Things Hidden #3 - A Non-Traditional Christian Apologetic

Greetings from Austin! I welcome the opportunity to bring to you the third post of Things Hidden! Episode #3 of the Things Hidden podcast is out now!

You can watch the YouTube by clicking the link here-

The script I wrote for Episode #3 can be found below. This episode is a non-traditional Christian apologetic. I try to make the case for Christ while (conveniently) sidestepping dogma.

If you want to follow along on socials too, they’re all linked here - https://linktr.ee/thingshidden

Be well.

- Travis

We ready? Let’s do this.

Welcome to Episode 3 of Things Hidden. Things Hidden is an exploration of the intersection of Faith and six factors that surround faith - Religion; Physics; Evolution; Consciousness; Philosophy; and Technological Innovation. The purpose of Things Hidden is to bring people into a closer relationship with God, and through that process coming into a closer relationship with God myself.

The first episode gave you the very basics - I told you a bit about me, my background, some of my beliefs, what Things Hidden is, what Things Hidden is not, how Things Hidden happened, why Things Hidden happened and what to expect next.

The second episode I told you about how I’ve experienced God in my life. And how those experiences led me to this, talking to you about Things Hidden.

If you haven’t listened to those first two episodes, I would strongly encourage you to do that before starting this one. We’re still at the very very beginning of Things Hidden, and Episode 1 is definitely the best place to start.

Today you will hear a non-traditional Christian apologetic. Apologetic in this context means - a defense of the Christian faith. Christian apologetics has been going on since immediately after the death of Jesus Christ. And those apologetics have taken on many forms over the last two millennia.

The apologetic perspective we will be exploring here today will be a logic-driven one. Today, for the moment, we will conveniently sidestep the question of whether Christianity is “true”. And the word “true” is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. You can leave a question mark around whether Christianity is true and still ask the question of whether Christianity is worthwhile - whether following the teachings of Jesus Christ is a worthwhile thing - for you and for society as a whole. Whether that’s been worthwhile in the past. Whether it’s worthwhile today. Whether it will be worthwhile in the future. 

Before we get into a Christian apologetic, we need to first make a quick pit stop for a God apologetic. But before we do a God apologetic, I need to make a quick point about worship in general. Humanity is built with a tendency for worship. Some of you hearing this will immediately know that it is true. Others may be doubtful. But if you look for it, it is right in front of your face.

The 4th century church father Saint Augustine said, referring to God - “You have made us for Yourself and our hearts are restless until they rest in You”. When that rest is refuted or forgotten, the human consciousness does not simply shift into neutral. Instead, it fastens onto some other center of gravity to worship other than God - money, power, technology, sex, ideology, politics, yoga, Crossfit. We are built for worship.

Atheists may say they explicitly don’t worship anything. And for a small percentage of atheists, that may be true. But most atheists worship rationality. Richard Dawkins. Sam Harris. They WORSHIP rationality. With incredible fervor. With vigor. With anger. Except humans aren’t rational. Not even close. There’s a huge pile of evidence showing us this is the case. And worshiping rationality? There is zero evidence that works in practice at scale and there’s all kinds of reasons to think it doesn’t work and is incredibly dangerous.

Research has shown that sustained prayer thickens the pre-frontal cortex that is in charge of things like attention and compassion, and quiets the reptilian amygdala, that houses fear and reactivity. Quite literally, our brain is at its healthiest when it bends to an ultimate concern. But most importantly, that circuitry is value neutral – if you point that circuitry at your RobinHood account, or celebrity gossip, or POWER, the same neural pathways light up. You can think of that as God circuits without God. That’s dangerous. So much of the damage that humans have done to one another over the millennia has been in service to the worship of a god other than the one true God.  

A belief in God is a profession of faith - you cannot prove the existence of God. Sometimes people try, and some of the arguments can be compelling - why is there something instead of nothing? The argument from fine tuning. There are many others, and we will discuss them in more detail in later episodes. But at the end of the day, a belief in God is still a profession of faith. It really boils down to whether you think there’s a creator to this universe. And whether you think you can learn anything about that creator. Everything else flows from that.

So as a profession of faith, I believe in a higher power that exists outside of this universe and/or dimension and is responsible for the creation of this universe (and perhaps other universes). I call this higher power God.

I believe that it is impossible in this day and age to even begin to comprehend God. The Bible tells us in Isaiah 55 - “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the Lord. “As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.”

So that makes sense to me and I’m cool building my faith on that concept. For some skeptics and non-believers, this may feel like a cop out. Take the “problem of evil” for example. This is the single biggest issue that keeps people from believing in God - If God exists and is all powerful and all loving, why is there so much suffering in the world? This is numero uno for atheists.

From my perspective, we don’t know enough to comprehend the nature of the question of suffering. We don’t know what was happening before we were born. We don’t know what happens after we die. What if the suffering we endure here on earth is like running a race with the best prize ever at the finish line? You’re tired and huffing and puffing and your side hurts while you’re running now, but the end result will be worth it beyond your wildest imagination? What if enduring suffering on Earth is like stubbing your toe for a second in exchange for eternity in perfect tranquility?

And I want to explicitly acknowledge that my perspective is one of immense privilege. The moment I was born I hit the lottery 100 different ways. I was born in America in the year 1985 to two parents that loved me and could afford everything we needed growing up. I was born physically healthy with a good brain. I don’t want to in any way pretend like my perspectives on suffering aren’t from a place of luxury. They are. But I also know that there are innumerable accounts from Jews in concentration camps in WW2, who experienced the most immense suffering imaginable, who never turned away from their faith. I won’t pretend to understand why there’s so much suffering here on Earth, I truly believe we don’t have the vantage point to effectively contemplate that suffering.

To me, the most logical frame of reference is that suffering must not be what we think it is. I don’t exactly know what that means. It may be somehow analogous to the concept of building muscle - if you want to build muscle, you work the muscle to the point where it gets all these micro tears in it, which is painful in a sense, and then you eat protein and the muscle repairs itself a little stronger and a little bigger. Pain now, to be stronger later.

I also know that “the sweet wouldn’t be as sweet without the sour” is a much deeper concept than people give it credit for when it’s heard in passing. It’s an incredibly deep concept. Think of one of the best days you’ve ever had. Envision that day. Now imagine God made it where every day was that good. How would you know how good the day was? If every day was that good? Conversely, imagine one of the worst days you’ve ever had. Envision that day. Now imagine God made it where every day was that bad. How would you know how bad the day was? If every day was that bad?

A vantage point starts to emerge that contrast is the mother of clarity. And that God’s beauty shines brightest because we’ve experienced times where we can’t seem to find God’s beauty at all. And I get it. None of that really makes any difference when the kid gets cancer and the whole church prays for him and then he dies anyway. When that happens, it doesn’t seem anything like “working out to build muscle”. And it sorta seems like if we could choose an existence where every day is so amazing we don’t even know what an amazing day is - vs choosing our lives now with all the ups and the downs we have, we’d definitely take the amazing day on repeat.

And any all-powerful all-loving God would know that’s what we’d prefer. So I’m not sitting here pretending to have it all sorted out. I will say it really seems like God is not a micromanager. That’s just part of the gig - God is not a micromanager. And it seems like there’s more to this concept of suffering than it seems on the surface.  

So if we don’t have the vantage point to truly comprehend suffering, I don’t think we have the vantage point in this day and age to glean much insight into free will vs determinism, which goes hand in hand with the problem of evil. My view here is supported by physics theories such as “spacetime is emergent and not fundamental”. In other words, spacetime isn’t even “real”. It is a sort of illusion that appears real as a function of our vantage point.

So if spacetime isn’t even “real” so to speak, it doesn’t make much sense to me to ask God “why do bad things happen to good people?” We simply don’t understand nearly enough to be able to effectively frame this type of causality. As a profession of faith, I do believe God loves us and has a plan for our lives. But I don’t think humans have the capacity to understand what God’s love for us really means, or what it means that God has a plan for our lives. What I do think is compelling is the idea that humanity is better off acting AS IF God is loving and has a plan for our lives. It’s easy for me to imagine that belief set being an adaptive trait for group selection. And I think we have the benefit of 2,000 years of hindsight that supports this view. 

From Biblical times all the way to current, we have anthropomorphized God in an effort to better comprehend His (see what I did there? His?) nature. There’s no particular reason to think God has emotions like humans have emotions, in fact it would be kind of weird if He did, seeing as God exists in another dimension that we can’t even begin to comprehend. God exists outside of time. How would you have emotions without time?

The Bible anthropomorphises God so that humans can try to comprehend God. We assign emotions to God. In the Old Testament, sometimes God is loving, sometimes God is angry. Or jealous. Or vindictive. Or spiteful. Or violent. In the New Testament, God is presented as a loving being and Jesus is the human/God manifestation of that love. These are emotions that human authors assigned to God. They may or may not be accurate, but I believe they almost certainly fall far short of accurately describing the nature of God. Imagine an ant, with its brain and comprehension, looking up at a tiny corner of tread on the tire of a car - and then trying to comprehend how the entire car works. That’s us reaching for God. Through prayer, worship and the study of scriptures, we can further extend our understanding of God’s love and will for us, but our comprehension will fall far short of truly knowing.

You have likely heard of Simulation Theory - the idea that what we experience as physical reality is actually an information-processing construct - an artificial world rendered for conscious observers by some more fundamental level of existence. Simulation Theory is not an actual theory. It’s not testable. But for me, Simulation Theory is an effective mental model for helping to understand God creating the universe. It is like a software developer that creates a video game world. Through nothing more than 1’s and 0’s, the developer creates a video game world from the ground up. Through the arrangement of 1’s and 0’s, the software developer establishes how the world works. How big is it. What it looks like. What’s in it. What can be done in the video game world. What cannot be done in the video game world. What is the purpose or goal of this video game world.

The software developer establishes all these things. I believe this is a good metaphor for God. God is the software developer of this universe. Quarks and gluons are the 1’s and 0’s of this video game world. We can observe our world and make testable hypotheses about how this world works. And it’s true that this world was built with suffering in it. But it’s also true that the sweet wouldn’t be as sweet without the sour. That’s just one of the many many rules about how this world works. Despite what some fundamentalists might say, Simulation Theory is a metaphor that’s helpful in grasping at the ungraspable.

OK. I’m about to get more into science but before I do that I want to make a disclaimer about science. Science is wrong. Often. Mainstream scientific consensus will just be dead wrong about stuff. That was true a long time ago, that was true 100 years ago and it’s true today. In the early 1600’s, Galileo spent the last decade of his life under house arrest because he said the Earth rotated around the sun and not the other way around. The Big Bang was first predicted in 1927 (by a Catholic priest) in response to Einstein discovering general relativity. The Big Bang theory remained fringe for more than 40 years before being widely accepted, only 50 years ago. Black Holes were considered nonsense for 50 years after they were first posited. Many such cases

My point is that science can be wrong. But to me, and this is an approach that Things Hidden is built on, you can still examine an area of science and evaluate the consensus views of experts in that area. In various areas of science, you can identify consensus views, evaluate the broadness or tightness of consensus views, and evaluate the body of evidence that supports those views. Some areas of science will have very strong consensus, tightly defined and well supported by multiple vectors of evidence. Other areas of science will have a weakly formed, broad array of consensus views, and there might be little evidence or conflicting evidence to support those views. There might be a host of smart domain experts saying polar opposite things to one another.

If you’re trying to run the ramp of reason before taking the leap of faith, this process of evaluation will be helpful in determining what your ramp of reason is made out of. You can take broadly agreed upon expert consensus and then build on that, even while acknowledging that it might be found to be wrong one day. There will be a lot of this process in Things Hidden. I won’t pretend to be an expert on the application of this process as it relates to faith and science, but the application of this process as it relates to markets and investing is the only thing I’ve done for my entire career. For whatever that’s worth.

So I believe evolution is generally true, not as a matter of faith but as a conclusion derived from the examination of facts. My faith is built on this assumption. I believe humans share a common ancestor with apes. There’s some chance that is wrong, but the evidence appears overwhelming in my view. So I’m gonna go with it. And it appears that evolution is at the core of our purpose here on Earth. I can clearly see God in evolution. Evolution seems to be so fundamental to the workings of this universe, that I can’t help but think it’s a headline purpose for the existence of the Universe. This is a critical aspect of my faith, so I’ll say it again - it appears that evolution is at the core of our purpose here on Earth.

Said differently, evolution seems so core to existence in this universe, that it strikes me as necessarily very close to God. Right now, science shows that the universe started out very orderly and is trending towards disorder - this is called entropy. That entropy led to the emergence of carbon-based lifeforms here on Earth (and potentially elsewhere! Who knows? Maybe we’ll find out one day). The universe is 13.8bn years old. Earth was formed 4.5bn years ago. Single celled organisms appeared 3.5bn years ago. Multicellular organisms appeared as far back as 2.1bn years ago or as recently as 600mm years ago (scientists aren’t exactly sure). The Cambrian Explosion occurred 538mm years ago. Mammals first appeared 170mm years ago. Primates first appeared 60mm years ago. Homo habilis first appeared 2mm years ago. While science never knows anything “for sure”, there is good evidence to support these timelines and I think it makes good sense to accept these timelines as broadly accurate until proven otherwise. I find the contemplation of God with these fact patterns as context to be helpful in understanding God, and understanding our purpose here.

So us humans today, we’re on this journey. And this current form that we’re in we’ve really only had for an incredibly short period of time. The earliest members of our genus, Homo habilis, are about 2mm years old. It took life somewhere between 1.4-2.9bn years to get from a single celled organism to a multi-celled organism. So there was 2,000 TIMES more time spent getting from single celled to multi-celled, there has been any kind of humans around. Think about that.

The universe is 13.8bn years old. Homo sapiens. Us. We’ve been around 200,000 years. That’s 0.0014% of the age of the universe. If the age of the universe was one day, humans have been around for 0.1 seconds of that day. So just take a second and consider the nature of God’s relationship with humanity from that perspective. As far we know, we’re far and away the most advanced species in the history of this planet. We have far and away the greatest capacity to comprehend God, contemplate God, seek God, worship God, change our actions because of God, change the world around us because of God. And yet, we must acknowledge that we are at the very very very beginning of this whole journey. 0.1 seconds into the day.

Fast forward to today, and things are now moving MUCH quicker. It appears we are barreling towards additional rapid advancement as a species. This is another core aspect of my faith – if humans keep advancing like we have been over the last few hundred years, technological innovation has the potential to bring levels of abundance that will look like what humans 2,000 years ago imagined heaven would look like.

This thought experiment can get whacky pretty quick. Because if we don’t blow ourselves up, humans are quite likely to quickly integrate with technology and become cyborgs. It looks like that’s going to happen in a few hundred years. Maybe a couple thousand, but really quickly. I don’t know where our species goes from there but it’s pretty easy to imagine if we don’t blow ourselves up (or get hit by an asteroid) then we won’t look anything like we do now in a few million years - which again, is a really short period of time in the whole scheme of things. I find the contemplation of God with these fact patterns as context to be helpful in understanding God, and understanding our purpose here. 

So that’s the basic timeline for life on Earth, which we know a decent amount about. We know nothing about life on any other planets but that life may very well exist and would have its own evolutionary timeline. We know some about the evolution of this universe but way less than we know about the evolution of life on Earth. But it certainly appears the universe has its own evolutionary journey that in some ways is comparable to the evolution of life on Earth.

All of that to say, it seems like evolution is near and dear to God’s heart. God made this universe and evolution is perhaps its defining characteristic. It seems that the more advanced a species becomes, the greater potential that species has to more deeply comprehend God. Consider humans’ relationship to God vs chimpanzees’ relationship to God.

If it is true that the more advanced a species, the greater its potential to comprehend God, then species advancement could be viewed as the central purpose for our existence - “To know God is the purpose of existence. More advanced species have the potential to know God more fully than less advanced species, thus advancing as a species is the purpose of existence”. This is a core aspect of my faith.

Honestly, I’m not 100% positive if I believe that. Is a human closer to God than a tree or a bug or a rock or anything else? Judeo-Christian religions would say definitively yes. It’s a bit more complicated with Hindus and Buddhists, but they both believe it’s a really big deal to be human versus anything else. Nevertheless, perhaps if you’re a tree, it’s self-evident that God exists, and you live in some sort of constant state of worship to God existing as a tree. We have no idea and it doesn’t seem like we’ll get an answer to that in my lifetime.

I think what we can say is that humans have a greater degree of choice than any other species or object on Earth, because we can influence our outcomes to a greater degree than anything else. No thing can manipulate its surroundings, and thus its existence, more than humans. Everything else on Earth has less free will in its decision to believe in God than humans. You could make the assumption that increased capacity to understand God leads to knowing God more fully, and thus species advancement is at the core of our purpose here on Earth. Species advancement also allows humans to have the potential to be increasingly more God-like in our actions. More Christ-like (for a less loaded term). A human that spends their life helping the poor is more God-like, more Christ-like than a rock, or a chimpanzee.

If you decide you want to make the above assumptions, which at the moment I think I do, then you can conclude that species advancement is of the utmost importance. In order to advance as a species, we must cooperate. The more advanced the species, the higher forms of cooperation that are found. Single celled organisms like bacteria have zero cooperation. Oceanic sponges have very little cooperation, but they certainly cooperate more than bacteria because they are multicellular, so there is internal cooperation with different cells having different functionality. Keep going up the chain and you find increasingly more complex forms of cooperation- ants, bees, elephants, lions, dolphins, meerkats, etc. Once you get to the great apes, chimpanzees have the ability to manipulate their surroundings to help themselves and their community. Chimps use tools. They can beat humans in some types of cognitive tests.

Which brings us to the jump from chimps to humans, which is obviously quite significant. Human brains are 3x the size of chimps and much more densely packed with neurons. This has allowed us to cooperate at levels orders of magnitude higher than the most advanced animals. Just think about ordering a product manufactured in India and delivered by Amazon to your front door the day after you order it. That’s incredible coordination!

As species cooperate in more advanced ways, groups form. For humans, these groups have become increasingly larger, complex and interdependent. Homo sapiens are 300ish thousand years old but civilization only started 7500ish years ago. So there was a long period of human history where the cooperation was just happening in small hunter/gatherer-type groups. And it’s fascinating to think about what God’s relationship with humanity might have been like for those earliest homo sapiens for those hundreds of thousands of years before any sorts of civilizations started popping up. We probably won’t ever know for sure, but it’s fascinating to think about.

What is clear though, is that the initial formation of the earliest civilizations went hand in hand with increased cooperation - civilizations required and also facilitated more advanced forms of cooperation in a virtuous cycle that led to increased species development and with it - increased quality of life and less scarcity. The advent of agriculture 12,000 years ago is a great example of this.

As groups get bigger, more complex and more interdependent, the need for a moral framework arises. Simplistically, a moral framework aims to push the Schelling Point of a group towards the game theory optimal group outcome, as classically presented in the top left corner of the Prisoner’s Dilemma (*show graphic*). What is the best outcome for the most people in a group? A functional moral framework should push in that general direction.

Through this lens, you can start to understand how over time a functional moral framework would be an adaptive trait - one selected for through group natural selection - because it increases a group’s likelihood of survival and reproduction. There is the struggle for survival - survival of the fittest. But there is also the snuggle for survival - cooperating so that you and your group all end up better off than you would have otherwise.

As a simplistic example, you could imagine two groups of Neanderthals - one group that could hunt and kill big game as a group without selfishly killing another group member to take his share of the hunt; and one group that couldn’t. Eventually, the group that couldn’t cooperate would starve, and their genes aren’t passed on. Imagine that simple example as a blanket concept, spread out over millions of years, and you paint a picture of group selection for moral behavior.

And it’s not like there weren’t any close calls. The rise of homo sapients to dominance was by no means set in stone. There is good evidence to suggest that somewhere around 100,000 years ago, we got down to maybe 25,000ish total people on Earth. We became an endangered species. Homo sapiens were an endangered species on a planet where 99.9% of all species go extinct. Sit with that for a second. That’s how close it got for us. So how did we make it this far?

When you dig into the research, there is not good evidence for a superior form of functional morality at scale that does not triangulate towards God. When you look throughout history, at nation-states, and multi-civilizational arcs and empires. And go look at how the ones did that had a belief in God as a major component of the societal structure, versus the ones that did not - the evidence is clear.

In today’s age, people like to point at the modern Nordic countries, which have low rates of religiosity and high rates of happiness surveys and indexes. Except the low rates of religiosity are only about 50 years old. A hundred years ago, the Noridic countries were overwhelmingly religious. Those countries are also very small relative to the global population - only 5-10mm people. Also, the populations have historically been extremely homogenous until very recently - the last decade or so. Also, the Nordic countries have strong social safety net type concepts, and those concepts are provably rooted in Christian ideals. Nordic governments never would have installed all that social safety net without the moral framework of Christianity in its immediate history. Some would point to modern Japan as an example, except I would point to WW2 and their current population collapse. Some would point to modern China - except China has some of the lowest reported levels of trust in the world and are also experiencing a population collapse.

Moral philosophy is an entire field of study, and the evolution of morality is a small but fascinating slice of evolutionary psychology that we will dive into more deeply in future episodes. And there are informative perspectives shared from this field of study as it relates to altruism, or as Christians refer to it - agape love. Most would probably not consider those two synonymous, but the concepts are closely related. Altruism is defined as “the belief in or practice of disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others”. Agape is a Greek word that refers to the “kind of love and action that shows empathy; wants the best; extends help; demonstrates good intentions; and is intended for everyone. Agape love is sacrificial.”. You could characterize agape as a deeper, more intentional, more transmittable form of altruism.

Darwin himself. The Darwin. When explaining group selection, pointed out that groups with altruistic tendencies, like bravery, sympathy and self sacrifice would outperform groups without altruism over time.

Evolutionary psychologists, sociologists, and biologists have developed theories as to why altruistic, agape tendencies emerge when at first glance they appear to go against the selfish tendencies of natural selection. Group fitness and tribal cohesion. Sexual selection through virtue signaling. Multilevel, indirect reciprocity. Gene-culture coevolution. All important factors, and all stuff we will get into in future episodes.

What we can say, is that altruism has been around in various forms since early hominids and some types of altruism can even be seen in other animals. But agape - this is a concept that is distinctly Christian. Agape as an updated, Christ-triangulated, deeper form of altruism that leads to distinct advantages for group selection in Darwinian evolution.    

The teachings of Jesus Christ call for us to love, to have agape for, our neighbor as ourselves, and in particular to love “the least of these '', and even to love our enemy. From a group selection perspective, why might it be good for the advancement of the human species to show selfless concern for the well-being of the least of these? Even more so, to love our enemies? Because it facilitates a level of cooperation otherwise impossible. This is good for me, for my group and for my offspring - agape love as an adaptive trait in group selection.

So. If: 1) knowing God is the purpose of life; 2) the more advanced a species, the more it can know God; 3) species advancement requires increased cooperation; and 4) increased cooperation requires a moral framework that promotes agape love; then a compelling explanation for the importance of the teachings of Jesus Christ emerges.

What follows will be the last piece of this non-traditional Christian apologetic. For shorthand, we will call this piece of the argument the “Tom Holland approach”. Tom Holland the historian, not the actor. He is one of the foremost authorities on the Roman empire and wrote a book called Dominion that makes a compelling case for the enormous reach of the impact of Jesus Christ throughout western civilization. 

So, the teachings of Jesus Christ can best be summarized as: 1) “Love God, Love Others”; 2) “The Golden Rule”; and 3) “Forgive As God Forgave You”. Jesus’ teachings were radical at the time. Tribalism dominated the world before Jesus came. The Old Testament is filled with stories of warring groups. Romans, Babylonians and other ancient civilizations had well-defined “in groups” and “out groups” that shaped interactions within a backdrop of scarcity. Loving “the least of these” was not a commonplace idea before Jesus Christ.

The concept of forgiveness also has a history and the degree of forgiveness that Jesus taught was once again radical. “Eye for eye” shows up in Exodus, but that concept predates the Old Testament by some 1,000 years in the Code of Hammurabi. 300 years before the Code of Hammurabi, the Code of Ur-Nammu laid out even harsher retribution than “eye for an eye”, with robbery punishable by death, for example. Jesus flipped this on its head - unending forgiveness, regardless of what the other person did to you.

Moreover, the story of Jesus radically inverted the value system of power in the Roman empire, and the ethics of western civilization are rooted in that inversion. Blessed are the poor in spirit. Blessed are the meak. Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness. Blessed are the peacemakers. Blessed are the persecuted. These are RADICAL inversions. The ideas of human rights, universal human dignity, value of the weak, equality of all people, separation of church and state – all stemmed from Christ.

So the teachings of Jesus Christ were a radical departure from the norms of the day, both in the Jewish culture and in Roman culture. Today, we get the benefit of 2,000 years of hindsight. We get to see the impact that the life and teachings of Jesus Christ has had on humanity. And they have been enormous. Christianity is the most philanthropic organization in human history. The Christian church literally invented hospitals. The Catholic church manages 26% of the entire planet’s healthcare facilities. Aggregate all-time Christian church aid measures in the trillions. There has been more good done under the banner of Christ than under the banner of anything else ever. And that’s not to say there hasn’t been plenty of bad done under the banner of Christ. That’s not true at all. Not even close. But even when you net the bad against the good, it is still overwhelming.

Democracy is inextricably linked to Christianity. From the 4th century adoption of Christianity as the official religion of the Roman empire, all the way through to the formation of the United States, Christianity is the religious foundation present for nearly every instance of Democratic ideals being implemented. Democracy is objectively the form of government that has led to the most human flourishing. It is not perfect. But it is the best we’ve ever come up with, and it has the most to show for itself.

The same is true for free market capitalism. Free market capitalism was birthed in Christian societies. So much of the abundance we enjoy today has been the product of free market capitalism. Again, it’s far from perfect. Certainly not all the results of free market capitalism have been positive. But it is undeniable that when we look at what has improved the human condition the most over the last few centuries, a huge amount of it was the result of free market capitalism. Much of free market capitalism’s virtue is rooted in strong property rights. And while property rights as a concept pre-dated Christ, the application of property rights as we enjoy them today fall squarely on the shoulders of John Locke from the Enlightenment Period. Locke was a devout Protestant and his defense and praise of property rights was a function of his Christian beliefs. 

Democracy and free market capitalism. Pillars upon which so much of the prosperity we enjoy today as humans was built. Capitalism was built on selfish tendencies. A primary driver of capitalism is the assumption that people will act in their own self interest. Democracy, as constructed in the United States, was built to PROTECT each of us against an individual’s selfish tendencies. The three branches of government. All the checks and balances put in place between those branches. It all operates under the assumption there are some bad apples lurking around trying to be as selfish as possible. And explicitly guards against that. All of it. Rooted in Christianity.

Science, scientific discovery, the scientific method and university education are owed to Christianity. The church quite literally invented science and quite literally invented the university. There were 52 prominent scientists in the period from 1543-1680 known as the Scientific Revolution. These were the people that founded various aspects of modern medicine, chemistry, biomechanics, analytical geometry, anatomy, number theory, telescopic astronomy. The list goes on. Names like Galileo, Fermat, Descartes, Copernicus, Newton, Pascal and more. 52 of them in total.  Of the 52, 50 identified as Christians, and 30 of the 50 were known to be zealous Christians, with an all-encompassing strength to their faith. Christianity gets the credit for this.

I could keep going here, but hopefully I proved my point. The Christian movement has helped humanity more than anything ever. This is the “Tom Holland approach” I spoke of. There’s a stack of books written on this subject. In my view, it’s undeniable. People will try to deny it and I don’t find their arguments to be as compelling as the “Tom Holland Approach”.  I’ll put it a different way- Jesus tells us that you will know a tree by its fruits - good trees produce good fruits. Bad trees produce bad fruits. The fruits of the tree of Christianity are by no means all good. Wars. Senseless killing. Systematic, large-scale raping of children. Really bad stuff. Deeply, deeply evil stuff. Done under the banner of Christ. And the fingerprints of human control are ALL OVER the church throughout its entire history – so much scarcity-minded human control tactics employed under the banner of Christ.

But looking at the totality of the fruits of the tree of Christianity. And comparing those fruits, both good and bad, to the fruits of other major world religions or any other large scale movement or organization - Christianity wins.

That’s it. 1) Knowing God is the purpose of life. 2) The more advanced a species, the more it can know God. 3) Species advancement requires increased cooperation. 4) Increased cooperation requires a moral framework that promotes agape love. And 5) The life and teachings of Jesus Christ emerges as the best avenue in human history to promote this moral framework, and Christianity has the receipts to prove it. A non-traditional Christian apologetic.

Maybe at this point you’re starting to get a sense of why I named this Things Hidden. My hope is that that name, Things Hidden, that it keeps resonating with you more and more, because that’s exactly how this ride has been for me over the last few years. And we touched on a couple dozen areas of study in this episode today. If those areas peaked your interest, keep watching. We’re going to dive into much more detail on them in the months to come.

In the next episode I’m going to talk about WHAT I believe. I hope this episode serves as a foundation to discuss that.

If you enjoyed this, hit like and subscribe. If you want to sign up for the blog, it’s in the description. If you know someone that would be interested in Things Hidden, send this to them. I really appreciate your time, and I wish you the best.