a second chance. We see that in Acts 15. Barnabas gives him a second chance because he helps John Mark to overcome his problem. I think by then the Lord would have prepared John Mark in time and then John Mark goes journeys with Barnabas. And we also see in Philemon 24 and in 2 Timothy 11, later after many years, later when Paul was in prison, John Mark has come back to help and assist Paul. And here we see in Philemon 24 or in 2 Timothy 4 verse 11. Can I request one of us to turn to 2 Timothy 4 verse 11? 2 Timothy 4 verse 11. Luke alone is with me and bring him with you for he is very helpful to me for the ministry. Yes, thank you. So Paul writes here, he acknowledges that John Mark is profitable in the ministry though Paul rejected him before, but later as he saw and he witnessed how faithfully John Mark started to serve in the ministry along with Barnabas. He heard the report of him and then he also experienced him when he met and the early he writes, get Mark and bring him with you for he is useful to me for the ministry. You see, sometimes even we would have faced some situation ups and downs, some failures in our ministry, people may give up. But then the Lord who's in you, the Lord who's called you is faithful enough to work in and through you. So all of us have certain weaknesses in us, just like John Mark. We may not be bold enough. We may not have certain skills in us that is required in the ministry at the time when we have been serving alongside with some good leaders, but then we don't give up, continue, continue because the Lord is working in and through you. People may give up, like a leader like Paul who gave up on Mark at certain season. Now the same leader is looking up, looking at Mark and acknowledging, acknowledging him that is profitable in the ministry. God can turn things around for us. God can turn things around for us. And it is perhaps it is a worthy note to receive from a man of God like Paul. And what happened? The man who was rejected once and he's become the writer of a gospel of the servant. This gospel of Mark is also known as the gospel of servant. Matthew, what was the gospel of Matthew was known as? Do anyone remember from last class? Gospel of Matthew was also known as gospel of, okay, gospel of Matthew was also known as gospel to Jews. Okay, this is known as gospel to Romans. At the same time, gospel of Matthew, what was focused on that throughout the kingdom? Gospel of kingdom. And here we see gospel of the servant, gospel of the servant in the book of Mark. So what was a tradition in those days when Mark was writing? What was a tradition? Many believe that because of the unique use of his mother's own. Mark had a bit of spiritual father or son relationship with Peter because Peter being the leader was very effective. And how do we know that he did that? And first Peter chapter five verse 13. And I request one of us to turn to first Peter chapter five verse 13. First Peter chapter five verse 13 says, she was in Babylon, laid together with you, greets you, and so does Mark my son. I request everyone to have your Bibles handy in the class so that when I request, please take it, read out loud, it helps us to be in the class. Here we see that Peter greeting John Mark's mother, she was in Babylon, laid together with you, greets you, and so does Mark my son. Look at the relationship between Peter and John Mark, a spiritual father-son relationship that which we also see between Paul and Timothy. So here we also see that he is believed to have actually like Paul's son Peter's interpreter when he preached in Rome. So whatever is contained in the gospel of Mark came from the relationship or the association with Peter. So Mark was writing or whatever Peter was sharing. Mark started writing it. And we also see the early church father, Irenaeus suggested that Mark's gospel was a reflection of more of Peter's region because of the relationship, because of the time that he spent together with Peter. And it is also believed that after his work with Peter at Rome, he went to Alexandria, Egypt and helped establish the church there. While in the work there, he was severely persecuted now. The Romans was ruling. The Romans were ruling the place and there were a lot of persecution to the Christians. John Mark was severely persecuted and tortured. Imagine the guy who ran away and now he's undergoing the persecution and torture under the reign of this Roman government. But what we see here is, we don't see that he's wavering anymore. We see that the determination is very much strong. We see that the man who ran away, who was scared, ran away with fear, who could not keep up with the pressure or with the situation that the Christian leaders would go through. He ran away once, but now God has made him so courageous, so strong that he's able to undergo any kind of persecution and torture for the fake sake, the gospel sake. And how did all this happen? All this happened because there was someone who believed in him and encouraged him. Though he failed, but still, part of us encouraged him and we see that the gospel spread through Mark. Some of the traditions say that John Mark was martyred under the reign of Nero government. So those days, the persecution and crucification was very common. Very common. And also some of the scholars says that John Mark was tied behind the horseback and he was dragged through the city. It may not be once or twice, but many times and some of them say that was one of the last time when the cause of his death was that. So under the Roman government is when we study about the crucification that the Romans had this practice of crucification was practice as a method of torture and execute all the people who were against them. So under the Roman cities and where even Jesus was crucified. And we see that in our notes, we have given a detailed information on crucification, like how the crucified Jesus and what happened and how they put the title on the cross of Jesus, not only on the cross of Jesus, but any pleads, anyone who was against the Roman government they used to crucify them and put up a title there. And for Jesus they put up a title saying that I am our eye, which has a Latin phrase Jesus of Nazareth Rex Eudorium which means Jesus of Nazareth, King of Jews. And this was the notice put up by Pontius Pilate nailed over the cross of Jesus. And now many were reading that inscription. And this was also translated in three languages because that was commonly spoken. It was translated in Hebrew, Latin and Greek. And here we see the chief priest comes and tells the pilot like he is not the king of the Jews. But then the pilot says that's what he said. So what I have written, I have written. I request you to please go through what happened, how colonial act, how Christians we killed during the reign of Nero and the Roman government. I request you to please read that in the notes so that we have a clear idea. And John Mark also died and he was martyred under the leadership of Nero. So now with this we will come to a place where when was this book of Mark written? As in most of the books the Bible were considered as they agreed or there was some kind of disagreement when, what time, when, which reason did they write each one. But here in the Gospel of Mark it's believed that many scholars come in an agreement that it was the first Gospel that was written. And in an early date, as Peran notes it says 57 to 59 AD and some says 60 to about 61 to 68 AD. As I said the dates may vary but then the book was written. This Gospel was written and it was one of the earliest Gospel for which even Matthew and Mark, sorry, Matthew Luke referred to. Matthew and Luke refer to Mark's Gospel and they wrote this. So most scholars believe that it was written in Rome and four years in the life of Jesus from the ministry of John the Baptist to the ascension of Jesus has been covered in the 16 chapters of Mark. And to whom was this book addressed? To whom was the Gospel of Mark addressed? Well, it was addressed to the Gentiles, to the Romans who was living there. His desire was to show the Romans that Jesus was God's servant and acting under the authority of the Lord God and he also gives us an immediate and full obedience to all his commands. And there are several evidence throughout the book when we will come across several evidence of Jesus obeying his father. We see that in the very start of Gospel of Mark in chapter 1, 2 to 3 we see that it was written to Gentiles and we find that one actual quotation from the Old Testament and it was regarding the John the Baptist and not about Jesus. And this was a contrast between the book of Matthew and the book of Mark. Because in the book of Matthew we see that 60 Old Testament quotations have been in the book of Matthew, not much, maybe one or two has been quoted. But then Mark omits much of his preaching style of Jesus but then he actually quotes the actions of Jesus. He records the action of Jesus. One of the reasons because he is writing to the set of the Roman people or the Gentiles they do want to have any kind of preaching. They don't want to do any kind of preaching but then they are much interested. The Romans are much interested in the practice of the action. So accordingly as he writing to this set of group, accordingly he takes the action of Jesus and he writes it down. Because the Romans were much inclined and they were much interested in the practices and not in the preaching of individual. I think among the all four Gospels it was Mark was the only one who gives us a translation of an Aramaic word that Jews would have often used. When we turn to Mark chapter 4 verse 41 can I request anyone to turn to Mark chapter 4 verse 41? They were terrified and asked each other who is this? Even the wind and the waves obey him. Was it Mark? Mark chapter 4 verse 41? Yes pastor. Okay. Thanks. Maybe I have got the scripture. Not trying. Okay. There is also another place where Mark quotes about a synagogue leader's daughter who was dead who reported that she was dead and here he goes into their house he held her hand and he says, Thalitha cumi. And then that is an Aramaic word which is translated saying that little girl I say to you right. So he was the one who used few of the Aramaic words for the common language which was spoken then. And we also see Mark often gives a Latin version of certain normal Greek words which suggest a Roman orientation well the term that Mark used for example throughout this book when we see a basket maybe a different word for the taxes in Julian and all these were Latinized version of these words to make this gospel of Mark familiar to certain set of people and we also see that Mark seems to feel the need to give a geographical description of the amount of olives and he also shares that Jordan was a river for which Jews don't need description of all that because they know what mountain of all it means and what Jordan means but then because he is writing to the set of different people so he had to explain it and also Mark omits many references to Jewish law which would not impress the Roman so accordingly as he is writing this gospel to the gentiles Romans so he is omitting certain things that may not please them but then at the end his intention is to share the gospel of Jesus to the unreached crowd so what was the purpose of writing this book anyone in the class we see when we read this book we see the basic purpose to have been to win the Christian faith by presenting Jesus of Nazareth as a perfect and a faithful servant of the Lord he acknowledges as a son of God in Mark chapter 1 verse 1 and then shows him to be the suffering servant and the willing sacrifice for the sins of the this is how we portray Jesus in the gospel and what does that makes the gospel of Mark as the gospel of sin or the book of servant there are certain words that he mentions in this gospel which makes the scholars to call this book as a book of a servant few points I just list out the first indication of the servanthood is the absence of genealogy birth record or the adoration of the wise men pre-existence glory and early life it's not that Mark did not make a E was not aware of all these incidents in Jesus or the early life of Jesus but then he intentionally didn't mention why one of the reason was a servant's genealogy is of no importance to the Roman white there is no real value to a servant or a slave until they can start to work so Mark jumps right into the work of Jesus into the action of Jesus and the Romans may be interested in and the second point we see that the focus on the work of serving rather than you know talking about serving so there is no sermon on the mount has been recorded in the book of Mark no lengthy preaching or no lengthy preaching but then yes we see few of his miracles and parables have been noted in the book of Mark the third point we see that Jesus performed miracles and he would often instruct those touched those who were healed who were touched he instructed them not to tell anyone not to tell anyone why the servants do not get a lot of credit for what they do in those days or it was not yet for the time one of the reason which Jesus after every miracle we said do not tell anyone but for certain people we said go show to the high priest another point we see here is Jesus ministry at times left him no time to eat not only to Jesus even to his disciples so we see in Mark chapter 3 verse 20 Mark 3 verse 20 then the multitude came together again so they could not so much as eat bread they were so busy so the multitude there were many people to attend to so Jesus gave the priority to serve people than to pay attention to his own need so yes Jesus was the son of God at the same time he was man he was God he was man so he has emotions he has sense he would be hungry he would be tired that is what the word says he was tired he walked very far up he was tired so he went and sat when he was crossing Samaria near the well of Chaitra and now we see he is so tired like you know ministering to people he had no time to eat yes maybe he was very hungry not only Jesus along with Jesus again his disciples also very hungry so we see that Jesus laying aside his own needs to serve others and there are some other things that are not there but there is no reference to is a judgment of Christ and the King enthroned in glory we do not see that and Mark also does not mention what happened in the garden of Gethsemane how the angel came and ministered to Jesus we do not see that but yes we read that and the other gospels but not and the gospel of Mark so the book ends with Jesus still working and his followers so the book of Mark is very important we see the Christ in action through the lives of those who bear his name we also see there is an army of believers who live to serve and touch and be felt who served along with Jesus and as we study this book the gospel of we should also know that some of the scholars feel that the last chapter Mark 16 Mark 16 the last chapter we turn to the last yeah 9 to 20 we feel the last chapter was only clay verse 8 9 to 20 most particularly the verse 15 15 to 20 should not be included in the book of Mark why the reason behind this has to do the fact that the oldest manuscript dating from 4th century do not contain these verses it is rather interesting that you know there was a debate between the scholars that this verse was later added by some writers some feel that you know Mark ended this gospel abruptly so later the writers filled in the gap by reading the other gospel and gave a sense of completion to this gospel so some other scholars feel that the manuscript that omits the verse reflect the fact that the last verse we dropped because they opposed a theological problem relating to the miraculous expression and isolation so whatever the case maybe what is important for us to understand is that things mentioned by Christ in this commission are confirmed in other places in the New Testament and therefore they are saved for the purpose and doctrinal study information these scriptures are very important because it is a great commission given by Jesus we are not very sure did John Mark wrote all the other writers who have added this but it makes sense for us that every gospel should end with a great commission every good news that has been shared should end with a great commission where the instruction of Jesus was given go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature even believes and is baptized will be saved but he who does not believe will be content and these signs will follow those who believe in my name they will cast out demons they will speak with new tongues they will take up serpents and if they drink anything deadly it will by no means hurt them they will lay hand on the sick and they will recover well after this verse 19 and 20 says so then after the Lord had spoken to them he was received up into heaven and sat down in the right hand of God and they went out and preached everywhere the Lord working with them and confirming the word through the comforting signs so what a beautiful ending to show that Jesus Jesus has commanded each one to take up this gospel this good news and share it with others just like how Matthew gospel confirms in Matthew 28 same way Mark also confirms in his last chapter carrying this gospel it is not something to be contented with to just keep it to ourselves but then it is a gospel to share as you share as we share it will only be multiplied this we end the gospel of Mark so I leave it open to the class share add on what was the learning just share each one share one point that we learned from the gospel of Mark blessings llamas literally anyone just share one point on what we studied what we learned today from the gospel of Mark Mark revealed Jesus to be a man of action he was a representative of the religion of God and man anyone else Brother Lubeka, Brother Isaac Lyndon, Ruby anyone Mark we see as we said as Christ as a tireless servant of God and man and also reveals Jesus emotions of Jesus as we discussed today sometimes his disappointment his Jesus appearing as wondered and sighed affection different emotions of Jesus but also being carefully considered while he was writing Thank you John anyone else would like to add on some of the points that we could recap just giving you Mark presents Jesus as a suffering servant of God as one who came to serve and not to be served he also came to be a sacrifice for us so in part to inspire us to do the same we need to do and follow the same we also see yes yes Rosalind please go ahead Rosalind I see your hand raised yes yes I believe God will not give up on us we learnt like you know Mark during his service he turned back like we don't know the reason like for him but maybe he was discouraged or disappointed or he could not cope with the pressure so maybe in our lives also if sometimes if we give up on ourselves or in the ministry God will not give up on us later we see that you know Mark really joined he came back he was again so active that he wrote a gospel yes he was fruitful and he was helpful to all as well yes yes thanks Rosalind for sharing that very important thing yes so from the life of Mark yes as Rosalind shared we need to learn to minister in that way the same greatness and humility that they carried in themselves as taking the example from Jesus himself they had a greatness of humility and the devotion the sacrifice with which they served the extent of their physical limitation they had to walk long miles not expecting any royal treatment from people around they were very simple people they ate what was given to them even if there was no food they went ahead serving serving people nothing stopped them so looking at that we need to be like that we need to be imitator of Jesus and you know as even Paul says in his gospel that imitate me as I imitate Christ because they went beyond the limitation they served they served God with all humility and with lot of self sacrifice and yes Jesus was willing to lay down his life for the sheep so calling us to be selfless to ourselves today as we set ourselves aside to serve God in any area that God has called us in so I request let us be our prayer Lord whichever area that we are and help us to serve you selflessly they should be our prayer help us to have that heart to seek you despite our weakness despite our limitations I pray that Lord you enable us you enable us just like how John Mark left and went many reasons maybe he was homesick homesick or he was weak he could not keep up with the maturity level of Barnabas or Paul who was a great leader you know it can be many reasons or he could be fearful he didn't have enough courage and confidence or he would have got scared with the persecution that each time this went through he was not ready to go through all that pressure at that time maybe it could be any of these reasons that John Mark ran away but then he didn't give up God didn't give up on him nor him we see the fulfilling of God's purpose in us in life unlike that even in our life nothing one thing we need to remember every time when I face challenges in my life one word that comes to my mind is that God's work should not stop God's work should not stop let not a weakness stop us from doing what God has called us to do let not the lack in skill stop us from what God has called us to do is there a way that we can improve we can change will it take time for you to accomplish or to learn that skill yes must God who is the giver of everything God can give us the grace the skill that is needed in the area that God has called us because God is faithful the one who called you is faithful so friends as today as we studied the gospel of Mark we may have some of the weakness and challenges just like how Mark went through but let us be like John Mark who never gave up though he fell but he never gave up he trusted on God who called him was faithful today as we also trust God let's trust God and ask God to fulfill that in our life I will end the session with a quick breath Father God I surrender each one of us and myself in your hand we pray that you will help us not to give up in any area Lord the God who called us is faithful and we trust in you Lord that you will help us to work in every weakness in every area in our life as we look up to in Jesus name we pray Amen Thank you class thank you so much and I'm sorry we have exceeded the time thank you take a quick break and join the other class God bless oh there's no more class sorry I thought there's a session after that okay thank you God bless have a great day see you all next week with the next gospel I request you all please go through the gospel of Matthew gospel of Mark okay one more thing there's an assignment I request you all to write an assignment a short summary on gospel of Matthew and Mark you can present it in a PPT or a word format and upload it on the Google Classroom I will create an assignment and send you all an email okay thank you God bless you all on Monday with the next gospel thank you thank you God bless thank you God bless


Have you ever felt a deep sense of peace while walking barefoot on the beach or a sudden calm amidst the city's chaos? It might not be a coincidence. Our planet emits a subtle yet powerful song, a 7.83 Hz frequency known as the Shuman Resonance. This video dives into the fascinating world of this natural phenomenon and explores its profound impact on our well-being. Did you know the Earth pulsates with a specific frequency? This 7.83 Hz hum, called the Shuman Resonance, has profound effects on all living things, including us humans. But with the rise of technology, we've become increasingly disconnected from this natural rhythm potentially impacting our well-being. Interestingly, the ancient Indian Aam mantra resonates at the same frequency, suggesting an intuitive understanding of this connection long before scientific discovery.


In this section, we're going to continue our discussion on analysis and synthesis, digging a bit deeper into the distinction between the two. The first thing to note is that the methods of synthesis and analysis are not mutually exclusive. They should both be a part of any well-developed model, but each will have particular relevance depending on the type or properties of the system we are dealing with. Thus, it should not be a surprise to us that physics is the home of the reductionist approach, where they are often dealing with inert, static and decomposable systems, whereas ecologists that deal with highly interconnected and dynamic systems are much more inclined to systems thinking. So some of the primary questions we will be asking to determine the type of system we are dealing with, and thus the appropriate method of reasoning will be, firstly, is it primarily a component-based system, or does it serve some common function that integrates the various elements? Is it isolated or connected? Is it a linear deterministic system or a nonlinear, non-determinate system? And is it static or dynamic? We will be covering many of these topics in more depth later on in the course, so we will just be touching on them for the moment. Firstly, are we dealing with an actual system or simply a set of things? When we wish to talk about a composite entity, that is to say a group of things, we can describe it as either a set of objects or a system, the difference here being that a set is a group of objects that share no common function. Thus we call a group of cups on a table a set of cups, as they exist independently from each other. In contrary, if we take the human body, again, it is a composite entity, but this time the elements have been designed to serve some common function and thus we can call it a system, and we need to use systems thinking to properly understand it. Secondly, how interconnected is the system? Analysis starts from a component-based view of the world and builds a description based upon the properties of these components. Synthesis, in contrary, focuses upon the relationships between parts, thus from a systems thinking perspective, we are often interested in connectivity, i.e. answering the question, what is connected to what, and thus is best suited to systems with a high level of interconnectivity. Thirdly, are we dealing with a linear system or are there feedback loops? Analytical thinking searches for direct linear relations between the cause of an event and the effect. Thus we call this linear thinking. Systems thinking is more inclined to see events as the product of a complex interacting of parts where relations are often cyclical with feedback loops. Is the system primarily static or dynamic? Analytical methods often describe entities in terms of static structures with limited reference to their development within time. Systems thinking takes a more dynamic view of things, often contextualizing entities in terms of the evolutionary forces that have shaped them and thus seeing the process of development as an important phenomena with which to understand the world. Lastly, are we dealing with a system on the micro level or the macro level? Analysis breaks things down into parts and thus analytical thinking typically focuses upon analyzing and optimizing subsystems in a belief that we can improve the whole system by simply optimizing all of its sub-components. If we are dealing with a system on the macro level, what we sometimes call the global level, we need to use systems thinking to get a vision of the whole system and an understanding of how the parts interrelate to achieve global functionality.


Other parts of Africa today the faults of March marks 10 years since the huge explosions rocked the neighborhood of Pilar in the capital of Congo, Brazil, Brazil, the blast of the ammunition and arms that were killed at least 282 people wounded over 2,300 and left more than 25,000 people displaced. 10 years have passed upon many of the estimated 17,000 victims are still looking for situable accommodation. Last year the government paid a compensation to about 1,000 victims and promised to pay some more in 2022.


The booth just came out with the Abraham Lincoln Limited Edition fountain pen. This pen is very limited There's only 125 pieces worldwide. So if you are wanting one of these get it now before it's no longer available included in the box is cartridges a little bit about the president and then obviously the pen Abraham Lincoln was the 16th president of the United States in 1861 so this pen is dedicated and kind of resembles who he was as a president and his entire life. There is a little outline of Abraham Lincoln on the cap of the pen, which was just shown The pen is a cartridge converter fountain pen There's a converter inside the pen and then I already did show the cartridges that were included as the box so you can choose either or This pen is fitted with a German gold-plated stainless steel nib that has the LaBeouf logo on it The pen is made from an exclusive hickory brown bluegrass blue Marbleized acrylic that they chose to represent Abraham Lincoln's Kentucky roots where he Grew up in a log cabin. This pen is also available as a rollerball, which Is a great option if you are not a fountain pen lover But you can get either the fountain pen or the rollerball right now at penchili.com


What's good everybody happy Thursday, it's Chris from jassescasebase.com doing the last failure that we need for our hit parade basketball Random team six. This is 21 22 prism NB a cell one pack break random team number 19 couple of Randomizes to do first off we're giving away seven of the pack spot giveaways and at the very very end We're gonna give away those last nine spots and that hit parade basketball Random team six which is already sold out. So thanks again everyone who got a spot in the hit parade straight up and in this filler Let's start it off fresh dice and our fresh excuse me list That's 23 spots from when shunned down to Davis you grab the last spot there our fresh dice our fresh lists and our teams from 1 to 30 will add the Last seven teams who won on this one here. We go good luck. Let's roll our first dice One and five six times for the spot giveaway. Good luck one two three four five and six Sixth and final time So top seven Davis one of those last spot mojo's and Rob Down to Rob here So a little arrow next to your name Means you won this one So Davis Eugene Zachary Eugene Davis one shun and Rob There we go. So our 30 now. Let's roll our dice and randomize for the pack one and three four times Good luck again one two three and four fourth and final time Rex down to Rob four times for the teams one two three and four Bulls down to Hornets No trade window just a pack failure. Let's format We'll print and we'll rip and let's show off real quick actually Like this We'll show off for just a few seconds you can pause if you would like to see what teams you've got But one shun and the Hawks All the way down to one shun with the winds up wizards a little grand opening a little grand closing Let's print and we'll switch screens Our cell pack here are hit pray looming in the background Thanks again everyone for starting out the day with me We're trying to say it's not a little earlier hours get some breaks them before Joe or Jason gets in whether it's me or Michael we all appreciate you Stopping it by Grab some spots and ripping with us. So one shun at the top there All the way down to one shun with the wizards All right grab our pack first This case right here is going to be in a separate video the next video even Bear bonus pack CJ McCollum Got a Lou Dort and a Steve Nash. All right. That's just the pack We'll switch screens get to the fun part here Let's grab our names here One more time from Rex down to Rob fresh dice Fresh list top nine We'll get into the hit parade basketball. We'll roll our dice and randomize two and one three times Quick and easy. Good luck everyone and thanks again one To who a three crunch Putting the role of mr. Owl today Davis with that free spot Just misses Robert when shun all the way down to Eugene Thanks again. Now. We'll see if you've all got some multi spots. So see who gets in congrats to Gallipa does get it nice Nancy When shun also on the outside looking in there for a second snail gets in Rob with that free spot one shun again Davis with the last spot mojo nice Eugene and scott So top nine We'll take you over here Post you out here for a sec real quick for his cell 19 grab these So these nine. Thanks again. Congrats I will grab your names plug them into our break sheet and when we come back Full case of hit parade jasper's exclusive basketball. Thanks again. Jasper's case breaks calm. Bye. Bye


三仙者哈解三極修仙阿仙相要擁有何懷疑女老仙拿鱗鱗好煮姓丹成秋胡同女老仙整到花糖慶好阿仙仙是我等死吼是超貓在步調上面有一些字哦The first one is 天官四子God bless and give happiness to peopleThe second one is 汪朝一平Obsvains are honored with high official titlesOne is 風條雨順It's good weather for the cropsOne is 國泰民And it's a peaceful and abundant year叫喊紅甘孤同捧獲足呀


Side effects of knowledge include greater understanding of the world around you, and an increased demand of evidence from elected officials. Difficulty swallowing lies has been reported by some users, as well as reduced tolerance for flawed arguments, personal attacks, anecdotal evidence, and false equivalences. Other users report becoming addicted to learning. A small percentage of users also exhibit behavior changes, such as fact-checking, rejection of internet memes, and political activism. Educational videos slow but do not stop the spread of misinformation, propaganda, and alternative facts. If confronted with a serious case of these things, seek immediate help from non-profit institutions of higher education or trained knowledge professionals, such as scientists, researchers, or investigative journalists.


No, I was just telling you it needs cleaning You just keep writing I am gay on this piece of paper Please copy this entire book because my printer isn't working Fair enough. I guess please be warned that at any given time I may come and spit on your face Can you feel it feel with the tension left or right? Right tight for two hours. You're my You know how to use tinder. No, I want you to go on a tinder and find me three matches tonight Okay, three days one at five one at seven and one nine p.m. I'm open to a platonic one-night stand Make me sound like a gentleman. Okay. Have you ever visited the basement of the school? There's a basement. Okay, great I'll lock you in there. You have two hours to get out.  You'll see some familiar faces in there. It's worth missing ten years ago. Here's my phone Make me reach level 25 on Candy Crush and I'll consider your detention You'll be level 25 really gonna give me attitude. Okay, you know what make it level 600 here is my personal computer I need you to blackmail the English teacher look for I want his position real bad. Luckily.  Oh, wow now I get why you're here I found a video of him where he says hello So I need you to photoshop this video of him saying I'll eat la Photoshop is for photos not videos plus there's not enough syllables in here. I don't know that double negative.   Oh, I can't imagine that Right. How can you focus on your movie, right? No, I'm not gonna do that to you I'm not that mean I would also ask you to walk out of the room so you don't see me suffer I guess that's fair. I'll call on the girls one of them is miss Sally the 60 year old math teacher Sagi Sally we call her Sagi Sally Sagi Sagi Sagi Sagi Sally. Do you like BTS? Not a fan, but I don't mind one or two songs Excuse me? By the end of this detention you will be an army I'll teach you all about every single member and their stories and why people think they're so Talented Which member is this? Jimin? Jungkook now tell me why you love them because they're so cute They're so talented and the same result could not have been achieved with just the three main members who write and compose the songs You need all nine of them. Oh, wow, they make life so much better. Now you're speaking my truth How broke are you? Pretty broke. Too bad. You could have bought your way out of detention.  Hey, why don't we just bang for two hours? I'm a student your teacher. No one's gonna know. They will know I'm filming for the channel Everyone can see Charles. Why why didn't you tell me the recording? Well, why didn't you tell me I'm a reward? Oh my god


40 here. So the news about the US Supreme Court striking down affirmative action on the basis of race into universities, it did seem like a lot of journalists took that very personally because journalism as a whole is not a business that can stand on its own two feet. It's heavily subsidized and therefore it needs to accommodate itself to the powers that be and the powers that be the ones who rule virtually all institutions in our country are on the left. And the left is very pro affirmative action. All right. Remember woke means that there are certain groups, certain allegedly oppressed minority groups such as blacks and LGBTQ trans, et cetera, who must be exempt from criticism. Here's how it goes. Half a century ago, the media and the liberals love the Supreme Court. And why not? Those justices established the constitutional right to abortion and Roe v. Wade and said race could be considered as a factor in college admissions in the Baki case. Conservatives ripped those rulings, but didn't try to discredit the court. But with today's John Roberts court overturning both those rulings in the past year, the national right to abortion. And last week, tossing out college affirmative action, there's been something of a media freak out. Add to that the court knocking down Joe Biden's student debt relief and saying a web designer can't be forced to design a same sex wedding site. And you have many infuriated Democrats. AOC says impeachment is not off the table. Congressman Ted Lu says he wants to expand the high court because of its radical extreme supermajority. Keep in mind that court packing turned into fiasco for FDR for an infection has always had a contradiction at its heart, hurting some people like Asian Americans who are also a minority while helping others such as blacks and Hispanics and has brought out plenty of ugliness. The Atlantic's Jamel Hill, who is black, telling Asian American on Twitter that you gladly carried the water for white supremacy and stabbed the folks in the back whose people fought diligently for Asian American rights. White supremacy. It's perfectly fine for pundits to attack SCOTUS rulings they don't like. But is it going too far based on partisan differences to try to undermine the institution? I'm Howard Kurtz and this is Media Buzz. These end of the term rulings are fueling heated media reactions on the left and the right, sometimes in quite personal terms as well as from the president. Is this a road of court? This is not a normal road. Impeach the justices, term limit the justices, pack the court for all the talk of civility and the talk of the restoration of norms. It seems there is no institution of our republic that won't be destroyed in defense of their democracy. This court has adopted a kind of imperial mindset. Six right wing politicians in robes on the Trump Supreme Court are granting themselves the authority to govern as a kind of unaccountable super legislature. The court's affirmative action ruling, which was pivotal, it's causing liberals heads to explode. They are even using it to call Asians white supremacists. And I'm not joking. I'm not making this up. It's the feeling that I and people who look like me and were born like me don't have the right to the promise of America as spelled out in our founding documents. Wow. So unless unless people like Jonathan Capehart, who's a two for right, both black and gay, he feels denied the promise of America unless the playing field is tilted in his favor. So right now, Harvard uses approximately a 400 SAT, you know, point advantage to to admit black students if they were admitted solely on the basis of merit according to 30 fewer than one percent of Harvard would be black. But Harvard's freshman class, by contrast, it's 15 percent black. That's so by those standards, according to that study, that means that only about six out of 100 blacks in Harvard's freshman class would would be there if the sole basis for admission was academic merit. Joining us and analyze the coverage, Ben Dominic, editor-in-large for The Spectator and Richard Fowler, the radio talk show host, both are Fox News contributors. Ben, how did we go from the media criticizing these last Supreme Court decisions to denouncing its credibility and calling it corrupt? Well, one of the big things that's left out of all of this is that this court has actually been quite balanced in its rulings. It dealt some real losses to Republican efforts when it came to redistricting and the like just earlier in this term.  The other thing that I think that is left out here is that of all the entities that represent our federal government at the moment, I would argue that the court is being the most representative of public opinion in the sense that if you actually look at the affirmative action question when asked both by Harvard's own polling efforts and by the Pew forum and the like over the last several years, it's a 70-30 issue at best. It's the most recent Pew poll was 74-26 in terms of the number of Americans who were opposed to affirmative action. And so I don't think that this has the same kind of flavor as it would in perhaps other areas where it's viewed as the court supplanting itself over public opinion. In fact, they are ruling according to the Constitution and it's in and it is consistent with where Americans are. Well, you have a point on affirmative action, but Richard, with AOC talking about impeachment and Dems talking about court packing, the media reporting on this is not that this is loony tunes and we all know none of this is going to happen. Listen, I think the media is missing a story here, right? And I think it's important to figure out the missing stories so you can understand where AOC and all these folks will come up with court packing. I think, and that has to do with many of the ethical missteps that the court has made over recent, right? We have pictures of Supreme Court justices palling it up with millionaires. Oh, my God, the Supreme Court justices palling it up with millionaires. We can't have that. I mean, the court must be corrupted. Way to say, hey, we're gonna unelect them or they're beholden to the people. So with that being said, when you put the affirmative action court, when you put the affirmative action ruling in the microscope and you say, well, okay, so if this is true, it'll to most applicants. So but before that, the coverage was like this is the apocalypse. You know, I certainly think that, you know, there's an overreaction on on this point because of so much of the dedication of a lot of a significant portion of the left to the ideas that are that undergird the affirmative action system. But I would point to the analysis of someone who I think is as one of the most intelligent political analysts on the left, Rita Sherra, who's formerly the Center for American Progress now in AI, who made the point that if you're actually running against this, you're doing it at odds with the current trends among the American working class and middle class in terms of their priorities. You're doing it, you know, completely at odds with what we see them saying about that way that they want our college systems to work. And I didn't hear any of that in this media coverage. Any of it sort of saying, well, you know, the court is basically saying we have to reset on this on these things on these different questions. The colleges are free to analyze things in different ways, which I expect that they will, you know, leaning more into personal essays, leaning more into things like that, as opposed to test scores, there's going to be a backlash to this. But yeah, it's fascinating how conservatives are so quick to claim that absolutely hopeless that these Kenny left wing college administrators will figure out ways to get around this for California banned affirmative action. And as a result, there's been a dramatic decrease in the number of, you know, like low IQ groups admitted to our elite universities. So the university industrial complex will found ways of mitigating, mediating, reducing the claims of merit, all right, to maintain a certain diversity of low achieving groups. But this will still have a substantial effect. Okay, so I was able to sleep in this morning. So I'm so energized right now is able to sleep until about 420 this morning. After my shower, I fired up my computer. And just before I was going into my recorded 12 step talks that I like to listen to to get my head straight for the day. This is what YouTube promoted to me on the front page of YouTube.com. So surely, surely YouTube is not promoting misinformation here. Well, welcome to today's talk Tuesday, the 6th of June. Now today I want to report on the most impressive piece of scholarship that's so far been released on the most impressive piece of scholarship. Oh, it's from a, a doctor, Dr. John Campbell, a doctor. Well, not a medical doctor. He's a retired dude in public health. He used to teach nursing. But it's really important to him that you think of him as a doctor. They're not a medical doctor. So in Australia, right, chiropractors are not considered doctors. But whenever I talk to a chiropractor on the phone, or in real life, they always introduce themselves. This is, you know, Dr. Cohen, you know, Dr. Ali, Dr. Salazar. And whenever I talk to a medical doctor, it's invariably, you know, this is John, this is Pete, the effect of lockdowns. This is it here. The whole thing is available and in the public domain. And I'm just going to give you a headline to see if you want to watch this video or not. The talk is called lockdowns were a costly failure. And COVID-19 lockdowns were a global policy failure of gigantic proportions, according to this report. And this report actually looks at empirical data, real numbers in the real world, not Whoa, this report guys, it looks at empirical data. I mean, it's looking at real numbers in the real world. This blog's got 2.81 million subscribers. And he's saying that evidence on COVID restrictions is now conclusive that they were absolutely useless. Because we have a John Hopkins study, guys, John Hopkins study looking at real data, empirical data, data from, you guessed it, hold on, the real whoa, whoa, art modeling, as was done quite, pretty well always in the past. Oh, so it's just modeling being done in the past. So socially isolating yourself is a response to pandemics that's existed for thousands of years. It was existed in biblical times. Right. The Torah prescribes social isolation during, you know, sometimes a plague and pandemic. It's was used with regard to the black death. It's a very common time tested way of responding to social pandemics. But apparently all studies until now, according to this doctor, were just based on modeling, but now we've got empirical real world data. Very exciting. So that's what this is about. Now, this is the report here, just released on the just released in June, as I say, very thorough report, all available in the public domain, published by the London based Institute of Economic Economic Affairs. And Okay, so this is a libertarian Institute. It goes on to well over 200 pages. So check it out for yourself. Completely free to download, which is very magnanimous, of course, of the authors in the Institute of Economic Affairs to do that. But comprehensive and completely readable. So let's get straight down to what it's talking about.  Like a global policy failure. So this is everywhere. Pretty well wherever you are, we've been let down by our government. So we'll be looking at the way reports were written, but not adequately scrutinized by government. This is primarily a governmental failure. So this guy is upset that we haven't adequately scrutinized previous academic studies. So you can be sure that he's thoroughly scrutinized this particular study. Guys, we need to thoroughly scrutinize these things before we change our way of life. And I personally feel that down and I know a lot of you do as well. Now this is the update we're just looking at here. That was the previous version there. So as I say, all available, check it out for yourself. The systematic review and meta analysis. So it takes to So when I have friends who want to push like French medical scientific theories on me, I always tell them send me and they what they usually send me are like tweets from various randos. That's it. No, send me a meta analysis published in a prestigious journal. Right. If you meta analysis mean you look at all previous studies on the topic, and you rate and rank the studies by their power, right? By, you know, how how important they are by, you know, how many people they use the methods that we use. And so you develop an overview of all learning in a particular area until now and you put it all together. So meta analysis absolutely essential for getting a handle on things. But what this review does not do is publish in a prestigious journal. Now that doesn't mean it's wrong.  And if it's going to be something groundbreaking, normally I'm going to want to see a meta analysis. A nation of useful papers, which is an excellent way to do research. Published in London Institute of Economic Affairs, did lockdown COVID restrictions, social distancing, non-pharm suitable interventions, whatever you want to call it, affect COVID mortality based on the empirical evidence. This is not someone sitting in a back room with a sophisticated calculator or sophisticated computer. This is actually real world data. What actually happened? Of course, that is what science is all about. Science is all about empiricism or it's about nothing at all. Science is not theoretically is a practical discipline. Systematic search and screening procedure. So they looked at pretty well 20,000 studies, 32 qualified, but only 22 converted for meta analysis. And that is because only 22 contain the real world data that was required. In other words, the numbers, the numbers in the real world. And this is why this study is so refreshing. We're getting back to reality. I think we've been in a bit of a flight of fancy for the past few years. Thank God, guys, we're getting back to reality. All right, finally, we got some scrutiny. And we're going to deal here with empiricism and real world data.  Thank God that there are these brave, contrarian voices out there. Even though squashed by YouTube, and I mean, Pope likes being limited to just 2.81 million subscribers Dr. Dr. John Campbell, right, not a not a medical doctor, but retired nursing instructor ably led by government and mainstream media. But now we're back to scientific reality, which delights me. Wow. So 22 is actually measured mortality data not derived from modeling. Now the use of stringency index as one of the one of the things they looked at. That's how strict the lockdowns were. So they were comparing to less strict areas such as Sweden, average lockdown in Europe in the United States in the spring of 2020, which is as far as this data goes. So this is the essentially the first wave isn't it the spring of 2020 only reduced mortality cover 19 by 3.2%. Man, this is so exciting. I mean, I'm so, so thrilled to be able to share this with you. And luckily, Fox News is on this story guys. CNN, MSNBC, New York Times, Washington Post completely avoid John Hopkins study finding COVID lockdowns ineffective. Man, why do they why do they try to hide the truth from us?  Come on, guys. We are getting reaction tonight to a report we told you about yesterday, including the coronavirus lockdowns have had little to no effect on mortality during the pandemic. Corresponded Jonathan Seary shows this tonight from Atlanta. Opponents of mandates are expressing vindication after one of the most trusted sources of data on COVID-19. Johns Hopkins University published a study concluding that lockdown policies are ill founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument. I think it's very appropriate that we take a look back and admit our mistakes. If if if we were wrong, we need to know from the next pandemic in the last few weeks. We're going to take a look at some of the data. In the Johns Hopkins report three leading economists analyzed data from 24 studies and determined travel bans and mandatory school and business closures early in the pandemic reduced COVID deaths by only 0.2 percent. I think it's important that we try and remove all the politics and really talk about what the data shows, what science shows and in support free inquiry and people asking important questions about how COVID-19 is going to happen in the next few weeks. The White House COVID briefing, however, federal health officials said they welcome a proposal in the Senate to create a bipartisan task force to investigate the pandemic's origins and the response of the Trump and Biden administrations. I think it's important to look at every aspect of this outbreak for lessons learned that is not only what the government can prevent something like this happening or respond better if and when it does. And an FDA advisory panel is scheduled to meet February 15 to discuss Pfizer's application to expand vaccine access to children under the age of five. A Kaiser Family Foundation survey finds that three in 10 parents with kids in this age group would get the shots for their children right away if approved. John. Well, thank God for Fox News, those brave truth soldiers at Fox News. They're willing to bring us the news that the mainstream media is just trying to black out from our knowledge. All right. This is Bruce Lee. He's a senior contributor to Ford's. He's a writer and a journalist and a systems modeler. What does he have to say? Have you seen the so-called Johns Hopkins study that's been making the social media and Bill Marr rounds lately? Some folks have been asserting that this Johns Hopkins study somehow showed that COVID-19 lockdowns have been essentially useless. If you haven't seen what they've been referring to, could it possibly be because there's been so called a full on media blackout of this so called Johns Hopkins study as an article for Fox News has claimed? Or maybe just maybe this Johns Hopkins study didn't receive much press because it wasn't exactly what some people have been claiming that it is. If you've noticed some have been repeating the name Johns Hopkins study as if it were some kind of magical phrase like open sesame or umbop. In actuality, it's not really appropriate here to call what's Johns Hopkins study, which might suggest that Johns Hopkins University has somehow commissioned or endorsed the study. Nevertheless, some people and social media accounts have been pushing the whole Johns Hopkins name. Yeah, the university itself didn't write the paper because buildings can't type on laptops without crushing them. Heck, the paper even stated that views expressed in each working paper are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the institutions with. Therefore, if folks really want to mention Johns Hopkins, they should instead be referring to this working paper as being from a professor at Johns Hopkins University, as Maher did in this past week's episode of his HBO show Real Time with Bill Maher. As you can see, Maher dropped the Johns Hopkins name without even mentioning the professor's name, Steve H. Hank, PhD, a professor of applied economics at Johns Hopkins University and a senior fellow at the Cato and American Libertarian think tank. Maher also didn't specify that two of three authors weren't even from Johns Hopkins University. Jonas Erby, MS, whom the working paper described as a special advisor at Center for Political Studies in Copenhagen, Denmark, and Lars Johnning, PhD, who is a professor emeritus in economics at Lund University, Sweden. Moreover, Maher didn't clarify that the three authors were economists rather than medical, psychology, or public health experts. Isn't that a bit like three proctologists telling you how the economy is doing? It's not clear how much economists alone would understand the complexities and subtleties of medicine in public health. After all, if you were to end up in the emergency room with an injury, don't worry an economist will be around shortly to reattach your arm, may not be the most comforting thing to hear. Oh, and note that Erby, Johnning, and Hank themselves used the term, working paper, to describe what they had put together. Simply calling it a John's Hopkins study glosses over this important distinction. A working paper is not the same as a peer-reviewed study published in a reputable scientific journal just like how a YouTube video of you getting pelted with sausages would not be the same as a full-length Hollywood movie. Basically, anyone who has access to the Internet, a laptop, smartphone, and opposable thumbs can post a working paper on a website. So while it is clear that Meerkats alone did not write and post this working paper, take anything that it said with 17 ugg boots full of salt. This working paper did make some bold claims. For example, it concluded that lockdowns have had little to no public health effects. They have imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted. In consequence, lockdown policies are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument. By the way, what did the authors consider lockdowns? Well, according to the working paper, lockdowns are defined as the imposition of at least one compulsory, non-pharmaceutical intervention, NPI. Holy changing definitions, Batman by Irby, Johnny, and Hank's definition, even face mask requirements would be considered a lockdown, right?   Sure, a face mask may prevent your nose from wandering away from your face and partaking in a rave, before returning to your face in the morning. But other than that, face mask requirements really don't restrict your ability to move away from your home. This doesn't quite jibe with the dictionary.com definition which describes a lockdown as a security measure taken during an emergency to prevent people from leaving or entering a building or other location. So unless you are wearing a ridiculously enormous face mask or one with BDSM chains attached to your friend, wearing a face mask shouldn't prevent you from leaving or entering most buildings. Okay, changing definitions aside, did this working paper really provide enough evidence to support its bold claims? In a word, no. In two words, hack no. The authors claim that they performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. That should mean that they should have considered and included all published peer-reviewed studies relevant to the topic at hand. Yet, this working paper did not include or even acknowledge many such studies that have shown the benefits of NPIs such as face mask wearing and social distancing without explaining why the three authors excluded such studies. Of the 34, studies included in the review, 12 of them were actually working papers. In fact, 14 of the studies were actually from economists with only one being from epidemiologists. This is odd since most of the key NPI research studies have been conducted by epidemiologists, medical researchers, and other public health experts. To qualify as a meta-analysis, a study needs to fulfill established criteria, which includes demonstrating that you've included all of the studies that have been published. Without providing clear evidence that you have done so, instead of a literature review and meta-analysis of the effects of lockdowns on COVID-19 mortality, would a better title of this working paper have been stuff that we selected to support our point of view? Not only that, others have pointed out various flaws in the working paper's actual analyses. For example, here's what Gideon Myrowitz Katz, an epidemiologist, tweeted. Later in the tweet thread, Myrowitz Katz suggested that some cherry picking was going on with the working paper. And when you do a review of the literature and select a paper to be included in your so-called meta-analysis, it's not a good sign when the authors of that paper disagree with your interpretation of their paper. Claiming that NPIs have had little to no public health effects, simply goes against what's been observed and documented throughout this COVID-19 pandemic. Just look at the rather stark differences among how countries have fared during this pandemic in terms of COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths. Countries that have followed the existing scientific evidence such as New Zealand, Taiwan, and South Korea have had much fewer deaths and hospitalizations than countries that have frequently veered away from the science such as the US, the UK, and Brazil. These certainly weren't the only problematic issues with the working paper. But why go deeper into them since there's been a so-called media blackout of this paper, right? At least, that's what Joseph A. reporter for Fox News tweeted in all caps. Yep, Wolfson claimed in an article for Fox News that there has been a full-on media blackout of the new study outlining the ineffectiveness of lockdowns to prevent COVID deaths. Really, a full-on media blackout? Apparently, many of us didn't get the memo. In his article, he asserted that the Johns Hopkins study received no mention on any of the five liberal networks this week. According to Grabean Transcripts, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS and NBC all ignored the anti-lockdown findings after having spent much of the pandemic shaming red states with minimal restrictions in events deemed by critics as, super spreaders. Oh, there were plenty of non-political and non-partisan reasons not to cover this working paper. Obviously, media outlets can't cover everything that anyone happens to post on a website. Otherwise, you'd be getting daily updates on what's been posted on the FartShare website. It's not clear what a full-on media blackout even means or how exactly it would work. How in the world would someone corral all legitimate journalists everywhere and tell them not to cover something? Would there be a secret sign, emoji, or set of semaphores? And would space lasers somehow be involved? Telling real journalists not to write about something probably would motivate them even more to write about it. This whole Johns Hopkins study situation is like deja vu all over again. Back in April 2021 I covered for Forbes how some people were pushing a so-called Stanford study that wasn't exactly from Stanford and wasn't even really a study. So be wary whenever people emphasize the name of any particular academic institution associated with a study rather than focusing on the study itself and who specifically performed it. Universities consist of many different professors and other academics who have varying levels of expertise and experience in the academic freedom to pursue whatever research they choose. Just because someone is from a given university doesn't necessarily mean that the person knows what he or she is talking about. Again, instead, evaluate the person's background and what specifically he or she is saying. Chora, Irby, Johnny, and Hank working paper may not sound quite the same as a Johns Hopkins study. But in this case, the former would be more accurate description than the latter. Okay, there's a lot of common sense there in that analysis. I mean, that people on the right in particular just the dissidently inclined or just jumping all over this the study seemed sympathetic. I mean, touting itself as a Johns Hopkins study because it was conducted by an economist at John Hopkins then claiming there was a full-on media blackout of the paper. Right? First of all, paper is a working paper, not peer reviewed. It was published on the website of the Institute for Applied Economics. Right? Not exactly a traditional medical institution. None of the authors are doctors or scientists. There are two economists and one employee of this libertarian institute. All of these trio have been extremely anti-lockdown since March 2020. And the paper has got a really weird definition of lockdown. Right? So the most inconsistent aspect of the paper is reinterpreting what a lockdown is. The authors define lockdown as the imposition of at least one compulsory non-pharmaceutical intervention. So if you wear a face mask anywhere that is considered a lockdown. So Neal Ferguson of Imperial College says in the UK has been in permanent lockdown since the 16th of March 2021 and remains in lockdown. Given that it remains compulsory for people in the UK with diagnosed COVID to self-isolate for at least five days. Of the 34 papers ultimately selected for this meta-analysis 12 working papers rather than peer reviewed. 14 studies were conducted by economists. Not exactly public health or medical experts. And the inclusion criteria doesn't include moderate counterfactuals, the most common method using infectious disease assessments. It excludes most epidemiological research from the review. Included studies are not representative of research as a whole on lockdowns. Many of the most robust papers on the impact of lockdowns are excluded. All this adds up to is a very weird review paper. The authors exclude many of the most rigorous studies but include those that are the entire basis for their meta-analysis in the first place. They then take a number of papers, most of which found that restrictive non-pharmaceutical interventions had a benefit on mortality and then derive some mathematical estimate from their regression coefficients indicating less benefit than the paper suggests. All this together means the actual numbers produced in the review are not interpretable.  This translates to approximately 6,000 avoidable deaths and 4,000 avoidable deaths in the United States. And when we come to look at the cost benefit analysis of this and how this compares to other diseases, these really are small amounts given these people primarily with significant comorbidities. Not all, but primarily. So Dr. John Campbell turns out to be primarily a trainer of nurses, not exactly much of a doctor. So what's going on with the Biden administration, the courts and social media? So major... Judges rule the Biden administration must limit most contacts with social media giants in a suit filed by Republican agencies in Louisiana and Missouri. In a decision some media folks are calling an attack on free speech, the Trump appointed judge ruled that Biden officials went too far in lobbying to remove posts dealing with vaccines and interference in American elections. There are some allegations and some very heavy handed tactics here where the government was pressuring social media companies to say what it wanted to say. When the government is telling social media companies what to do, there is a risk of censorship there. For them to now suddenly have a hands-off attitude and let anything run rampant across all of these platforms would just be radical. Joining us now from Connecticut, Charlie Gasparino, senior reporter at Fox Business Network. Charlie, the judge in this case and the Biden administration has appealed and the Junction could be overturned, says not only did the administration go too far in lobbying, pressuring the social media companies to take things down but has silence conservatives in the process? Well, all that could be true and this still could be kind of a funky ruling, right? I mean, listen, obviously the facts are not great here. The Biden administration basically got Twitter essentially to censor anything that was not following the party line regarding vaccines and more than that and actually getting people canceled. Alex Berenson, the journalist, was canceled because he's a vaccine skeptic. All horrible, disgusting stuff. But I don't know, how is it illegal for the government to ask? Do you see what I'm saying? They don't make the final decision. The companies make the final decision. Right, we're reporters.  The question, you know, you want to have that dialogue with people that you're covering and social media is kind of a journalism outfit even though it does have pleasures that we don't have like section 230 of the communications acts.  By the way, let me just jump in because the Trump campaign did some of this as well and the Twitter files investigation uncovered some of this and the mainstream media basically ignored it, but do you see it as a battle over free speech? You know, it is a battle over free speech. I don't know the law here. The law seems dubious here that you can tell the government not to call up anybody, not to call up a social media company. Now, if the government was essentially, I don't know, bribing them, extorting them, okay, you know, we'll take away X if you don't ban Alex Berenson from Twitter, well then we're talking, then that's legal and that's not a First Amendment issue. That's a crime, okay, now how can you charge a government for that? I don't know, but that gets into another area. So Mark Zuckerberg got 70 million sign-ups in a couple of days for his new okay, so if the full force of the United States government is reaching out to you, doesn't that inherently have a chilling effect, right? If the White House reaches out to you, you know so much of your welfare and your profits are based upon government favor, why would you not be intimidated? Why would that not have a sensorious effect? Okay, so I'm struck by all the coverage of the French riots that almost all the coverage treats it as something that's unique to France and some problem with France when in reality the populations involved, they cause very similar problems everywhere they are in the world. There's nothing particularly French about these French race riots. So let me play a little bit here from our favorite Peter Zayn. France. There have been a number of protests and a number of schools and police officers have been burned in the last couple of days. The triggering event is the police killed a kid I want to say it was like 15, 17, something like that and so there's been the spontaneous uprising of violence. We haven't seen activity like this since 2005. Back then similar cause, police killed a couple of kids that were hiding from the police and it triggered riots that lasted several weeks. Too soon to know if this is going to be one of those sort of explosive protracted events, but it's worth considering because France is not like a lot of other places. Now here in the United States Yeah, so he's saying essentially there's something unique to France that's causing these riots but I have a bigger question where exactly has it worked out well for a host first world country to import low IQ groups? So I can understand in certain circumstances where you desperately need the labor and being low IQ isn't disqualifying because you have such a desperate need for labor, but where has it worked out very well for any first world country to import low IQ groups? I'm just unaware of that working out well for anyone everywhere that has done this has ended up with French, these type of French race riots We obviously have a checkered pass at a checkered present when it comes to issues of race and it's part of the conversation Checkered meaning that different groups tend to have different gifts tend to perform at different levels, have different levels of educational attainment, different levels of income, different levels of law abiding this, different levels of committing rape and murder Time, and there are members of a number of minorities that are representative in governments at all levels especially the national level, we've even had a black president. That is not the situation in France. In France, they made the decision back after the revolution that ethnic conflict was so extreme that they had to redefine what the term Okay, so where on earth with these particular ethnic mixes have they gotten it right? There are different approaches but none of them have borne any empirical result that any same country would want a model. Not the United States, not Canada, not Australia, not England, not France, not Germany. How do you know if groups are low IQ? Well, it's about the most replicated part of social science. We're in the replication crisis of social science but the most replicable, most predictive and most explanatory analysis in social sciences is the predictive power of IQ for groups of large numbers. You can also give an individual kid an IQ test at age 6 and you pretty much know what he's capable of achieving as an adult. If he scores under 100 on a Raven's matrices test at age 6, he's never going to graduate college. He's going to need a lot of help as he goes forward. In the modern age, what that means it's illegal, unconstitutional even, to collect ethnic data on the French population and if everyone was just Basque or Catalan or French or Alsatian that might be okay but that is not the France of today. I know what you're thinking, Forty, wouldn't it be wonderful if nature collocated people to our advantage so we could just look and see at a glance whether someone was likely to be dangerous, whether someone was likely to be intelligent, whether someone was likely to be a good fit. I mean, this urge for simple solutions. Now, of course you can't look and tell at a glance whether someone's usually male or female and we know that men are 10, 20 times more likely to commit murder than women but young men are far more likely to commit murder than older men. So I guess some things you can just tell at a glance but unfortunately nature hasn't collocated people for our benefit, gosh darn it. Of the colonial legacy a number of people from their former colonies have moved to the mainland France, metropolitan France and even have fresh citizenship. In fact, in some cases their great-great-great grandparents had French citizenship so these are not people who arrived recently but because it's illegal. Wow, so the people writing and not necessarily people who've arrived recently but apparently knowing who someone's ancestors are is highly predictive of how individuals will perform and it's true like low performing groups tend to stay low performing over many generations so sometimes they even regress. So in some ways like second and third, first second and third, Mexican immigrants to California are higher achieving than fourth and fifth generation Mexican immigrants. So if you want to collect any sort of racial data they exist as a sort of second class that is from the American term almost undocumented because of the racism that exists in all societies. So in the case of... Why do I assume that these riots are low IQ because higher IQ people are more able to see the future and smarter people would recognize that participating in riots like these has a very good probability of destroying your future life prospects and so higher IQ people would be much less likely to engage in the type of writing that is convulsing France right now. Also we know the average IQ of a prison population is usually around 90. So crime is overwhelmingly something that is committed by low IQ people except for high IQ forms of white collar crime. Friends, they don't even know how big the racial problem is. It's probably about 15% of the population is non-ethnic French but legally French and that has institutionalized the racism in a way that we have a really hard time... Institutionalized the racism there's no such thing as racism it's an entirely made up moral category. People just prefer people like themselves. Everyone has an in-group preference and often race is a component of people's in-group preference. Clint Medley knows that if the mean IQ is mean, then it's better unseen. Processing here in the United States doesn't matter what they've got in Brazil. You've got an urban center where the ethnic French live that is relatively well off and then you've got a ring of suburbs that is more akin to... So were the January 6th rioters all low IQ? They were not rocket scientists. It was an idiotic thing to do and yeah, I think that they were a very modest IQ. I would be surprised if the average IQ of the January 6th rioters particularly the ones fighting the police above 100. So anyone with anything to lose would have been highly unlikely to participate in the January 6th riots.  You'd be highly unlikely to participate in things like the January 6th riots or the current French race riots. Slums were most of the non-ethnic French who are still French citizens live. Would 40 send the January 6th people to Gitmo if he were president? I would allow the justice system to work. I am not up in arms that some of them have been sentenced to years in prison. I think anyone who participated in the January 6th riots and didn't get shot and killed on the spot by police should simply count as lucky. And so that they are still alive I think they should simply have gratitude for that. So I am all for cracking down and prosecuting rioters where they are on the right or the left prosecuting them to the full extent of the law I don't think it's necessary to send them to Gitmo but to put them away for a long time in prison let that serve as a warning to others is a really stupid thing to do. It wasn't a coup.  And because the French can't even do the first step of collecting data in order to get a good grip on what the size of the issue is it's really hard for the government to apportion resources. Yeah, higher IQ January 6th rioters didn't riot they stayed away. They weren't heading into combat. So don't join low IQ groups like the Proud Boys or any low IQ groups. I remember I was walking around with this Orthodox Jew from Israel and he just started yelling death to the Arabs. I mean just totally a moronic thing to be yelling in Beverly Hills. Beverly Hills is still majority Jewish but it's just an idiotic thing to be yelling out loud and it's not really a high IQ thing to do. This was not a doctor a lawyer, a dentist an accountant or a professor or a CEO. The sources outside of law enforcement so in many ways parts of France even in their major cities resemble a little bit of armed camps and that makes it very easy for violence to erupt because it's it's not a big reach for people who are the subject of... You know what makes it really easy for violence to erupt people who have low IQs than have much of a future time horizon don't have a lot to lose and they do have develop all sorts of assertive and aggressive tendencies that may well serve them in one particular environment but don't serve them as well in a first world country. Living in the armed camps to rebel against the people who are supposedly providing law and order. Now for those of you who know my work you know that I'm very bullish on France in the long run. They never bet their economic much less their political system on globalization and they never integrated their economy into the European Union. They've always seen themselves faced a lot of efficiencies and a lot of the reach they could have gotten under the globalized era in order to maintain a more nationally oriented economic system that comes at a big cost but it does mean as globalization breaks down that the French don't have that far to fall because if the EU were to dissolve tomorrow and freedom of the seas would deceased to exist next week the French economic system is largely in-house they're a massive producer and exporter of agricultural products they've got energy nearby in both the North Sea and in Northwest Africa they're several countries removed from the Ukraine war with the Russians and their primary economic competitor is also their primary political partner in the current environment and that is Germany. And unlike the French the Germans have gone whole hog on globalization to the point that we're already seeing massive problems there when it comes to exposure to the Chinese systems or the Russian systems or whatever the French have none of that. Okay I think that's pretty good P-design analysis it's true the French did not go in the globalist direction that Germany did as a result France may well be better positioned to survive than Germany Germany you know sold out to Russian energy they got away with it this past winter because it's about the mildest winter on record but Germany and its economy seem to be in a lot more trouble than France and then finally the French demographic is strong because there's a neonatal sort of policy set that encourages people to have kids in large numbers giving France the healthiest demographic structure in the world outside of New Zealand and the United States happens to be third in that regard among the advanced countries so all of these things add up to a strong prognosis for the French over the medium to long term but the racial issue is absolutely France's Achilles' heel now the racial issue is everyone's Achilles' heel that has the same proportion of races it's not something that unique to France or something particularly French all right might be wondering what went on at the 2023 Melbourne International International Comedy Festival hi hi everyone my name is He is spelled as H-E and that's it it is my first name it is not my pronoun but I know my name is only two letters in English but in Chinese it's actually spelled as just one second everybody on the stool is great yeah I do grow up in China I found a small town in China my hometown is pretty small we only have half a billion people yeah they're all Chinese you probably can tell I am pretty single I'm in my 30s and very horny for love and visa sponsorship pretty desperate it's so funny like I'm being single have driven my mom insanely progressive now like in my early 20s she said to me she was like that's my name you can only date Chinese guy from mainland China I was like okay in my late 20s she was like hmm Alabama kinda black is fine okay now I'm in my 30s fuck anyone don't get me wrong I'm trying I'm trying to date I'm trying to stay in shape recently I've been fasting if you don't know what is fasting it's basically the modern ways to starve yourself to death you'll be amazed there are so many ways I'm fasting this week and it gave me nightmares like for example last night I was dreaming about dry humping rice like white rice one by one I was like yes Jasmine let's get wet oh I tried really hard I'm trying to date English in my second language I feel like dating in English can be challenging for me for example I found dirty talking in English is really confusing I have to google it all the time for example why it is okay to say oh give it to me daddy but not okay to say oh give it to me uncle come on guys they are the same generation and my uncle is hotter than my dad okay the melbourne comedy festival alright I just finished a book it's on the tutors it's by this bloke peter acroyd he's got this multi-part series on history of England so this is a book on Henry the 8th and Elizabeth the 1st this is the very conclusion of the book so talking about the reformation of the English church I was raised a Protestant I was raised at the most important centuries in Christianity but the 4th century Christianity became the empire the Roman empire took over the Roman empire and the 16th century when we had the reformation and maybe the 20th century but the reformation of the English church I learned as a child through much of a religious lens but from this book says that performing the English church was a political matter it had no roots in popular protest it wasn't the people were crying out for relief from the oppressive burdens imposed by the Roman Catholic church it wasn't driven by principles of humanist reform John Calvin or Martin Luther would have been permitted to flourish in England but Henry the 8th and Elizabeth the 1st were highly discouraging of any forms of religious enthusiasm and the English have remained over the past 500 years quite averse to religious enthusiasm so the reforming the English church was entirely conducted under the direction of the king and the queen so in continental Europe those countries that espoused Protestantism they did away with rituals and customs of Catholicism there'd be no mass, no virgin married, no court of the saints yet in Henry the 8th he was basically an Orthodox Catholic except when it came to people sovereignty so he destroyed some monasteries, he replaced the Pope but the mass survived and those who supported the king's reforming of the church were of a practical persuasion so just like the people who supported Hitler and the people who supported Stalin they did it for practical reasons so the supporters of King Henry the 8th they wanted the lands and the revenues of the Catholic church for themselves they were lawyers and courtiers, they were members of parliament and they voted in accordance with the king's will so for only a very few was the theology of the reformation important so what you got in England was kind of a mishmash of contradictory elements that developed the name of Anglicanism Anglicanism is as alien to the pure spirit of Protestantism as it was to the doctrines of Rome it was just kind of a mix and match of old religion and new religion so England became Protestant by degrees by accommodation by subtle adjustment and the people went along so time forgetfulness, apathy, indifference right that weakened the old religion beyond repair England became a Protestant nation and what that really meant is that England was no longer Catholic so the passage of time accomplished what the will of man could not work and you see the enduring effects of the reformation in the emphasis on the individual in England rather than on the community private prayer takes the place of public ritual manuals address the personal devotional life your personal work walk with Jesus right they abound justification by faith alone becomes one of the cardinal tenets the new religion this is wholly private in character right the struggles