What Greg Koukl Couldn't Say to Alex O'Connor on Diary of a CEO

Something I admired about Alex O'Connor. He is somewhat transparent. He went after me pretty aggressively at some theological points, and this was supposed to be about one issue meaning and significance. And in my view, you have one of two choices. There either is or isn't. It's almost like he said, go to church, take drugs, read a book on philosophy. In other words, a very utilitarian approach basically is just saying, I'm going to provide a way to help people feel better without providing an answer to the question, I wanted to focus on the question. You're listening to the Provoke and Inspire podcast. This is provoke and inspire, where everything we do is to help you follow Jesus more faithfully in a broken world. Today I got to talk to Greg Kokal, founder of Stand to Reason and one of the most respected Christian apologists today. Recently, he spent over five hours on one of the world's biggest podcasts, The Diary of a CEO, with Steven Bartlett, alongside atheist thinker Alex O'Connor and Harvard trained psychiatrist doctor K. These three men aren't just interesting public figures. They represent people in your life. The confident skeptic who's thought more about this than most Christians have. The successful friend who has everything and knows it's not enough, or the spiritual but not religious person who believes in something, just nothing you can seem to pin down. Greg modeled how to communicate truth in a clear and respectful way. And if you've ever walked away from a conversation like this, wishing you'd known what to say. This episode is for you. So Greg, good to see you. And I'm excited for this conversation. And as I said before we started, you had the privilege and the challenge, I would say, of spending more than five hours from what I understand. That's right. Five hours and fifteen minutes. That's insane. And you were on one of the biggest platforms podcasts in the world, The Diary of a CEO, Steven Bartlett. And you not only got to talk to him, but then you had the extra challenge of talking to, I would say, one of the brightest young minds on the internet. Alex O'Connor. Amazing. And then doctor K, which for those who don't know him, check him out. That's a whole thing. I guess just to start with, what was that experience like for you? Well, it was really intense. Five and a quarter hours whittled down to what, three twenty, I think the final thing, and actually when I saw the final production, I was happy with all the edits. I thought the, the team there, the post-production team was really fair. And there were some good things. I thought that ended up on the cutting room floor that I had said. But there are other stuff too that probably could have been left out. So I think it worked out well in a balanced way. It was a challenge, though. I've done quite a number of these things in the past. I did a somewhat infamous a one hour debate with Deepak Chopra, the number one New Age guru in the world. And so I've been in these circumstances before, and I know how to prepare and ready myself. But I will say in this situation, um, ironically, and this is going to sound like amazing to a lot of your viewers, but I actually didn't know who Alex O'Connor was before I got this assignment. Interesting. I'm not really got my pulse on pop culture. I don't watch a lot of videos. I got so many things to do, just kind of in my lane. Now. The rest of my team, they know all about it. And Tim Barnett said, you know Mr. B from Red Pen Logic, Tim said, this guy's the most famous atheist in the world, you know, so I had to get ready for that. And, um, and whenever you're in a situation like that, and this is a fairly friendly environment, it's not supposed to be combative. In fact, when I had my pre-interviews and there were two of them before, I kind of made my way to the, the program proper. They were concerned that this not be combative environment. And I said, look, I don't approach these things as gladiator events. I think this is a mistake for Christians to do that. A lot of non-Christians do it. They're looking for mic drop moments. They're looking for, uh, clickbait stuff, you know, but that's not our view. It's down to reason. And there are some Christians like that, and that's really unfortunate. They're just nasty and overaggressive. So anyway, I was a little surprised when it turned out that Alex was quite aggressive with me, and it took a lot of my focus or attention or concentration, I guess is what I'd have to say, just to be able to be careful that I didn't get squeezed into a corner. And in all these, there's, there's kind of a gamesmanship that goes on. Now, Steven was fabulous and he's the open guy, you know, trying to feel the information. I do think he's genuinely open and increasingly so. He just had Wesley Huff on board. Yeah. Now Wes had the advantage. Lucky guy of having a one on one. Right. And that changes everything. And so and he acquitted himself so magnificently. So anyway, good for Wes. But I didn't have that. I had to divide up between four and, uh, and even though Steven was asking the questions, all three were responding. And this is supposed to be about one issue meaning and significance. And in my view, and this is strategically how I wanted to play this out. Well, you have one of two choices. There either is or isn't. And if there is meaning and significance, you have to have something above that provides that. Right. Um, it's if there is no God, if it's just molecules clashing in the universe is the way I characterize it. And that's the alternatives, then there is no meaning. And at one point, um, and something I admired about Alex O'Connor, he is somewhat transparent. He went after me pretty aggressively on some theological points. But when he was asked by Stephen, hey, if if somebody asked you, how would you help them if they said, I don't have any meaning and purpose in life, what would you say? It was almost like he said, go to church, take drugs, read a book on philosophy. In other words, a very utilitarian approach, which is the same way that doctor K approached it in all of his kind of new agey, Hindu Buddhist stuff, psychiatric stuff that he had all blended together. Basically, he's just saying I'm going to provide a way to help people feel better without providing an answer to the question. I wanted to focus on the question. Augustine said, Lord, you have made us for yourself, and our hearts are restless until they find their rest in you and Steven, you just read those statistics about people who feel restless, and we're all here to talk about it because of our restlessness. This is this is an indication that there is an answer to this question, that there is meaning, there is purpose. And I talked about C.S. Lewis's argument from desire, a kind of along that line. But but as you know, if you've seen the whole broadcast, which some people told me it was a bit tedious and I, I agree because of some of the directions it went that I thought were not helpful in the topic. Um, it was so many. There were so many sidebars that were unrelated to that issue that I honestly didn't know what to say about some of it, and a lot of it had to do with all of the variety of stuff that doctor K was kind of bringing onto the table. That was very hard to organize and make sense of a very nice guy and certainly not going after anybody he had. He was complimentary to everybody on the table, so that wasn't a problem. But I think what he offered created confusion regarding the issue. And I wanted to and I tried to go a number of times to thirty zero zero zero feet and say, what this is about is meaning and purpose. And you have two choices, kind of, you know, either there is or isn't. And if there isn't, then anything you choose is going to be adequate. And that's where, where Alex is, you know, I mean, at least he was honest about that because he's an atheist. And so he doesn't even believe in objective morality, you know? And so that was the, the dynamic that was frustrating for me because I had to navigate with four people instead of just or three others instead of just one. Others like Wes had that, that one to one thing would be would have been for my purposes, I think Ben would have been much more productive because I could have zeroed in on some other things without the distraction and the challenges and pulling off, pulling me off the thing. I was happy for the way things went. Um, you know, when you do these things, um, you know, you always look back and say, uh, coulda, woulda, shoulda kind of thing. Fog of war. Was it? Mike Tyson said that you always have a, a game. Everybody's got a game plan until they get punched in the mouth, you know? Right. So that's what happens in these circumstances. I had a game plan and I had worked things out with my team and we got prayed up and all that other stuff. But then when you get in the midst of it, things happen that you just have to deal with as they come and let the Lord do, you know, do what he wants to do through it. So, so it was a mixture of satisfaction and frustration, if I put it simply on that. And I hope I, I hope they ask me back just one on one like Wes had, that would be much more fruitful. I think you did fantastic, Honestly and frankly, the environment was very challenging. I mean, I'm not trying to be critical of doctor K in any way, but it felt at times, without getting too myopic on the actual conversation, people could of course go check that out. But it did feel like he wanted to insert himself into the conversation, right? He'd come from a long way assumably to be there, but it felt like in so doing, it kind of took the conversation somewhere that neither you nor Alex knew how to navigate, and you had to kind of pull the whole thing back together. So it is what it is. It's a challenge. But what I was saying before we started, by the way, let me just say, Ben, that's a good example of real life. Exactly. Because in real life, whether you're on a camera or you're just at Starbucks or wherever you are, you never know where it's going to go and you kind of bone up as best you can for engagements like this with your own study and stuff like that. And then you follow the circumstances, you know, the you just take what the Lord gives you right? And then trust that he is going to use it as you're seeking to be faithful in the moment. For those listening and trying to understand the framing here, you know, as I was listening to that, I was struck by the idea that in many ways, it represented the kinds of people that are in all of our lives and the kinds of chaos that we all face when trying to have these conversations. And so whether you have Steven, who was moderating but still contributed on some level as someone who I would say is maybe the least intellectual of everyone, but but just a very driven guy, a very honest, open guy who's trying to he has achieved so many things. But what's next? And you have Alex O'Connor, the brilliant atheist who seems to represent this confusing character in the sense that he seems close on some levels and then millions of miles away on another level. And then doctor K, as we've already said, is just very hard to pin down and understand. And so what I thought would be cool is to just try to understand each of their characters so that somebody listening can say, oh, I totally get it. I have that kind of person in my life through the lens of your experience in that moment, I think you could offer a lot of insight. And so maybe to start meaning was supposed to be the main point. Where do we derive meaning? Was that coming largely from Stephen? Do you feel like that was a personal angst he has? Because I feel like I've heard shades of that coming out in other interviews he's had and his friend in Dubai that he references. Did you feel like that was a very personal question for Stephen? I do think it's genuine in his case, and especially after watching the interview with Wes, I think he is really grappling. A difficulty for him is that there is a lot of noise in his life. In other words, all kinds of people from all kinds of directions. I mean, just think just in the one hand, we'll talk maybe about Doctor King in a few moments. But just coming from doctor, that was so much noise that, in other words, all of this mental traffic that he's got to separate out, he's got to separate the wheat from the chaff. And I'm just saying, there was a ton of chaff there, in my view, and I don't know that he had the ability to separate that out, especially when he is kind of being buttered up a bit, you know, by doctor K. And actually, each of us were he was complimentary to everybody, which is a nice thing. But there's also some gamesmanship in my view, that was involved there. But I think that Steven is as genuine in this. I am glad Wes was on. I'd like to be one on one with him. I wish he could have a one on one with Steven Meyer, for example. Uh, because all this evolution stuff is, is backstory, certainly for a guy like Alex O'Connor. Uh, and it's what he thinks the explanatory power that is meant to blunt a whole lot of the, the theistic claims or points that might be made. And I think, uh, J. Warner Wallace would be great to just on the authority of the Gospels, the West did a great job on the historical material. So I'd like him to hear from more of our team, so to speak, that really have done deep dives in this thing. To give Steven more confidence, because there is always in the back of his questions was this, well, what about what if stories get changed? How do we know for sure? A lot of this fair questions for which there are great answers. But when you got a lot of other than other kind of noise, it's hard sometimes to hear the answer and see that the answers are really, really good. Um, if you let them settle in and see and you're able to assess the merits. So I would take Steven as being a genuine person in this, and I think increasingly so he had westhafen. Right? I mean, this is we were there in September of twenty five. And here's Wes in early part of twenty six. Well, that's meaningful. And incidentally, you had made reference to this with Steven. He is extremely successful. Yeah. You know how the podcast world works. You know, if you've got if you've got twelve million subscribers, he was offered. I read this in Forbes magazine, one hundred million for his show, and he turned it down. He said, I can do better on my own. Now, this is interesting, though, because from worldly perspectives, here's a young man who's nice looking, who is exceptionally successful, and his operation is magnificently professional. These people are great. Okay. And he's asking, what's it all about, Alfie? Right. Well, that's a song from the sixties. Sorry about that. I should have given you a warning. I do that once in a while. Uh, but. And he's asking these questions because he realizes that that's not the answer. And sometimes it's, it's like, well, the young people are asking, but I know he's asking that question too. And so that that speaks well of him. And I, you know, I pray for him. I, I think I prayed for him this morning, actually. Uh, because, um, and I pray that I can be back on the show, um, to give him more of the truth in a thoughtful manner. Yeah. So those are the things I think about with regards to him. I was impressed with him, his genuineness, his capability as a, as a, as a leader there and what he does. But I think as an individual, I think the existential element is a big deal for him. What's going on inside him, the hunger for meaning and significance. I think those were his questions genuinely. Yeah, in many ways, as you said, that he kind of feels like a modern day Solomon in that for so many young people, he represents a rival. I mean, he's young, but he represents the, you know, getting your life all in order and the entrepreneur and the success and the businesses and he's attractive and all those he represents what I think so many young people want. And yet you can already see that not only in himself but among his peers. There is a existential restlessness and a wondering of is there more to life than this? And so Hypothesizing or Lord willing, the next time you have that one on one, how do you get through to a guy who clearly seems to be asking the right questions, and yet it feels like even similarly, maybe with different but similar to a Joe Rogan or a Jordan Peterson, there almost seems to be this a popularization of the quest, but there seems to be a wall that it hits in terms of. Yeah. And it's different, certainly for each of them. What do you say to confront that? What needs to take place in a guy's life like that to really come to grips with reality? Right. Um, there are two things going on here, Ben. One of them is how do I posture and how do I navigate strategically with what I know about him? And so in my own mind, I, I, I have a sense of how I do that. I'll tell you in just a moment, but the wall, you can't do anything about the wall. That's something the Holy Spirit's got to deal with because that's, I mean, not to be over pietistic here, but it's just the reality of the circumstance. There are so many barriers. I mean, just think of the, the spiritual, the the say, for lack of a better word, the the satanic barrier. Some people might cringe when I say that, but look, John says, the whole world lies in the power of the evil one. That's first John five, okay? Paul writes to Timothy in Second Timothy, the end of chapter two. He says that, um, that the world has been held captive by him to do his will. Mhm. And, uh, in second Corinthians chapter two, he says that the, that the devil has blinded the minds of the unbeliever. So, I mean, I mean, just thinking of that element now, you know, the world of flesh and the devil first, first John talks about that. So that's just the devil part. Yeah. That is an element in this engagement, in any engagement with people. Okay. Then you got the flesh, all the things that the flesh is drawing away from. So this is what we are up against is an insurmountable barrier in human terms. When you think of the terminology of the phraseology of the text regarding what I just quoted, the devil's control. We can't get through that. Only God can get through it. But our task is not to worry about that, frankly. We can pray about that. But that's praying to get him moving, to get God moving on our behalf with those people. Our job is to communicate clearly, graciously, and truthfully and persuasively as possible. That's it. And, um, and then let the chips fall. This gives these are the things that God has entrusted to us to do. And there's a lot of verses that speak to those details. Uh, graciously, persuasively, truthfully, persuasively. You know, kind of thing. Um, that's what we do. And then we let God take it from there. Okay. So we have an important role in this. Um, I the way I divide it out, Ben, is, uh, I just say one hundred percent, one hundred percent, man. It's kind of a very, it's a takeoff on the Chalcedonian formula of Christology. Jesus is one hundred percent God. But I mean it now in terms of, uh, sanctification, also ministry that God, God's responsible one hundred percent for his part. Right? And we are responsible for one hundred percent of our part, right? So we have something to do. It's not all of God and none of me. He has entrusted us with gifts and capabilities and opportunities and all that. So we try to, to, um, we try to acquit ourself well with that area. And then when it gets to the wall, that's his problem, not mine. Nothing we could do about that. But when it comes to my part, if I were to sit down with Steven, I would want to make two points. I want to focus on the reasons why we are convinced I didn't like the word believe, because it's too easy for non-believers to relativize that language. Okay. The reason why we are convinced that God exists and that Jesus is God in flesh on the earth. Okay. And that has to do with the reasons for God and historical evidence from New Testament. I do not argue for the inerrancy of Scripture with non-Christians. It's a waste of time. And Alex O'Connor has spent a lot of time. There's contradictions in the in the Gospels. My response is, so what? That doesn't mean you can't have trustworthy history. And that's what we want to trade on, right? And so I'd want to talk about that element and answer questions, because I have a broad conviction here. And your viewers might find this helpful. And that is that, um, when my daughter was what, eight years old, she asked me, Papa, how do we know that God is true? I thought about it for a moment because I'm trying to put this in words that would make sense to her. And the thoughts that came to my mind was, and this is what I said to her. The reason that we believe God is true is because he's the best explanation for the way things are. He's the best explanation for the way things are now. This covers the existence of the universe, the appearance of design, morality in the universe, the problem of evil, all of these things, and many, many more. The details of Jesus life, the resurrection. It's the best explanation. What we hold. There's no better explanation. You can come up with ad hoc things that try to explain away. And this is what Alex O'Connor kept doing, waving the wand of evolution and. But it's not going to be adequate. This is the. And so I want to focus on that. I want him to get the substantive stuff that he could get his teeth into without distraction from other people. He's got that already. He's talked to all these other people. He can weigh what I'd have to say in light of all of that. But if I'm in a one on one conversation and so I'm talking about Stephen now, but this is I know you're thinking more expansively as people are engaging other people. This is what you that's a central part. They have to have a conviction that this is actually true, that that the what we're providing is not our truth, but facts about history and facts about the nature of reality. Yeah. Okay. But the second element, and this is also really, really important, especially I think with Stephen, is what I referred to earlier as the existential element. Now the existential element is not the external fact stuff. It's the internal hungers, the internal yearnings, the internal desire for meaning and significance, which is what that show was supposedly about. And the internal, um, hunger for forgiveness. And I would want to speak to that. Yeah. And, um, you know, and I think, you know, the way Christians sometimes will say it is, well, we're all sinners, you know, and Jesus is the only way because, you know, he died for you. And those are all really profoundly true. But when people hear that, I think it's religious noise to them. Yeah. And I think we have to find different ways of expressing it. And so, for example, if I were addressing this particular point with Stephen, I would say, Stephen, let me ask you a question. Have you ever felt guilty? Yeah. You know, he says, I try to do good. I try to do all these things. He said that on the air, you know, I try to do the best I can. He told that to West, too. And, uh, and I said, I'm just asking this question. Do you ever feel guilty? Yeah. Everybody's felt guilty. Right? Right. Okay. Why? Why do you feel guilty? Now, I want him to answer, you know, the tactical approach. I'm asking questions, right? And since I don't have a whole bunch of people, I can. I can use my time back and forth with questions with him. Sometimes when you have a big deal like that limited time, although we had quite a bit of time there. If you ask a question, you yield the floor to somebody else who's going to over over, you know, overuse the the opportunity. But in this case, I don't want Steven to respond because I know he's going to say yes, that he has feel guilty because he's a human being made in the image of God. Okay. That's a safe question. And then I'm going to ask why. Now, what I'm getting at, and I think I can get this get to this point fairly quickly. You feel guilty because you are guilty. Yeah. It's not artificial. You know that deep in your heart. Okay. And the answer to guilt is not denial. The answer to guilt is forgiveness. Now I'm just saying I have used this line many times. The first time I spoke, that was at berserkly. Believe it or not, a huge audience there a number of years ago. And, uh, it was at the end of my lecture on relativism, actually. And, and I just said that the answer to guilt is forgiveness. And in my own heart, I know it was going on in other people's heart, too. Just when you hear that the answer to guilt is not denial, the answer to guilt is forgiveness. I think that goes like an arrow, right directly to the heart of the matter, of the people want forgiveness. That's the answer. Forgiveness. You can't undo the past. You cannot do that. It's done with. You are standing there in the dock and you're guilty. And eventually the books are going to be opened. And every single thing that anybody has ever done wrong is right there. That's revelation twenty. You know, he's making a list and he's checking it twice. Know what and what's not in there is all your good stuff because that doesn't matter. You're supposed to do that already. You don't get credit for that against your bad stuff. That doesn't law doesn't work that way. You can't, you know, you're not going to get a letter from the Da. Um, you know, saying, hey, I checked the records. You haven't committed any crimes in the last ten years. Um, go off out and knock off a few gas stations on us. You have credit in your account, right? Yeah. It doesn't work that way. It's the bad stuff that sinks our ship. And that's what the final judgment is about. Now, what? The answer is forgiveness. And this is where Jesus comes in. Yeah. And so what I'm trying to do is take the, the heart of the gospel and attach it to that existential hunger and desire that everybody has. And, uh, so, so I have a, and this I'm offering to, to you and to your viewers that as a two pronged approach, sometimes as apologists, guys like me. We want to do the the first part, get to the facts and all that. And that's important. Sometimes, though, it's almost better depending on the individual. Sometimes just going straight to the existential issue, straight to the heart. You know what you need? You need forgiveness. That's what you need. And that's what Jesus can get you a line like that, you know, and sometimes that can turn everything around completely, you know, especially if you've offered some credible reasons to think that this whole enterprise is actually true. That's so profound. It feels like that ultimate resistance is connected to sin. It's connected to a revelation of our sinfulness. And then as a result, our need for grace. And even in your conversation where it got kind of stuck in the mud of, well, there's a lot of things that can give you meaning and happiness. And Alex is like, yeah, it's drugs or church. And, you know, you can practice this religion or this meditation or why not all the different religions. Stephen was saying that at some point. And, you know, to me, as I was arguing back to the podcast, you know how you do that where you like, engage as if you're on it, you know, part of, of course, what I was wanting to say is that yes, these different things can, can contain elements or essence of the ultimate truth that is unique to Christ. But even beyond that, and I think this is what you're alluding to, is that that's not even the point, because ultimately Jesus did not come to make you happy or even to give you meaning as much as he came to forgive you, to give you grace. And so to kind of to shift the conversation around, look, yeah, you're right. Okay. Drugs might even make you temporarily happy for five minutes or, you know, sex or ice cream or a roller coaster or whatever. Yeah. But what your soul longs for more than happiness is to be known as the sinful person you are. And for there to be an actual remedy to that. Yeah. And so to shift it to the conversation of sin and grace as opposed to meaning and meaninglessness is kind of the the necessary pivot, but that's maybe where you'll get the resistance, right? Because if it's just a matter of trying on different clothes to see what fits better, we can have that conversation all day. But sin confronts Steven, sin confronts you. Right. And so that's probably where the resistance ultimately lies. Yeah. And so the I have a little wrinkle I want to add to that. It's really well said Ben, but, um, this is where this question about have you ever felt guilty is an attempt to get them to reveal their own awareness of their own sinfulness, not me calling them a sinner. And so this is a little tactical twist. You know, we can call them sinners. And that's just and, and there's times where that's appropriate. I mean, Jesus did that at different times. But, but, um, I'm just saying tactically, if we can ask a question that gets them in a, if you've provided a reasonably safe environment for this in the manner in which you're engaging, you're nice, you know, um, to them, uh, they, they will acknowledge what's true and you don't have to, in a certain sense, tell them the sooner everybody knows they're a sinner because they are made the image of God and they're fallen. Okay. And this goes to the wrinkle to it. Isn't that Jesus the way I would argue this, it isn't that Jesus came to give you meaning. Jesus came because you already have meaning. He you have meaning because the way God made you in the image of God. And you know this human beings have an intuitive sense of this, that there's something special about human beings, and it's reflected in our language and our behavior and all kinds of things. Now, we don't always live consistently with that, but it's internal knowledge that we have because being made in the image of God. Okay. So, so, um, and Jesus doesn't die for junk. It isn't like his death makes you valuable. You are valuable. It's interesting. Peter has this line in first Peter, it says, um, you have not been redeemed with with, you know, silver and gold, you know, junk like that, right? You know, but rather with the precious blood of Christ. So the price that Jesus paid for us is an indication of the value we already have. Yeah. Yeah. And and that would that was a point I was wanting to work on in that conversation. But there were a lot of distractions. We know we have meaning and purpose. The question is, what is the grounding of that? It certainly is in eastern religions. You know, that's all over the map. And ultimately you don't have durability and as, as as your identity yourself. Oh, you go to heaven, not in Hinduism. You disappear. In Hinduism, in Buddhism, you disappear. That's heaven. We disappear, you know? So it's, it's, um, we disappear into the Godhead or whatever, you know, kind of thing. But, uh, it's Christianity provides something entirely different. What our hearts yearn for forgiveness and relationship that is reliable and it's not dependent on us for their safety because we're not the ones keeping ourselves saved. It is Jesus that is able to do that, and he does do that. And that's what gives us a sense of safety. And for Stephen's friend in Dubai who became a Christian, you know, there is a video he did. I noticed it somewhere and I made a link. I got to get to that some day, you know, but, um, he's talking, he talks about his relationship with Stephen, but so you may want to think about checking that out. It's out there somewhere. I don't know, but but, um, that guy has had a radical conversion from what I can tell. And when Stephen was offering, well, you know, lots of religions change lives. I'm I'm not sure how much of this I addressed because you're limited with time and competition and all that. But but the fact is, if I were one on one, I'd press. I said, this isn't true. Yes, other religions can make some changes, but there's nothing. I promise you. There's nothing like the radical transformation that takes place consistently, persistently, universally, regardless of time or culture. As when someone gets born again, they get regenerated. Their lives are different. Think of all the Muslims who are willing to change to Christianity, even though they know in the place that they live. This puts their life in danger. Their families will throw them out, you know? And, uh, anyway, so it's not the same. You can go to, you can join a club, you could whatever. And, and your life will be changed in some measure, but nothing like what we're talking about here. No, there's no comparison. That's what I would want to argue with, Stephen. And again, it's because even in these other religions, I guess if you can find a sense of, okay, there's a transcendence, there's a basis for morality in a theistic framework, maybe it's not a Judeo-Christian theistic framework. And so that's kind of more you that's going to anchor you on some levels as opposed to the nihilist or the secularist who has nothing. And so I could see how that would orient you. In some ways that would be better, uh, afford you some psychological stability or whatever. Right. But I think even more fundamental, as I was saying, and as I think you were saying as well, is that what we need even more than that is to be known, fully known and fully loved because we have, as you said, this deep, intuitive sense that something is missing, there is a gap. And so a Steven Bartlett might attempt to fulfill that gap through exercise and being a great, uh, CEO or whatever it is, but it's still meritocratic. It's still I need to earn this somehow. I need to fill it with some way. And the doctor K might find it in a variety of, uh, hard to define sources. And. Alex O'Connor, it's a whole nother conversation. But the only thing that says. I know exactly who you are, and I love you and forgive you, I redeem you not because of you is Jesus. And that's the ultimate existential dread, right? Like, I'm going gonna get caught out. So I got a band aid. Numb cover, fill, succeed, earn, but nothing. But Jesus says, hey, you can now pursue life from wholeness, not for it. And that is a massive distinction that I think, Lord willing, Steven one day. See, that's why I call it in the story of reality, which was somewhat the subtext of the conversation there a little bit got got a little book time there at the end of three hours. I don't know anybody who survived to the end of that thing, but, um, but I just talk about the rescue. We get rescued. We can't rescue ourselves. God rescues us. That's our story. Every other story, we're trying to rescue ourselves. And we're hoping to try to rescue ourselves. And by the way, that mentality seeps into Christianity, too. Mhm. You know, people that are just thinking, I just got to do, I got to do, I got to do, I got to do in order to get saved or keep saved And of course, behavior is really important to God, but it's the context is entirely different when you belong to him and you're on the inside of his family based on grace, that changes everything. Yeah. Switching gears just for a second, um, with a little bit of time we have left, this will not be a three and a half hour, five and a half hour marathon. Fear not, Greg, I promise. Um, Alex has been on my heart for a while, and I know you said you haven't. You didn't know him prior to this. I did. He's been on a fascinating journey, as I'm sure you learned in quick order. And he to me represents in many ways kind of the evolution of the new atheists, the young, young new atheists kind of emerging in the footsteps of the Dawkins and Dennett and all those guys. But then he's evolved and he's more winsome. He's a little bit more open minded in a sense. But then, as you said, there still seems to be a pretty antagonistic, aggressive tone was with me, though some told me that they've watched almost everything he's ever done, and they had not seen him as aggressive with someone as he was with me. He wasn't that way with John Lennox, for example. He was very deferential. Well, right. But I think the irony with him is that, you know, and I think you tried to tease this out, he has no basis for objective morality, but I think he gets quite worked up by suffering, especially animal suffering. Oddly, I think that does. I think it struck him in an emotional way in that moment that I think made him less kind of the, you know, the pleasant, diplomatic young Brit that he normally is in those contexts. Yeah. That's a liability to argue with anybody with an accent like that. Yeah. I mean, already you're on the back foot. I mean, he just sounds so cool. But this was a point that I always want to make with people like him is the grounding question. How is it okay, so he doesn't have morality. He's an emotivist. And, and I, I, you know, I'm thinking back on that engagement and it might have been helpful just to said, um, Alex, I know this bothers you. You explain to me, based on your worldview and your understanding of morality, why anyone should care what you think about animal suffering. Yeah, there it is. Because he would have nothing, I think, useful to say. I didn't ask it quite like that. I did accuse him of smuggling morality into this question, and he really reacted to that. I have never mentioned one morality once. So of course that's that's why you call it smuggling, right? You're slipping it in there. And it was so evident to me and most people who are watching that was the case. But, um, yeah, this is, this is um, I think that there, what I like about Alex, um, I don't know if he's close or not. I mean, he, he is willing to acknowledge the cracks in his armor. Consciousness mystifies him. There's no place in a materialistic worldview for consciousness. He doesn't know what to do with it. And now he's thinking of panpsychism. This is so silly. What the heck? What's wrong with mind body dualism? Which is so obvious? Which you've got a mind, a soul, and you've got a body, right? But you've got an immaterial self, right? That's what your thoughts and your desires and acts of will and feelings, all that. Duh. That's so that's such a straightforward answer that comports with all of our intuitions. He doesn't want to go there because there's theistic implications to that. So he's now flirting with panpsychism, which, jeez, that really made doctor K happy, you know. He's flipping out over there about that one. But but he'll acknowledge that the the problem with consciousness and um, he doesn't seem to be bothered at all about his moral non-realism. He doesn't believe in objective morality. He's a self-professed emotivist moral statements are just emotional gushes. That's all it is. They don't even have propositional content. If I say something like rape is wrong. I'm not saying anything about rape or being wrong because wrong has no meaning. I'm saying, oh, rape IC. You know my response. So, you know, he he he doesn't seem to doubt that at all. Like he doesn't seem to be wondering. Well, maybe there is objective morality that amazes me, especially with his concern about suffering, because he was pressing me on that point, uh, about suffering, uh, quite a bit actually, and, uh, trying to embarrass me, I think. And he characterized, uh, my own view, the Christian view of the most uncharitable way imaginable. So that was a rough spot to get out of for me. But, um, the irony is that he has nothing better to offer because he doesn't even think suffering is morally suspect. Yet here he is reacting this way. Yeah. As if there's some substance to his response and inveighs against theism of some sort. So, uh, so I admire him for his transparency and his willingness to acknowledge that there's some evidence for the resurrection. Something happened right around thirty three, right in that period of time, at that part of the world that created an explosion that we now know as Christianity, what something happened. He acknowledges that. So, you know, it's hard to tell where he's going to go from here. And, um, I mean, he's, he's, I don't mean this in a condescending way at all, but he's just a kid. Um, it this is deceptive when you listen to him. He's twenty six years old. That's young. Okay. And, um, and so he's got a lot of years to be thinking and to be and maturing. And as you use, as you said, evolving in a sense from the new atheism and the harshness and the, I think, intellectual shallowness of those views, uh, to something more robust and something more thoughtful. And I think as time goes on, uh, that that may serve him well. We'll just have to see. Yeah. So much of that part of the conversation centered around suffering. And it made me think, as he was saying it, that I think it's easy to have an intellectual, detached intellectualism when it relates to suffering, when you haven't suffered much. Mhm. And again, I'm not I don't know his biography, but I haven't suffered very much, relatively speaking. And so I'd be first to admit that a lot of my thoughts on this are largely intellectual. And my dad just went through a cancer diagnosis that definitely tested some of what I've experienced. But I'd imagine for those listening who maybe encounter someone like him, apart from praying, continuing to listen, continuing to answer their questions, would you say that for a guy like him, once he experiences a little bit of the reality of suffering and the lack of resilience, or the lack of resources that a emotivism secularism has to offer in the face of that suffering. I wonder if that will soften him. Not that I wish that upon anyone. Of course. No, no. Well, if that's the price for eternity, it's certainly worth paying. And ironically, that that was a feature that in my own life, when I had left, um, my kind of quasi religious or somewhat religious upbringing. And when I was a teenager in the sixties and then, you know, embraced the whole, you know, worldly deal. Um, what happened is things were going really great for me. And then, um, because of a broken relationship that was really, really hard for me, I had to face the reality of my, my own philosophies and their inadequacy to help me in this time. I called it cosmic alienation because that was it. I mean, there's nobody here. Nobody in the world, no in the universe that knows or cares or whatever, ultimately for me. And that didn't lead me to Christ. But it really showed me the the depth of or the inadequacy of the conglomeration of philosophies that had stuck together that made me feel good when I was feeling good. You know, then those things changed. Here's another liability, though, that Alex is facing. Um, Alex is a very successful podcaster. As an atheist? Yeah. He's he hasn't written a book yet. He's thinking about he's planning to do it, but it doesn't matter. He's he's in print. You know, he's public with all of his views. When you get in print, whether literally in a book or, uh, you know, virtually, uh, in a major way. He's got over a million subscribers, I think to his, his, his enterprise. It's very hard to change your view. So much more is at stake when you change your view. So I don't know, economically for him, he'd probably still do well as a podcaster, but that's got to be a consideration for one, maybe in the back of his, I don't know in his mind, but I'm just saying this makes things harder. Um, I think that he'll gather a good following as a Christian podcaster if he were to make that move, but it's just psychologically harder to, to to say I was mistaken. It's very hard to do, especially when you've been very public about your convictions. It's not impossible. Look at Saul of Tarsus and many others like like him. Even nowadays, we have people that have been very public and have have changed their mind, turned, uh, not quite on a dime, but nevertheless still. But it's I think it's a liability for him. Something to think about. Yeah. I feel like somewhat ironically, we might not even have time to address doctor K, which I think the irony, the irony in the the guy that was least most difficult to pin down is probably the one that would take the least or the least amount of brevity to be able to explain, but just kind of zooming out again towards the end of our time here for someone who's listening and maybe they have someone in their life who, hey, spirituality, whatever, but they never seem to be able to pin them down. Or someone who's like an Alex O'Connor, who very, very intellectual. But there's this, this resistance, maybe this even hostility or someone like Stephen. Uh, what kind of words of wisdom would you offer them in general, uh, to, you know, as they listen to how you interacted, but then to take that into their own context? Well, the largely the appeal from culture and certainly this came through, I think from, um, doctor K is, is utilitarian approach where you find some things that make you feel that help you feel satisfied, fulfilled, right? Help you feel like you have value. Okay, this is the wrong approach because, um, well, let me back up. If, if there is no meaning of any sort, then all you're left with is making your own meaning and you do your best with that. Okay. But that's nihilistic and that's like nothingism, right? And so you just, you make peace with Nothingism and you find your path. But in that regard, there's no distinctions between the paths morally. So you could be a Mother Theresa, you can be an Adolf Hitler, Idi Amin, or, you know, a sex slave trader or whatever. You can't qualify one as better than the other, except for in the way it just satisfies you. That's what you're left with. Now, I think people know better, I think. And Francis Schaeffer made this point many years ago. You know, every human being has made the image of God and they can't get away from that. There are things that are built in. They live in the world that God made. And in the tactics book, I have a chapter called Inside Out, and I trade on this notion. And the last line in that chapter is they can run from God, but they can't run from themselves. And so what I try to do is trade on things that people deep down know to be the case and, and, and do that. And, and so if there are people thinking about these things, this is what you have to you want to know what's true about the world. Now, if it turns out that Christianity is true, this is not going to be an easy life for you if you decide to follow Jesus. It is not going to be. It's going to be hard because now we're on the inside of the family and God's going to train us up, discipline us, and make us more like Jesus. That's the goal. He's got the long view, not the short view. It's satisfying and fulfilling, but it's also hard and painful as God takes us through all kinds of stuff and we never get over that. The I mean, your folks can tell you the same story, you know, and you know this because you have a long history with missions in your family. It isn't like, okay, now I'm mature in the Lord and things get easy. No, they just get they just get harder. They still stay hard because God, you're not you're still distance to go. But my encouragement to people is you want to find out what's true. Sooner or later, you're going to know that. And if it's Christianity, which I'm absolutely convinced is the case, this will. When you find out that Christianity is true and it's too late? This is not a pretty picture. Yeah. You know, so that's when here's the simple calculus. When I talk about the cross, either Jesus pays or you pay. It's either perfect justice, punishment for everything you've ever done wrong. And God misses nothing or perfect mercy, which is forgiveness for everything you've ever done wrong. And God misses nothing. That's what's at stake. Yeah. Wow. Well, Greg, I appreciate you. And again, I said this earlier, but I, I think you did a tremendous job in a very challenging environment and I appreciate that. I was I was definitely cheering for you and, uh, imagining myself in that context. And yeah, it was awesome. Appreciate you Greg. I hope we can do this again sometime. And I look forward to, to, to cheering you on from afar as God continues to use you. Thank you Ben. And at your service, any time you'd like to chat, I'd love to chat with you again too.

‍