HOW A GAY JEW REWROTE CORE CATHOLIC DOCTRINE IN THE 1960s
```
████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████ SECTION 37 BEGIN — "HOW A GAY JEW REWROTE CORE CATHOLIC DOCTRINE IN THE 1960s" ████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
Series: Based Camp | Simone & Malcolm Collins Date: Jun 09, 2026 ```
``` and openly gay man who authored the first draft of Nostra Aetate, one of the most controversial documents of Vatican II. Explores institutional capture, the implications for Catholic authority, and why traditional Catholics view Vatican II with suspicion. Key points:
- Baum was matrilineally Jewish and never fully abandoned Jewish identity
- Was having active gay sex while writing key Church documents
- Wrote first draft of Nostra Aetate (approved 2021-88 by Vatican II)
- Document declares other religions have a ray of divine truth
- Made it immoral for Catholics to proselytize Jews
- Every pope since has reaffirmed and built on this document
- Baum later left the priesthood, married an ex-nun platonically
- Had long-term gay relationship with another former priest
How A Gay Jew Rewrote Core Catholic Doctrine in the 1960s (This is CRAZY) Based Camp | Simone & Malcolm Jun 09, 2026 Is Vatican II the result of a “gay Jew infiltrating the Catholic Church”? Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into the shocking story of Gregory Baum — a matrilineal Jew, former Catholic priest, and openly gay man who authored the first draft of Nostra Aetate, one of the most controversial documents of the Second Vatican Council.
In this episode, they explore:
• Baum’s background, conversion, active homosexuality while writing key Church documents, and later life
• The content and lasting impact of Nostra Aetate on Catholic teaching regarding Jews, other religions, and interfaith dialogue
• Why many traditional Catholics view Vatican II with deep suspicion
• The broader implications for Church authority, doctrine, and demographics
A wild, uncomfortable, and thought-provoking discussion on faith, identity, institutional capture, and theology. What do you think — infiltration, urban monoculture influence, or something else?
Watch until the end for Malcolm & Simone’s unfiltered reactions.
Episode Transcript Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. If you clicked on this video and are wondering, is this a clickbait title? It is so much crazier than you think, right? So I saw a title going through on a Redeem Zoomer video. We’ve had him on the show. I think he’s a great content creator, but he’s a pretty small C conservative content creator.
Doesn’t really lean into c- clickbait. Generally tries to dig into the meat and bones of religious history, Christian history, and theology. And it was the, the gay Jew who infiltrated Catholicism or the Vatican or something like that. Anyway, I read this and I was like, “Wh- this isn’t normal Redeem Zoomer content,” right?
It mu- it can’t possibly be true, Malcolm. I start listening to the video. I get to the end of it and I’m like, “Oh, my God, I have to know more.” So I need to clarify a few things about this particular individual and the influence they have had on Catholicism. [00:01:00] First of all is this somebody who was just, like, same sex attracted or, you know, not, not actually sleeping with men?
Or maybe they, long after writing the documents that became important parts of Vatican II Nostra A- aetera m- they, they maybe long after had gay sex or started doing gay activism or something like that. They were, while they were a priest, during the time period they wrote these documents, having active gay sex with men Yeah and
Simone Collins (2): then it’s like- Wait, whoa, whoa, whoa, hold, hold on.
You, how can you be a Catholic priest and a, I mean, I guess you could be a ma- a matrilineal Jew And that’s the other, right, so here’s
Malcolm Collins: another thing. I was like, maybe they’re just ethnically Jewish or something like that. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, yeah. No, they’re probably not actually a
Simone Collins (2): Jew. They’re just matrilineally, ooh, matrilineally Jewish, and that’s it, right?
Yeah, so- And then that would be-
Malcolm Collins: He is, by the way, matrilineally [00:02:00] Jewish. His, one of the things he fought hardest to normalize within the Vatican and Catholicism as a policy is that it is immoral to attempt to proselytize to and convert Jews to Christianity. Does that sound a lot like somebody who actually deconverted from Judaism?
That makes no sense if you actually believe Christian principles, right? Like, you would... I’m, I’m saying this, I’m trying to be, like, as... I have, I have tackled this particular conundrum every way I can in my head, and the only way, because then, like, wouldn’t he convert back to Judaism?
But the only way I can get it to make sense when I piece together his various writings, and then it does make sense, is he thinks that, that the [00:03:00] Jews are still under the first covenant. And that as such, you can have a b- believe that the Jewish worldview is both 100% correct and accurate, and the Christian worldview is simultaneously 100% correct and accurate. Because the first covenant stands and you have the second covenant. And so he basically, I mean, if this is true, it means that he 100% believed in, even if he was telling the truth about being a Catholic, Catholicism and Judaism.
Or a form of Catholicism that’s heavily different from other forms of Catholicism, because now we’re gonna get to, what did he write? So he wrote Nostra Aetate. This is an official declaration of the Second Vatican Council. It was overwhelmingly approved with a final vote of 2,021 in favor and only 88 against, and it was promulgated or officially issued by Pope Paul VI on October [00:04:00] 28th, 1965.
What that means in terms of Catholic doctrine is that’s not the same thing as a papal bull, right? Like, it doesn’t mean that it directly came from God. But what it does mean, according to the catechism of the Catholic Church, or, like, their official documents about what all Catholics have to do, is Catholics, quote-unquote, “owe it religious assent or a sincere submission of intellect and will.”
See CCC 892 to 893. It is not optional. And I will read through that, the, like, official Catholic doctrine on these types of policies. But what it said and what it introduced to Catholicism as a concept is that other religions, including religions outside of the Abrahamic tree, like Hinduism and Buddhism, have a ray of divine truth to them.
And it’s even written ... It can be interpreted, like now, [00:05:00] after I went over this document, I understand now why so many of our Catholic friends hate Vatican II. ‘Cause I’m reading this and I’m like, “Whoazers.” Like, this is pretty wild. And it, it goes through and sort of praises things about other major religions and sort of creates commandments, essentially, for Catholics around getting along with them rather than necessarily trying to convert them.
That’s crazy. Very
convenient if a Jew had entered the, the, the Catholic Church. Okay. By the way, other final crazy thing is he also deconverted- Oh ... from
Simone Collins (2): Catholicism. So he, like, came in, vandalized church policy, and then- Vandalized church
Malcolm Collins: policy in a very d- and note, when I say he wrote the Nostra E- Eleata this document- It’s not like he co-wrote it or something like that.
He wrote the entirety, as far as church history and anyone is aware- Okay ... of the first [00:06:00] draft of this document. How- Yes, it was heavily edited after its first draft and before it entered the sort of church law and stuff like that. And actually, it seemed to have gotten even worse in future edits. In his original writing of it, it was really just focused on Jews and Christians getting along and Judaism being partially true.
Okay. And all of the, like, Hinduism and Buddhism stuff was added by other people afterwards. Oh, wow. So, like the his, his group of buddies- It was the ‘60s. It was the time. Yeah but the reason he left was also crazy. So within the church and during his time in the church, he was a well-known LGBT activist.
Oh. And he left the church, and we’ll go into that because as he said the, the, the, the church’s stance on gays. Which is odd because one he... If- he was a priest. He’s not, in C- Catholic terms at least, it’s, that, that doesn’t [00:07:00] just mean you can’t sleep with women. You can’t sleep with anyone as a Catholic priest.
Yeah. Right? Like- Yeah ... their stance on gays had nothing to do with the fact that he couldn’t sleep with men. Yeah, it’s, it’s about
Simone Collins (2): celibacy. It’s not about selective celibacy.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, although he was doing that anyway. Well. He ends up, by the way, long-term dating another Catholic priest who is gay or former Catholic priest who is gay.
Simone Collins (2): Oh, I just, no, I just want the yaoi manga version of this. After leaving- It sounds fantastic.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Y- you know how G- oh, you wanna get even more manga? Do you know who he’s married to today?
Simone Collins (2): Neil deGrasse Tyson.
Malcolm Collins: I don’t know. Who? What? An ex-Catholic nun.
Simone Collins (2): God, you said that and my, my computer just, like, demonically shut off. It, it was like- ... it wasn’t used to process that. No, it was
Malcolm Collins: an
ex-Catholic nun who he’s married to now. Oh my. Well,
Simone Collins (2): a very
Malcolm Collins: mannish
Simone Collins (2): nun perhaps.
Malcolm Collins: No, no. They don’t have any [00:08:00] sexual relationship. I think it’s so that he can more easily have both a long-term pr- relationship, which is something he’s always wanted, and practice casual sex with gay men in, in potentially large numbers.
So okay. I’ve set the scene, I think. This is absolutely crazy. I now understand why, like, all of the sane Catholics who, like, are, are our friends are all like, “Yeah, I’m not, like, a big fan of Vatican II. That... Some w- some fishy stuff went on with that,” right? And l- let’s, let’s just go into this, okay?
‘Cause it gets... , so he knew he was attracted to men in his teenage years but remained celibate during his time as a priest. Ordained in the 1950s, left the priesthood in 1974. A- and note his conversion into Catholicism is also pretty fishy. So we’ll get into that as well. In his 2016 autobiography, The Oil Has Not Run Dry, he publicly came out. He described falling in love with men [00:09:00] emotionally in his younger years. The joy mixed with pain because it couldn’t be reciprocated due to his vows. His first gay experience was at the age of 40 around 1963. This was around the age that he wrote this document which he described as exciting but ultimately disappointing because he wanted a committed partner.
After leaving the priesthood, he married Shirley Flynn, a former nun, in 1978. They lived together platonically until her death in 2007. He described continuing to explore his sexuality in other, quote-unquote, “non-conformist ways.” In 8- 1986 after moving to Montreal, he fell in love with a former priest, a male partner, and remained committed to that relationship.
Now, this is also pretty interesting because that’s a huge age gap relationship there
Simone Collins (2): on the bright side, I mean, we’ve got gay romance, we got the costumes, we got the age gap. This is just perfect manga [00:10:00] fodder for some kind of priest yaoi series.
So- Yeah, this is- At
Malcolm Collins: least there’s that ... this is one of the things where if you come to the conclusion that I do in this and, and you’re watching this, that he just never stopped being Jewish I’m not getting the Jewishness in any of this, though. I... Where is, where
Simone Collins (2): is the Jew coming in? We haven’t, we haven’t gotten to that yet.
Okay. Because I, I’m not... None of this feels like someone who’s very Jewish. It just, it just feels like someone who’s kind of trolling the church,
Malcolm Collins: having fun. But if you, if you... No, suppose you are an actual Jew, right? Now- Okay ... keep in mind, Jews aren’t supposed to be gay either, so, like, he’s not good at being a Jew in that
Simone Collins (2): respect.
Well, like, again, to my point. Now, this doesn’t sound like a Jew. This sounds like m- maybe someone a little bit ur- ur- early urban monoculture or someone very 1960s-ish, just like, “Free love. Everything is real. God comes in many forms.” That kind of person. [00:11:00] There’s nothing particularly Jewish about that.
That has to do with a loss of culture, a loss of tradition. Mm-hmm
Malcolm Collins: No, but imagine you’re, you’re Jewish, right? Even a bad Jew. I, I, I still think even as a bad Jew, even with that level of sin- God, Jew ... this is one of those, like, sneak stat things where I often joke that, that Jews are just specced into, like, way too high a sneak stat.
They, they, it’s not just they come off as sneaky, it’s the fact that, that Mossad has been able to pull off these insane things like getting terrorists to pay them for pagers to blow- I love that,
Simone Collins (2): yeah. And most recently there’s been this big scare with Mossad being a little bit too socially connected with a lot of high-ranking Trump officials, and they’re sending all this intel back on what internally the US government is talking about vis-a-vis the Iran war.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, but imagine the civilization level sneak stat that is to sneak your way into- Into everything ... the core council which decides [00:12:00] what is religiously true for Catholics.
Simone Collins (2): Okay, okay. So he’s, he’s Mossad-ing the Catholic Church is what you’re trying to say. Infecting
Malcolm Collins: it with documentation that says you’re not allowed to go against the Jews.
That’s not even, like... That’s not even, like... I’m just like, “
Simone Collins (2): Damn.” Really? Isn’t that just, isn’t that what he wrote more just, like, let’s try to be more cooperative and kind vis-a-vis other religions? Or is it- no,
Malcolm Collins: it basically affirms Judaism is, is partially true and worshiping the same god. Well, it is the sa- I mean, they, they share the Old Testament.
Yeah, but m- most Catholics before Vatican II did not think Jews were worshiping the same god. That is... E- even the concept of that is really a post-Vatican II concept. Well, Jews worship
Simone Collins (2): the God of the Old Testament and
Malcolm Collins: Christians worship the God of the Old Testament. I know that makes sense to you as a techno-puritan because we believe the same thing.
Okay. I am just saying that most Christians don’t believe that. [00:13:00] They do believe- I guess someone’s
Simone Collins (2): gonna explain this to me in the comments, so yeah. Okay. Fine. I’ll take, I’ll take your word for it and then go to the comments.
Speaker: So I decided to look more into this to see how popes after it was out related to it, and it looks like they’ve just built on it since then. , You have Pope Paul VI, who was the one who
, Put the whatever on it, the, the, the seal on it. Then you’ve got Pope John Paul II, who frequently referenced and built upon it. Examples include addresses at an anniversary, specifically his 20th address in 1985, his 1986 visit to the Rome Synagogue, and multiple statements on Jewish-Christian relations.
Um, then you have , Pope Benedict XVI, who wrote a letter for the 40th anniversary in 2005, praising it for opening a new era. So he explicitly praised it in relation with Jews and overcoming prejudices. As both cardinal and pope, he affirmed its role while noting some limitations, e.g.
[00:14:00] it focuses positively on religion, but should address the sick and distorted forms of those religions. Okay, whatever. , Pope Francis marked the 50th anniversary, 2015, in a general audience, calling the message, quote unquote, “always timely,” and quoting sections on Judaism and Islam, and emphasized practical dialogue, friendship, and cooperation in the document.
Then we have Pope Leo XIV, who recently gave an address to a general audience for the 60th anniversary, highlighting its ongoing urgency for Jewish-Catholic relationships. So, , what I’ll note here is, yes, none of these are like papal bulls or anything like that, but for half a century at this point, well over half a century at this point, , every single pope has reaffirmed and built on this document.
, This inception was deep and thorough
Malcolm Collins: It looks like the age gap might’ve been around, like, 25 years for one of his relationships. Ooh.
Simone Collins: Well, I mean, you know, they’re very common these [00:15:00] days, so.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. So we’ll start with his sexuality stuff, then we’ll get into the Jew stuff.
But that is, that is fas- ... And it makes me understand more why we see so many of the Catholics who do not think the church is, is, as it exists right now, is something that they can follow.
Mm.
And they’ve gone for other versions or sort of past iterations of what the church taught. And it’s always fascinating to me that they don’t consider themselves schismatic.
Although, what’s really funny is a lot of the, like, most famous schismatics, like Martin Luther, also didn’t want to consider themselves a schismatic.
Speaker 22: Other individuals who didn’t consider themselves schismatic were John Calvin and
Henry VIII and John Wycliffe. I personally don’t understand this. You know, now that Protestantism is large, maybe it’s just twisted my brain on this issue,
Malcolm Collins: So, like, th- that’s just a common thing that happens to people, where you have this sort of trans-schismatic take, where it’s like, “I don’t define myself as schismatic, and I’m just looking at the guy in a wig.”
And I’m like, “But [00:16:00] you’re, you’re clearly just a guy in a wig,” right? Like, you’re ignoring the church’s teachings, right? You know, that seems ... But anyway, to continue here. And, and I think that at the end of the day, whether or not you’re schismatic or not does actually come from whether or not you define yourself as schismatic.
I actually buy into the, the trend thing of schism- schismatism, because you at the end of the day get to decide, you know, what your heart thinks, right? So even if I as an outsider would be like, “This looks schismatic to me,” they as, those insiders wouldn’t, right? So to continue there. He knew he was attracted to men in his teenage years but remained celibate during that time as a priest, and he used priesthood to sort of, this was part of what seemed to motivate him to become a priest, the ability to live a celibate lifestyle and, and not be drawn to this. In his 2016 autobiography, The Oil Has Not Run Dry, so keep in mind this stuff about who he’s sleeping with and when he’s sleeping with them is not coming from outside hostile sources.
This is from his own mouth. Talk about this. Oh, sorry, we just ... Wait, wait, did we just go through [00:17:00] this? Yeah, we went through his first sexual experience and stuff like that. He described wanting to explore se- his, his sexuality in non-conformist ways. So anyway, th- this is where it gets interesting, right?
So, remember I mentioned wh- when his sexual experience was, right? So, that would’ve happened when he was 40 years old, okay? Oh. So the document by the pope, right? With officially promulgated, that means this is when the pope, you know, basically affirmed this document, when he was 42 years old.
He apparently wrote the first draft of the document when he was 38 years old, and would have been working on the inter-drafting process during this time when he was having se- gay, gay sex.
Right? Mm.
So to get some quotes from him “Looking back, I begin to realize my vow of celibacy had not been a meaningful religious commitment, but simply a promise to bracket my homosexuality, to refuse to [00:18:00] explore its meaning and power.”
He decided to leave the priesthood since, quote, “Since I no longer agreed with the church’s official sexual ethics and was exploring my sexuality in non-conformist ways.” Oh, no. A- again, wait, you left the church to explore your sexuality in non-conformist ways? My brother, straight men don’t get to do that either.
Like, the level of this guy’s commitment to the church, not high. You know? That is
Simone Collins (2): a little... Yeah. Ugh.
Malcolm Collins: And this is actually something really weird about Catholicism that I’m beginning to notice. And I notice this from his writings on Catholicism, the way he re- relates to Catholic theology, is a lot of people who are at, like, controlling levels within the Catholic Church and Catholic religious orders are significantly less religiously faithful than I’d say, like, the average lay Catholic that I know.
Mm. And that’s been very, very surprising to [00:19:00] me. And I- Well,
Simone Collins (2): there’s also such this... It is a little something that I struggle with with the c- the Catholic Church is the lifestyle, the day, just the day-to-day routine of someone who is in the clergy is so different from the day-to-day routine of a layperson who’s really deeply engaged in all the sacraments, right?
‘Cause you’re looking at one life that has possibly a lot of solitude, you know, a lot of sort of communal living sort of like a university style living if you are, you know, in a group, or more isolated living, very independent. Versus, you know, a teeming family, lots of young kids running around, lots of...
I mean, obviously priests work closely with their community too. It’s just, it, it worries me that... And what I like about the LDS church, for example, is that the people who are involved in policy are people who are, they came from the church. They raised families. They, they’ve done the whole thing. They’re living the LDS life, or they lived the [00:20:00] LDS life and now they’re older and senior and, and now influencing it and trying to make it sustainable and good, presumably.
Yeah. But if you’re a Catholic priest, you’ve never done that. Like, you haven’t had the family. You haven’t raised the kids. You don’t know the challenges of raising a kid in the church in the modern day. Well, then why
Malcolm Collins: do you think, like, Catholics have such low fertility rates when contrasted with other groups?
Simone Collins (2): I mean, it’s, it can’t help. There, there are so many factors, but yeah. I, it... So when, when you say, you know, you, you don’t see such great adherence from The clergy, well, can you be surprised when the clergy don’t really live the life of the layperson? They can’t, because they can’t be married. They can’t have kids.
They can’t raise children within the church. Yeah, but is it- They instead... It’s kind of like how, something I’ve noticed, and this, like in a very different world, there’s a lot of childless women who worked as nannies or as teachers. Mm. And they’re like, “Well,” you know. And they, they sort of act like they know really well.
Like, “I know how a child should be raised. I know [00:21:00] all these things.” But they, they never really have lived it, right? They’ve only been, like, paid staff who work with children under certain conditions. But they don’t know the full experience of it, and then they’re very judgmental around, like, parents and parenting and how a child should be raised, even though they don’t know what it’s like to be on the hook 24/7.
And I think there might be a similar dynamic that takes place with, like, a full-time clergy who’s not allowed to engage in the sacrament of having kids and getting married because they’re viewing it from a limited perspective that makes them think like they fully understand the experience when they really can’t.
Does that
Malcolm Collins: make sense? Well, it’s also one of the things that was increasingly clear to me as I studied this guy’s life is he seemed to do very little for, like, actually... Like, if you look at his writings and stuff like that they predominantly seem tied to gay activism, right? Like- Mm ... it almost seems like he was living off of Catholic tithings while spending his day and nights promoting, like, because he just had, you know, you have time to think in free time when you’re doing something like this [00:22:00] promoting gay stuff.
Hmm.
And that seems to be a, a big way that, like, the, the sort of gayness became more normalized within the church was specifically downstream of him. But to continue here. And, and gayness is super normalized in the Catholic Church to the extent that we’ve pointed out, there’s even an article on, like, the gayness of Catholic priests where it’s argued between 25, from surveys, 25 and 50% of gay, Catholic priests are same-sex attracted.
Which isn’t a, a ding on them. I mean, we often say this is actually kind of a, an ethical way for society to deal with same-sex attraction. Absolutely. If it, if, if you know, it’s saying you can’t participate in it, you know, at least use these people like ethically sourced eunuchs so you can get people without as much nepotism to have positions of authority within your religious institutions, right?
Like, but that’s also gonna make them, like, way more open to these ideas and in an environment where people are skirting around these ideas. And I think that this might be where the normalization- Mm ... especially in the heart of the [00:23:00] Catholic Church, of trying to cover up the child, the ev- everybody knows what scandal I’m talking about.
I guess I’ll put a line from South Park here.
Speaker 2: Why would he put anything in your butts? We don’t know. That’s what we’re trying to figure out. Hmm.
Hmm. Hello there, children. Chef, why would a priest want to stick up my butt? Goodbye.
Speaker 7: Now I want to be clear that the Catholic institution, , was committing these SA attempts at lower rates than other large institutions like the US public school system, , by pretty significant margins. , But that doesn’t explain why they tried to cover it up, like up to the highest levels of the church, and put people in positions where they could continue to do this even after the coverup.
Like, if you’re gonna do a coverup for reputation, at least keep the people away from kids afterwards
Speaker 23: It was almost as if, or at least in terms of how they were acting, that they thought the mere fact that people were [00:24:00] upset , at them for sleeping with children was the problem. , And I think we even see how the sentiment could potentially arrive through individuals like Milo Yiannopoulos, where he originally said that this was like a sexual awakening for him, , when a, a priest, , hooked up with him as a kid.
, And that others may feel that way as well, and like the outside world just doesn’t understand. It’s, I don’t know, one potential perspective?
Speaker 24: Like, okay, so bear with me here, but suppose you’re like Milo, and you were molested as a young person, but you felt it very affirming for whatever reason, Stockholm Syndrome, whatever, or even j- you actually did feel it affirming. It was like an important awakening for you. And then other, you see other people doing the same thing to other children, and you then, , see them being punished for it, and you would think, “Oh, well this doesn’t make sense.”
Look, just, I as an outsider am trying to find any logical reason why a good [00:25:00] person would do this, and maybe Catholics can chime in and explain why they think that the church may have been covering this up in the way that they were covering it up, where it allowed the people who were doing it to keep doing it
Speaker 16: This year, we’re taking the boys on a weekend boat trip to discuss Jesus’ role as the navigator of our lives. That sounds pretty fun.
Speaker 17: A Catholic boat trip?
Speaker 18: The Catholic boat’s gonna be heading on out today. The Catholic boat, get some hot Christian action that’ll take you-
Malcolm Collins: but uh
The, the, it’s always really perplexed me, like why did they not, why, why were they trying to protect these priests, right? When, when they were like moving around the priests that they knew were the issues instead of dealing with them. Like it- I, I always thought like there must be some form of normalization that [00:26:00] I’m not aware of.
Then I read this guy’s writings in daily life and I’m like, “Oh, if there are a bunch of priests like this guy, that explains it.” There, there’s basically a What do you call it? A gay cult that has infiltrated the upper rings of the Catholic Church, the Vatican, right? Like,
Speaker 4: No, to keep their mouths shut. Right. Yep. Right. And so... W- wait a minute. What? Yes, but we’ve got to find out why these children are suddenly finding it necessary to report that they’re being molested. Stop the problem at its source. Yes
Malcolm Collins: what, that’s, that’s what. Yeah, everyone he’s married to and having sex with after he left was a former priest.
Mm.
Simone Collins (2): It doesn’t look great that that happened, yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Okay.
Simone Collins (2): And- Or, or it just means that when people realize they can’t adhere to the values and rules of the church, they leave, which could be a sign that those who remain are being pretty good. I don’t, I’m, I don’t know, just maybe, maybe. Right? That could be...
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. So, and note here, this episode, people might be like, “Malcolm, like, this seems [00:27:00] like an area where you could really dunk on Catholicism. Like, why aren’t you taking the shots here, bro? Like, we all know you want to.” And this is one of those, oh, no, no, no, no, no. Like, this is too bad even for me. Like, I’m like, I feel bad about this.
I would like, learning this history, it wasn’t like... It was almost like a curse to knowledge for me because like, oh. Like, this is, this is not fun to know happened to your religion, right? Like, this is, this is too much of a, this is like, you know, you don’t like the other team, but then you see them do so bad in a particular game that they just get completely owned.
Mm ... and they’re, they’re walking off the field and you’re just like, “I’m, I’m, I’m sorry that happened to you guys. That was painful to watch.” Which is what learning the story of this guy has been in terms of, like, my thoughts on the Vatican.
Mm.
But to continue here a- and note here, I’m not saying this ‘cause I’m anti-Jewish or anti-gay.
Like, everybody if this guy was secretly a Jew, right, [00:28:00] like, dang. Right? Like I’m, I’m just sort of, like we all should be advocating for our own group. This is, this is where, you know, when somebody sees a Jew say something like, “Well, you know, I support Israel over the United States.” And people are like, “Oh, can you believe they...”
I’m like, I mean, they’re Jewish. Y- yeah, like I support America over any other country, but I’m, I’m an American, right? You know? That’s like the core of my identity, my genetic history, my cultural history. And if I lived in, for example, Britain, I would never move to supporting Britain over America just ‘cause I had a job there.
Speaker 6: I should clarify, this is very different from supporting your own in a way that creates negative externalities, like the Jews did where the ADL ended up supporting, , in trying to de-platform that content creator who rightfully was calling out Orthodox Jewish communities for running welfare fraud, or Chabad did in getting that guy who killed a bunch of people off, or the Mormon sort of [00:29:00] cabal did around the bricks and minifigs.
Yeah, , that’s, that creates problems. But in terms of just being pro-Mormon if you’re Mormon, , and you know, saying, “Oh, I’ll hire a Mormon over a non-Mormon,” like f- of course. Of course. Why would, why would we not want... That’s presumably what we all want
I mean, in this respect, sometimes we’ll have like Jewish fans or Catholic fans who will be like, “Oh, well, I’d support America over Israel,” or, “I’d support America over the Vatican.” And I’m like, It doesn’t... I mean, I support America because I’m an American , , and my religious and cultural history is American.
If your plan is to eventually become fully American, that will eventu- I mean, intergenerationally lead to a break from your past identity. It’s not a flex to not care about protecting your people. , Your people are different from our people, and if you deny that, [00:30:00] you can. America does integrate people, but full integration, eventually means some form of true and permanent separation from whatever your original group is.
, And I think that we’re actually seeing that within portions of the American Catholic population and their relation with the Vatican right now. , It’s just w- when is this fully accepted? And, and as well as with the American, portions of the American Jewish population
Like the Jew who tells me, as some Jews have, that they would support American interests over the interests of Jews more broadly, I don’t hear that and think, “Oh, that’s super cool.” Or the, the Catholic who’s like, “I would support American interests over the Vatican interests.” I don’t hear, hear that and I’m like, “Oh, oh, oh yeah, you’re so cool.”
Like any more than like if I moved to another country, even if, even if I spent 50 or 60 years there, I wouldn’t support that country over America. And some people can move to America and become fully American. Like I think Leaflet’s a good example of [00:31:00] this. But, you know, I don’t expect that from everyone.
It’s just that when it’s clear that a person isn’t moving here for that reason, there’s probably another place where they would be better suited
Malcolm Collins: You know, that’s, it, the, the guy was playing on Team Jew, you know? His, his goal was it, you know, in- inje- inject Catholic doctrine with protect the Jews, right? And, and he achieved that. So to continue here. He also thought gays had, like, a special position in, in God’s design even when he was religious.
So here’s another quote from him. “I have asked myself, is there a special meaning in the homosexual condition? God creates the great majority of humans heterosexual and only a small minority homosexual. Is there a special task associated with the condition of this latter?” By the way, there is. It’s, it’s self-control.
But that doesn’t occur to him. An, an additional opportunity to [00:32:00] exercise self-control and an additional challenge. “Since they are an oppressed minority, aware of the hypocrisy of society and the damage done by the dominant culture, I have suggested that gays and lesbians are intended to extend solidarity to all marginalized groups and demand greater justice.
Because homosexuals are largely invisible in society, their prophetic vocation will have a cultural impact and support the struggle for human emancipation.” So, like, keep in mind that this is what this guy thought his spiritual mission to do with, like, the tithings that were supporting him. So, Simone, before I go further
Simone Collins (2): I’m just so flat.
Like, this is so Maybe this doesn’t have more people talking about it because it’s so hard to process that it actually could happen, I guess. Like, it just... Like, if you were to see a flying saucer land right in front of you, or, like, you were to [00:33:00] drive by one in a parking lot, you’d be like, “Well, I definitely didn’t see that,” ‘cause that would, that could never happen.
And so- Yeah, no, I
Malcolm Collins: actually f- y- people know me. Like, come on, this is Malcolm. He’s gonna have an anti-Catholic conspiracy rant. Like, that- Yeah, but I- ... that could work. That, that should go like butter for me.” But it’s just, like, too blatant, right? Like, it’s like you spend your whole life on alien- Yeah, like how could
Simone Collins (2): this...
My brain can’t process it. It doesn’t make sense.
Malcolm Collins: I mean, it’s, it’s like you spend your whole life on alien conspiracies, and then aliens land in your front yard with a flying saucer. They come out, and Elvis is hanging out with them, and he starts doing, like, an Elvis dance in front of you. And you’re like- Yeah, and you’re like, “
Simone Collins (2): I, I don’t know what to do with this.”
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, you’re just like, “What? What? What?” That’s, that’s not even, like, an interesting... Like, gay Jew infiltrates the Vatican and infects them with weird ideology that inverts their prior religious principles? What? No, [00:34:00] no, Malcolm. Bad Malcolm. Th- th- d- Oh, my God. But we’re gonna pull on this thread, okay? And this is also why for me and, and, a- and I’ve always said, like, this is why I really personally, when people always wonder, “Well, what’s your source of authority,” right?
Ever having a source of authority that, like, is living and not dead for me is always really difficult, because it can always just decide to disagree with you, right? Mm. Like, this isn’t just something that Catholics face. Like, suppose I’m a true believing Mormon and I truly believe everything I believe, right?
Like, and, and just like- Mm ... tomorrow the church can come out and say, “Your beliefs are officially wrong now. Update them or you’re no longer a correct Mormon.” I’d just be like, “But I really believed all of that,” right? Like, “You taught me all of that, and then I really believed it. And now all of a sudden black skin wasn’t a punishment?”
Right? Like, what, what do you mean? Right? Like, that, that [00:35:00] was- Oh, God ... that was the, the war, right? They were the people who sat out the war in heaven between Jesus and Satan, right? We, th- we, we, we, we’ve alwa- I, that, that’s not, like, tangential to my worldview. That’s a core part of my reality, right? But to continue here.
And then so I f- I, I think that the way that a lot of American Catholics have gotten around this is they sort of I think branched with, well, what the Vatican is doing largely around the second council, and now they practice something that’s, like, a- a- adjacent and may, may one day recapture the Church.
But, like, the You know. And, and if you look at current demographics, you know, th- they might... The question is, is how far does the church go before they recapture it, right? Mm. Okay. That’s another quote’s from him, ‘cause I wanna, I wanna get in his mind here, okay? “The definition of human nature tends to reflect the self-understanding of the cultural elite.”
S- So here what he’s talking about is whether or not I think [00:36:00] gayness is normal, right? And he’s trying to- Okay ... and because he believes that, like, white straight males are the cultural elite with, like, their heteronormative ideas he’s trying to argue that, like, gayness isn’t, quote-unquote, “unnatural.”
Because I w- I was trying to understand his, like, theology on this, ‘cause, like, the Bible’s pretty clear on gayness, right? And, and so therefore calling gay love unnatural is a cultural statement, is what he’s trying to argue here. Not an absolute moral one. He challenged the traditional natural law that homosexuality is inherently disordered.
So let’s, let’s go into, to what, what he, what I think he means by this. Basically when he reads in the parts of the Bible where gayness is seen as negative, he would say, “Well, that was just those cultures at that time.” And that’s where he got, you know, that’s, that’s where he’s like, “So I don’t need to follow what, what, you know, those cultures did because our church’s theology and [00:37:00] motivation has evolved since then.”
And what’s interesting is you can sort of tell under what does he think that it evolved into, it evolved into the goals of the urban monoculture. This sort of, you know, endless helping of the society’s, quote-unquote, “oppressed classes,” which, which doesn’t necessarily map onto real oppressed people, as we’ve talked about in the press.
It’s, it’s more like an urban monocultural distinction of, like, ethnically superior groups in their mind. But let’s go into the quote on what he said about Catholics and Jews, because you might think I am overstating him saying, “You’re the Catholic, you shouldn’t try to convert Jews.” He said, “After Auschwitz, the Christian churches no longer wanted to convert the Jews.
While they may not be sure of the theological grounds that dispense them from that mission, the churches have become aware that asking Jews to become Christian , is a spiritual way of blotting out their existence, and thus only reinforces the effects of the Holocaust.”
Simone Collins (2): Hold on.
[00:38:00] What? Hmm. Th- that, that, like, undermines- All of Jesus’
Malcolm Collins: teachings? All of Jesus’ stuff, yeah.
Simone Collins (2): Okay, okay. I’m not... This is like, this is, again, this is why I can’t process this. Like, how did he get this through? Like, this, it boggles the mind. Okay, well, keep going. Maybe it will start making
Malcolm Collins: sense. No, that part wasn’t in the official document, but that was something that he said in an official capacity.
Okay. We’ll get to the stuff in the document in a
bit. Okay.
Let’s talk about his conversion. So when did he convert to Catholicism? Okay. Formerly, you know, living in a, a Jewish household. He had one parent who wasn’t Jewish, though, his dad. Oh, okay. He converted at the age of 23 That is very suspicious age to convert.
Simone Collins (2): Why? I mean, isn’t that... You’re, you’re almost fully myelinated. Like, you could argue that’s your time of [00:39:00] intellectual maturity. It’s the time to really reevaluate- No, it is true- ... some of your mental religion ... most people
Malcolm Collins: convert, if they are gonna convert to a different religion, between the age of 13 and 23.
But this is also an age where if I was a Jew and sitting down and thinking like, “How could I have the most positive impact with my life for my whiter people?” Like, what’s the moonshot of moonshots, right? Like, if I could incept a group with converting Jews as equivalent to the Holocaust, and you should from a religious standpoint get along with Jews it would be the, the Vatican, right?
That, that’s, that’s the, I mean, I, I think of religious orders on Earth, it might be the largest single religious order. Because, you know, with like Islam, there’s not like, even, even if you could, there’s so many different factions. So even if you could somehow . inception.
Speaker 26: We create and perceive our world simultaneously, and our mind does this so well that we don’t even know it’s happening. That allows us to get [00:40:00] right in the middle of that process. How? By taking over the creating part. Now, this is where I need you.
Malcolm Collins: In- incep- do an inception on like a, one of the Muslim faiths, you still wouldn’t affect as many people. So just be like, “Oh, at 23 I converted.” And he said he converted after a friend gave him a copy of St. Augustine’s Confessions.
That’s a weird reason to convert. Like when people generally convert, it’s either because they’re on a mission, like actively s- seeking what they think is true. Or you know, something profound happens to them, or they see something that they think can only be described as miraculous. Like for us, or for me, the thing that really made me so fanatical in my belief was when, like literally happening through this podcast and on this podcast, is me going back to stories of the Bible that everyone in my childhood had told me they said one thing, and then I read them and they say something that is one, both completely [00:41:00] different and completely implausible that people at that period in Biblical history could have known.
D- see our Adam and Eve episode or our Genesis Confirms the Bible episode, or any, like just more broadly, I’ve been broadly shocked by how little... And so that had me sort of be like, “Okay it is miraculous to me that I could grow up next to these stories and not realize h- how sort of- correlatory they were to reality as I understood it, right?
You know, how much sense they made, the things that I thought felt unethical, like the Adam and Eve story, actually weren’t when I reread them. And that, for me, was very... That, that’s like the way a normal person converts. I read St. Augustine’s Confessions and I converted. That sounds like the type of poetic nonsense that a Catholic would buy, but I don’t really buy it myself.
But anyway what was his early work? So what were some of the first things that he started writing as soon as he got, like, officially into the Catholic [00:42:00] Church as a full-time, like, staffer, right? In 1961, he published The Jews and the Gospel, later reissued Is the New Testament Anti-Semitic. He emphasized God’s covenant with the Jewish people as valid and irrevocable, drawing from Romans 11:29, “The gifts and the call of God are irrevocable.”
The church is, quote-unquote, “incomplete without Israel” and Judaism continues as a source of divine grace, he believed. Okay, so first let’s do a, a broad g- overview of, of Nostra Aetate and then we’ll go into the various points in it. So broadly speaking, it promotes a more positive view of non-Christian religions, e.g.,
positive remarks on Hinduism, Buddhism, esteem for Muslims, stating they adore the one God. Strongly condemns antisemitism and rejects charging, quote-unquote, “all the Jews with responsibility for Christ’s passion.” Affirms God’s ongoing special relationship with the Jewish people, quote, “God holds the Jews most dear...”. So yeah [00:43:00] To keep going here, let’s get into specific authority.
And so first I wanna go into, like, how much a- a- authority does this have for Catholics, okay? It’s considered an authoritative teaching of the church. Catholics are expected to accept it with r- religious assent, the same level as most consular or papal teachings that are not defined as infallible dogma.
So, and if this isn’t infallible, but that doesn’t mean that Catholics aren’t supposed to accept it. We’ll get to the official teaching on that. It is not a dogmatic definition. Like some statements on Legent, Gitmen, and earlier councils it is as a pastoral and declarative document addressing the church’s relationships with non-Christian religions.
Catholics owe it a, quote-unquote, “religious assent or sub- sincere submission of intellect and will.” So the part of the catechism of the Catholic church, which is, like, the official things on documents of this type, by the way it says, “Divine assistance is also given to the successors of the apostates teaching in communion with the successor of Pete and in particular the way- The apostles or apostates?
Simone Collins (2): Sorry, I’m trying to keep up ... [00:44:00]
Malcolm Collins: A- apostles. Did I say apostates? Yeah. That’s quite a Freudian tip there. The, the apostles teaching in communion with the successor of Pete, and in particular way to the bishop of Rome, pastor of the whole church, when, without arriving at an infallible definition and without pronouncing an in- definable manner, they propose in the exercise of the ordinary magisterium a teaching that leads to a better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals.
To this ordinary teaching and faithful are to adhere with religious assent. So this falls into the category of, to this ordinary teaching and faithful are to adhere with religious a- assent.
Mm. Which,
though distinct from the assent of faith, is nonetheless an extension of it. Because Catholics are also like, “Well, it, it, it’s not exactly like you have to assent with faith,” and it’s like that’s true, but the, this is the actual teachings of the church on this.
Mm-hmm. ‘Cause I wanted to double-check on this, ‘cause people are always like, “Oh, well, that’s, like, just a vague suggestion from the church,” and it’s like, it’s not a vague suggestion. That is not official Catholic [00:45:00] doctrine. That is a, this schismatic belief. But it’s okay, right? Like, it’s, a, a, you know, if, if you, if you believe that the church is wrong in this document too, then they’re just wrong in all the documents, right?
So, you know, we can go back to the older councils.
Speaker 21: This actually gets to me, , and I think it helps me explain to myself what’s going on better. In the same way that I get really confused when I talk to a Jew and they’re like, “Your children are Jewish,” and I’m like, “They’re like one-sixteenths Jewish.” Like, , that makes no sense to me, right? Like, I’m like, “I-- Yeah, I mean, matrilineally they’re Jewish, but they’re not...”
You know, no other culture on Earth would think of them as Jewish. But a Jew will think, an Orthodox Jew at least, “No, they are 100% Jewish.” And I just can’t understand that ‘cause I’m from a different cultural perspective. , It’s the same with Catholics, where a Catholic will be like, “Well, I’m not schismatic.”
And it’s like, “Well, you, you do disagree with the Magisterium on these issues.” And it’s like, “Well, I don’t identify as schismatic, therefore I’m not schismatic.” And I’m like, “Well, that’s not really...” And then I’m like, “Oh, I just need to see this from their [00:46:00] perspective.” And it’s not just their perspe-- it’s also the perspective of the people at the Vatican.
They also don’t see these people as schismatic. , And it’s just that I’m never gonna be able to understand what it’s like to perceive the world in this way
Malcolm Collins: Yes. Okay. So, this is also rooted... So if you wanna go to where this comes from, it comes from Vatican II’s Lumen Gentium 25, which the CCC quotes to build this out, but the quote from that is, “This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman pontiff, even when it’s not speaking ex cathedra, that it must be shown in a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence.
The judgements made by him are sincerely adhered to according to his manifest mind and will.” So again, religious submission of mind and will. Okay. So now let’s get into the stuff that was updated by this document, the new parts. Okay. Yes. Thought, Simone, before we go further.
Simone Collins: Keep going. I,
Simone Collins (2): I wanna, I wanna see what the updates are.
Malcolm Collins: [00:47:00] Okay, great. Yeah. So this is in relation to Hinduism, Buddhism Muslims, et cetera. Okay? Okay. “The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reve- reverence those ways of conduct and life, that precepts and teachings which, though different in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless offer and reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens all men.”
Hmm.
That’s crazy Um That’s, that’s completely crazy. And, and, and note here if you contrast this with previous councils, right? So we have the Council of Florence, Conte Dominio 1441, what did it say in relation to these sorts of stuff? It af- firmly believes professors and proclaims that those [00:48:00] not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews, and heretics, and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart into everlasting fire, which was prepared for the devil and his angels.
Unless- Okay ... before the end of the same have been added to the flock. That, that seems like uncertainly a, a, a very different teaching.
Simone Collins (2): Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: The, at a, at a very different perspective, right? And I think a lot of Catholics still want to hold to that perspective. And so I, I can see why it’s becoming so popular, these sort of pseudo-schismatic branches.
So what did the document say about various specific religions, right? ‘Cause it also, like, even went so far as to start glazing individual religions. On Hinduism it says, “Thus in Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery and express it through inexhaustible abundance of myth and through searching philosophical in- inquiry.
They seek freedom from the anguish of [00:49:00] our human condition either through ascetical practices or profound mediation or flight to God with love and trust.” On Buddhism, “Again, Buddhism in its various forms realizes the radical insufficiency of this changeable world. It teaches in a way by which men in a devout and confident spirit may either to acquire the state of perfect liberation or attain by their own efforts or through higher help, supreme illumination.”
Simone Collins (2): No. The... I don’t know. So in the, in the Primer’s Guide to Crafting Religion, you make it pretty clear there are basically two types of religions. You can have two types of approaches to what it is required to be saved, and one is limited to atonement. You, you, you can’t save everyone, you know? Not... There are some people who are just not gonna make it, and these are kind of, in some ways, not very nice religions because they accept that you [00:50:00] can’t save everyone and some people are damned, whatever that might mean.
The two core religions which
Malcolm Collins: have this perspective are the Calvinist denominations of Protestantism of which we are one-
Simone Collins (2): Mm-hmm ...
Malcolm Collins: and the
Simone Collins (2): Jews. And then there’s the other which is a more domineering religion which believes that everyone can and should be saved. And in this way the religion is a bit unpleasant because it basically would entail, if you really wanna save everyone, coercing people to convert against their will.
And what this is trying to do is be neither. Like, it’s not like, “Well, no- no one, no one can be saved,” but it- Also, it’s not trying to save anyone. It’s just like, “Well, everyone’s kind of right,” which is kind of the worst thing. Like- Yeah ... I don’t care, do what you wanna do. It’s the absence of religion.
It’s the antithesis of Catholicism and, and any organized religion. I, I just can’t believe they... This has to- You know what I- Like, maybe someone’s gonna chime in in the comments and be like, “Oh, this is some obscure piece of writing that’s not official in any real capacity.” I, I [00:51:00] mean, could that be? Is that what’s going on here?
This was affirmed by one of the major councils and the Pope. Yeah, but is this the equivalent of, like, someone hearting something on X, you know, h- adding a heart to a post on X and not realizing- No, that’s why I
Malcolm Collins: went through the other documents that, specifically the, the Ca- catechism documents and stuff like that, so you could read before we get into this exactly the way that Catholics per previous rulings that were seen as coming directly from God- Yeah
are supposed to relate to teachings within this category, submitting
to them.
Mm. It’s, it’s not the same as having faith in, in them.
Speaker 28: By the way, I put Simone’s concerns into an AI to see what the AI would say, and it says, “Simone’s skepticism is understandable as a layperson reacting to something that feels like a massive shift, but it’s not accurate. Nostra Aetate is not some obscure low authority footnote. It’s a formal declaration of the Second Vatican Council as an [00:52:00] ecumenical council, overwhelmingly approved two thousand two hundred and twenty-one to eighty-eight, and officially promulgated by Pope Paul VI
catholic teaching, as outlined in the - Catechism of the Catholic Church, , eight nine two to eight nine three, and rooted in Lumen Gentium twenty-five, requires religious assent, a sincere submission of intellect and will to teachings from the ordinary magisterium of the ecumenical council, even when they are not infallible dogmas.
This is distinct from full assent of faith from infallible documents, but is still binding and not optional or dismissible as just a suggestion
Malcolm Collins: So this isn’t
Simone Collins (2): someone passively endorsing something without sufficiently paying attention to it or, I don’t know- Yeah ... someone just being like, “Here’s an interesting idea.
Sure, we’ll publish it,” but like, you know how The Huffington Post- No, this is- ... used to be. You know, they’d be like, “Yeah, we’ll accept your blog submission,” and they wouldn’t really, like...
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, this is very, very, very different than, say, [00:53:00] like, the Vatican wrote something in an official paper or something like that, right?
Keep in mind th- ths had to be of, of the declaration of the Second Vatican Council, so that’s a, a Vatican council, mind you. Right. This had to be voted on by the bishops, right? Who knew? Okay, wow. So
of the vote- Yeah ... of the vote 2,221 voted for it and only 88 voted against it. So it was also overwhelmingly approved. Then it was promulgated, that’s an official issue. That means review an official issue by Pope Paul VI.
I mean I, o- obviously I, I, I think that there’s a, I mean, Catholics, I, I feel like Want to say, like, and- and w- well, you know, we don’t, the real Catholics don’t take this sort of thing, and the way that those documents say you’re supposed to relate to this stuff is actually corrupted as well, and this stuff shouldn’t actually fall under that.
And I think [00:54:00] the Catholics actually have a number of outs here. There’s been a number of things in recent papal elections that could be s- considered outright fraudulent. I may do a whole episode on that at some point.
Simone Collins (2): Whoa, really? Ar- What do you mean outright? Can you g- what do you mean by outright fraudulent?
Malcolm Collins: They did some things, the Jesuits did, in how they held... It wasn’t the pope of this pope, but it was one of the previous popes, I think. Okay. Where they pulled some shenanigans that sort of prevented people from voting. Like the, the block that was against them from being there to vote. Oh, wow
Yeah. It, it was w- I, I, I can’t remember the specifics. A Catholic was the one who would, because obviously they were most invested in this when he was crashing out on me about the Jesuits and, and, and blackpilling me on the Jesuits and making me sort of see Catholicism as this fight of, like, the good guys, the Opus Dei versus the Jesuits for, like, the heart of what it becomes.
But this, the way I sort of see this right now, like a- as I’m looking at it from an outsider, is I historically, as a kid was of all the sci-fi franchises, and I was a big sci-fi nerd the one [00:55:00] sci-fi franchise I didn’t really like was Star Wars. I, I- Hmm ... I liked Star Trek over Star Wars.
Starship Troopers obviously love. SG-1- Sure ... love. Gotta do a whole video on how they canceled the SG-1 reboot because- Oh my gosh ... it treated the military too well. Oh, no. Fans might like it. It did- it didn’t make the tribals, like, better. People might like
Simone Collins (2): the military, yeah. Wait, and by the way, Stargate did not universally portray the military well.
In fact, some of the most annoying episodes were ones where they, I guess r- fairly, you know, well, not realistically, but- No, US politicians- ... give a realistic depiction of how military bureaucracy can really gunk things up sometimes.
Malcolm Collins: No, no, no, that was, those, almost every one of the episodes you’re thinking of was tied to the US Senate or Congress.
Yeah. And the military was the good guy. Oh, yeah,
Simone Collins (2): yeah,
Malcolm Collins: yeah. Okay, you’re right, you’re right. So- No, I feel like they were
Simone Collins (2): even not realistic. You know, they’re like, “What? There are some problems that the military faces.” The, the point
Malcolm Collins: here being is despite me not being a Star Wars fan- Okay ... watching Disney buy Star Wars and then start to just write, like, “We hate you” in [00:56:00] poo all over the walls of the property made me genuinely sad, right?
Reading this feels a bit like watching the new Disney Star Wars where it’s like- Hmm ... yeah, I might not have been the biggest fan of that property, but like, why’d you have to do them that dirty, right? Like, and, and as a Star Wars fan, I feel it’s, it’s probably pretty similar to being, like, a Catholic today, where it’s like, well, you know- None of the real fans actually take those new ones and consider them canon, right?
We’re still all about legends over here. What, what are you talking about? Yeah, we’re, we’re
Simone Collins (2): in this for the long run. It’ll, it’ll come around
Malcolm Collins: again. Yeah, we’re, we’re... Everybody knows Disney’s eventually gonna realize this didn’t work, as I’ve heard rumors that they’re thinking about doing an, and retconning it.
So we’re, we’re gonna get a, a Vatican II retcon. Just like go , go back
Simone Collins (2): but anyway. But they can. That’s the cool thing, is they can. They can say, “Look, that was a mistake. I don’t know what happened. It’s over now. Undo.” There’s...
Malcolm Collins: Catholics ki-kind... How could you retcon [00:57:00] Vatican II? Could it be done? I guess the best way to- Delete.
Delete.
Simone Collins (2): Undo. We’re sorry, we were wrong. It, how, what
Malcolm Collins: the... The Catholic Church has
Simone Collins (2): made lots of weird-
Speaker 29: I asked an AI how you could retcon Vatican II, , with this context, and basically what it said is full deletion is extremely unlikely. It would require admitting a major error in a council guided by the Holy Spirit, which undermines everything the church claims about itself
Simone Collins (2): The, I mean, I think the most real
Malcolm Collins: way to do it was to assert that they didn’t have official power when they put it out, and that something had g- that’s, that’s... I mean, like, obviously there’s been instances in the past where there have been, like, multiple popes at the same time.
And then a council came together and decided, “Okay, now we have another new pope,” that decides, you know, gets... You know, clearly you gotta have a, a, a, a chain of, what do they call that? The chain of whatever. , They got together, they decided this new pope, and then the new pope comes in and, and immediately says, “Actually, popes rule over councils.” And the council was like, “But we brought you here saying you wouldn’t do that,” right? Mm. So like, yeah. They’ve, they’ve done a bit of this in the [00:58:00] past.
But I don’t think any of that was as, like, written down as Vatican II was. I don’t think that that i- it counted as the same l- category of stuff that can’t easily be retconned. But I mean, clearly it retconned something else. So like, Catholics can chime in here. So let’s go what they said about Islam.
Okay? “The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems.” Th-this is what they... Is- Islam. “They adore the one God, living and subsisting in himself, merciful and all-powerful, the creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men. They take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even his inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham...”
Dot, dot, dot, submitted to God. “Though they do
Not
Malcolm Collins: acknowledge Jesus as God,
they revere him as a prophet. They also honor Mary, his virgin mother.” Dot, dot, dot. “In addition, they await the day of judgment” dot, dot, dot. “Finally, they value the moral life and worship God, especially through prayer, almsing, and fasting.”[00:59:00]
Hmm.
Yeah. Which is interesting here. When you take our, our view or, or contrast it with our view on all of this I mean, at least we take the stance of like, well, we do say that Jews and Muslims are worshiping derivations of what appear to be the same god. Like Hindis and Buddhists are certainly not.
Like I- pff, that was, that was wild.
“As the sacred synod searches into the mysteries of the church, it remembers the bond,” this is about the Jews that spiritually ties the people of the new covenant to Abraham’s stock... The Church, therefore, cannot forget that she received the revelation of the Old Testament through the people with whom,” the Jews, “the people with whom God in his inexpressible mercy concluded the ancient covenant.”
And then they cite here, “On account of their fathers, this people remains most dear to God, for God does not repent of the gifts he makes nor the calls he issues,” Rome [01:00:00] 11:28-29. And so this directly quotes Romans. And then further they say, “Although the Church is the new people of God, the Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God, as this follows from the Holy Scriptures.”
And then on collective guilt, this is from Nostra aetate again, “True, the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead presented for the death of Christ. Still, what happened in his Christ passion cannot be charged against all Jews with distinction then alive nor against the Jews of today.”
Right. “It offered to cry his hatred, persecutions, displays of antisemitism directed against Jews at any time by anyone.”
Okay. But yeah, I had no idea. That is really sad. That is, that is, I mean, a potentially near God tier play by an individual Jew. And if not that, at least a heavy infestation by the urban monoculture, ‘cause he was already living, you know, at the, the very least in the lifestyle of the urban monoculture.
You know, [01:01:00] sex with men while, you know, writing this stuff down. If you see his wider philosophy, it’s very clearly more tied to the urban monoculture theology than anything that could historically could have been considered Catholic values or
Simone Collins (2): theology. Yeah, not even close.
Malcolm Collins: So very crazy, crazy conspiracy.
And you guys- Well,
Simone Collins (2): conspiracy, yeah, I guess the, the, the larger question though this doesn’t appear to be documented from what you found, who let this happen? Like, y- you’re talking about this guy going through, publishing all this stuff, but th- all these people that voted for it, all these people that added to it- Yeah
to your point, right? Like- Who let this
Malcolm Collins: happen? Like, if you want to know how co- when people act like... And this is the other thing that got me, is I had this impression as an outsider that, like, when people are like, “Oh, we’ll retake control of the Vatican. We’ll retake control of church infrastructure. We’ll...”
I hear that and I get this impression that, like, oh, well, maybe they’ve recently been able to get their hooks into the Vatican. [01:02:00] Maybe there’s, like, this ideological divide in the Vatican. 2,201 of the bishops approved this with only 88 against this. This is not, like, two power factions or something like that, or an infiltration of the Vatican.
If this is an infiltration of the Vatican, it’s... What, what percent is that?
Simone Collins (2): Yeah, I guess I don’t know how the voting structure is set up. I don’t know if this is, like, people around the world or a bunch of people concentrated in- Yeah, so-
Vatican City ...
Speaker 30: So, , again here I decided to ask the AI to find out who are these bishops? Are they just randos or are they actually the people who run the Catholic Church? , And it said, , the bishops who voted for Nostra Aetate as well as all Vatican II documents are the actual power structure of the Catholic Church, not randoms.
They are called the council fathers, the highest level church governments in an ecumenical council. , They included all diocesan bishops, head of dioceses around the world, archbishops, cardinals, [01:03:00] Eastern Catholic patriarchs, head of major religious orders with voting rights. It was the largest gathering of Catholic bishops in history, deliberately global for the first time.
Bishops came from Europe, North, South America, Africa, Asia, et cetera, and not just Vatican insiders and Europeans
This is why Malcolm and Simone noted that in an extremely lopsided vote, only 3.8% against, it shows nearly universal buy-in from the worldwide, , episcopate at the time, not just a small clique of Vatican insiders
Malcolm Collins: so 3.8% of the bishops voted against this
3.8%. And that was in 1965. So, like, not recently either. Like, when I talk about this institutional capture having been in the Vatican for a very, very long time at this point, I’m not like, that isn’t me being a conspiracy theorist or something. I’m just trying to, like, lay out, like, what I’m seeing as an outsider.
And so, the [01:04:00] best thing that you can do, I guess, if you wanna recapture it, is just breed. And yeah. Get involved.
Simone Collins (2): I, I mean, yeah. This shows things can change, and things can also change quite violently. But this means that I think that there’s hope they can change violently in a different direction.
Malcolm Collins: Are you actually... I love Simone as an outsider. Went from, like, your standard progressive whatever and now she’s like, “The Catholic Church needs a civil war. They must take out the Vatican.”
Simone Collins (2): Well, this is I don’t know. It, it’s like someone trying to change t- they’re like marching into an anime convention and they’re like, “No, this is a Star Trek convention now.”
Like, fine, but go to a Star Trek convention. Like, leave the anime nerds alone. This is about anime. So I don’t, I don’t... Like autistically, I don’t like the, [01:05:00] the, the diluting and confusing of the categories. I need Catholics
Malcolm Collins: to be Catholics. Yeah, like at the very least, I think if something was written by somebody who deconverted, it should be taken out of official church teachings Like that should be, that should be the thing that invalidates it
Simone Collins (2): Yeah, that’s, yeah.
May- I mean, I think until pretty recent history, people just didn’t deconvert, so there is not yet a cultural technology to address that, and this is exactly the point you make among many others, of course, in The Prophet is Patched Against Religion. And it wasn’t even like he deconverted
Malcolm Collins: for like a good reason.
It was just like he wanted to have sex with strangers. Like that seems to be the reason he deconverted.
Simone Collins (2): Again, I think there’s an argument to be made for that being then the system working as intended. That the bigger problem would be if active and especially policy-wise influential people in the Catholic clergy were like, “I wanna have gay sex and I’m gonna just stay and continue to generate policy and do, have it all.”
[01:06:00] So I don’t see the deconversion as the bad sign, but I do see statements that seem to nullify pretty definitional or, or foundational concepts, at least as I as an outsider understand them about Catholicism. And that’s throwing me for a loop. But even from pretty devout Catholics, we hear about these like, well, there was this conspiracy and this particular faction was trying to mess with things, and I feel like there’s A non-trivial amount of politicking, infighting, and influence campaigns that are influencing what’s happening in Vatican City, and to a, a great extent, the most devout, active, practicing Catholics that we know have an attitude of, “Look, at the parish level, we are going to thrive.
We’re going to follow kind of a pre-Vatican II version of [01:07:00] the, of the Catholic Church and pretend that this stuff didn’t happen. We are going to leverage the infrastructure of the Catholic Church and of bishops and everything else when we need it,” like if we need a, a Catholic school to be spun up. They will lean on the formal church when they need to, but for the most part, they’re just like, “Look, what we’re creating is what’s going to last.
We’re the ones having kids. We’re just gonna ride this out, and eventually they’re gonna find their way back to sanity.” But I don’t know if that’s gonna happen.
Malcolm Collins: So just so you get an idea
Of like what level of authority this teaching would hold. It would hold the same level of authority as something like the theology of the body which actually I think holds a little bit less because it wasn’t also affirmed by a religious council. So that, that sort of gives you an idea of like the level of import...
And theology of body is pretty important Catholic teaching. Mm. So yeah. [01:08:00] Anyway love you Simone. That’s a crazy episode. And it- Understatement, yeah. It, it feels a bit like, is this a simulation? Because like if there was something this big, why was I unaware of it?
Yeah.
Yeah. Like, it seems like one of the first things you would mention if you were a Protestant talking about this stuff
Simone Collins (2): You would think that.
Y- yes. But again, I think it’s one of those things where it’s so outlandish, it’s so hard to believe, that it just doesn’t process. Yeah. And again, I, I have... I think there’s at least a good 30% chance that someone, a Catholic in the comments chimes in and is like, “This means nothing. You’re doing the equivalent of s- you know, saying, well, you know, Person [01:09:00] X responded to Person Y’s comment on YouTube, and that doesn’t mean that’s an endorsement of Person Y’s com- you know-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, that’s not-
reputation or commentary ... an official endorsement. Yeah. Or that there’s different ways of relating to the councils, or there’s different ways of relating to the bishops. Yeah,
Simone Collins (2): so I feel, I t- I, I just, we have to be missing something. It has to be something like this. The bishops who
Malcolm Collins: voted on this, the thing that I c- is, is le- less than 4% voted against this.
Like, that to me shows that, like, the quest, even if that’s true, for retaking the Vatican, is an astronomically uphill battle.
Yeah.
That’s like when my loading bar’s at 96%, that’s like when I am in my- Yeah, it’s, you’re functionally there, yeah.
Simone Collins (2): Mm-hmm. It,
Malcolm Collins: it, it’s like there. It’s done, right? Like, it’s cooked.
Mm-hmm. But they do have, fortunately, current demographics on their side.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins (2): We’ll see. We’ll see. Thanks for sharing that with me, [01:10:00] though. That was a wild ride. All right, have a good
Malcolm Collins: one.
Simone Collins (2): You too.
Malcolm Collins: What are we doing for dinner?
Simone Collins (2): You’re having the rendang either with french fries- All right ... or on a Hawaiian bun.
Malcolm Collins: Fries.
Simone Collins (2): Okay. Fancy Korean fries or normal fries?
Malcolm Collins: Fancy Korean fries.
Simone Collins (2): Oh, if we have any. I’ll make sure we have some. If not, normal fries. If we don’t have those, then we can
Malcolm Collins: do curly fries.
Simone Collins (2): Oh, I thought you didn’t like the curly fries. You
Malcolm Collins: did like them? They’re great. We just gotta cook them a bit longer.
Simone Collins (2): Okay. All right.
Simone Collins: thought I was a
prude. No Yeah, people were
Malcolm Collins: mad at us for like
Not being aggressively mean.
Simone Collins: Yeah. What on earth? Like, hello.
Malcolm Collins: Like when we give me, I think this is something that the wider conservative community doesn’t get about Aila’s relationship to the community. We’re talking about the episode , from yesterday about how somebody from Aila’s circle actually made us against early stage abortion, which we were not before through a very well argued piece.
But it starts, the story [01:11:00] starts with a birthday gang bang. Well, no,
Simone Collins (2): her, her essay doesn’t, but like our discussion of her does because she recently talked about her experience meeting her future husband, I think, I think they’re engaged to be married and they have a kid to- together now, at Aila’s famous birthday gang bang.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. And I, because people generally in the conservative movement who aren’t on like the nerd tech side, they’re unaware that Aila in terms of gravity and orbit has been pretty useful to the right. In that because she tries to always say what she believes is true means that she is constantly pissing off the trans community.
A- and constant- Is she? Oh, yeah. She’s, sh- sh- the trans- well, because you, you can’t really talk about the science around transness anymore without just incensing trans people. And because of that, she’s actually sort of broke the egg for a lot of people’s- God ... transition into [01:12:00] more and more conservative ideas.
And I think- Mm ... for a lot of people, the trans issue is their first step on that pipeline.
Simone Collins (2): And so- She, I mean, her sex survey does have, or big kink survey has one of the best samples of at least self-reported trans individuals of probably m- maybe any research done, just given her sample size. So I don’t know if she’s said anything that’s like disturbing, but, or that like makes them look bad, has, she does have very good sample data.
Malcolm Collins: Well, I mean, she’s the one who did the study when we did the trans one showing that transness is linked to violent fetishes. Oh, yeah. We used her data. That’s from her- That’s right ... that’s from her study. That’s true. That that comes from. .
Simone Collins (2): But, but what I mean is
Malcolm Collins: while I may think her actions are immoral, and more immoral today now that I understand the potential negative consequences of sex, and I’ve become dramatically less sex...
Like, I’m kink positive, sex negative now. I just think that n- non-procreative sex is bad. Until [01:13:00] we have better forms of- I guess I just- ... birth control ..., but in the net she pushes people towards our movement. And, and advances, like, the number of conservative donors, voters.
Well, she’s not encouraging anyone
Simone Collins (2): to live her lifestyle. Like, I, I... Sometimes I feel like I get this insinuation from people of, like, that she’s selling something to them. She’s not. No, she, she said that she didn’t like
Malcolm Collins: the gang bang. She tried a gang bang and did not enjoy it. Everybody- Yeah ... like, that seems like a pretty good indication of, like, don’t do this, people.
Simone Collins (2): Well, but more, ugh, Tex is so into pulling on everything. She’s not trying to fob her lifestyle onto anyone. And just like we aren’t either. Like, we’re not... A lot of people like to accuse us. They’re like, “You’re trying to convince all these people who aren’t equipped to have children to have kids.” Like, that’s something someone just today was accusing us of.
And that we... No, we absolutely don’t do that. So I think people like to misattribute this. Really? Were they
Malcolm Collins: accusing us on our comments or on, like, Twitter or something? On X,
Simone Collins (2): yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Oh, okay. So, like, somebody has [01:14:00] no idea what we’re about.
Simone Collins (2): Yeah. But a lot of people have no idea what Aila’s all about, so you know, like, it’s...
I just think it’s stupid. It’s very annoying.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Well, I mean, the, the informational sphere, I guess just when somebody’s aligning with us on anything that puts them on the outs with progressives and they are also helping the whiter project, I’m generally, like, pro them. Like, that’s the way I operate.
Simone Collins (2): I’m generally pro when someone is thoughtful and takes a first principles approach to what they believe and what they’re doing and why, and that’s Aila. Yeah, but
Malcolm Collins: sometimes those people can still be antagonistic to us or, or our efforts. And I, I think that, you know, in th- those instances we need to..
[01:15:00]
Christianity Was Never a Religion of "Peace" — Forgetting That Is Killing Us Based Camp | Simone & Malcolm May 28, 2026 In this explosive Based Camp episode, Malcolm & Simone Collins dive deep into one of the most uncomfortable topics in Christianity: the Biblical commands to kill infants and civilians during conquest — and why they might actually reflect a coherent (if brutal) longtermist moral framework.
From 1 Samuel 15 and the total destruction of the Amalekites, to Deuteronomy’s rules for Canaanite cities, to Jesus’ teachings on mercy — Malcolm argues that modern “peace at all costs” Christianity has cherry-picked the Bible and is actively destroying Western civilization. They explore how true Biblical mercy often looks like decisive action, not endless tolerance of predators and parasites.
This is a raw, unfiltered discussion about civilizational morality, the dangers of naive pacifism, and what “love your enemies” actually meant in context.
Tract 12: Sociatal Morality & A Genocidal God
[00:00:00]
Malcolm Collins: Hello Simone, I’m excited to be talking to you today. Today we are going to be digging into morality as the Bible and Christian faith relate to it. Because I am getting really sick of all of these Christians out there that we see within like the wider Christian media influencer ecosystem talking about how Christianity is like the religion of peace and we need to always be peaceful.
And if you’re going to, for example make a blanket rule against dropping bombs on schools in a warfare scenario, then all of a sudden terrorists are going to put their headquarters under schools and make society net negative for children.
Simone Collins: Oh, you’re not, you, this is purely hypothetical of course.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. If, if at a, a societal level, right, we did something like just always gave out food whenever somebody was hungry you would have groups begin to evolve or [00:01:00] move in close to you that evolve entirely predatory off of this, right? And somebody could be like, “Well, maybe the Bible didn’t predict all of these things, or didn’t really think through difficult moral decisions.”
And the reality is is that’s not true at all. The Bible all over the place has God telling people to kill infants. And so we are going to go, because I think that this is one of the clearest, I mean, I could go into the instances where God’s like laying out the rules for selling your daughters into slavery or rules on how to treat slaves.
But in this episode, that we’re gonna go more on in the next one, ‘cause this is gonna be a bit of a two-parter. But on this one we’re going to go deeper into specifically where, why, and when does God say it’s okay to kill infants? Because I think it’s through these scenarios we can get a broader understanding of how Christianity should [00:02:00] understand morality.
Speaker 6: You know, maybe I was wrong about this pacifism thing.
Speaker 8: Are you insane? Pacifism works like a charm as long as you button it.
Malcolm Collins: Right?
Simone Collins: Isn’t it broadly understood, though, that one of the reasons Christianity got so much early adoption in the in the Roman Empire was because the Christians didn’t kill the babies, and people kinda liked that. Like especially women.
Malcolm Collins: Did, yeah. And so what I’ll also point out is I do not, I think that there was a period of history where Christianity was meant to be understood as this ultra-peacenic religion because that helped it grow.
We’ve done an episode where we look at the morality of early Christians and show that them being willing to help each other during times of plague, them not killing their infants th- this helped their population grow at a significantly larger rate than pagan populations and lowered the persecution that they might have otherwise gotten during their period of growth.
But once they were the dominant religion within regions- At first, they kept their [00:03:00] warlike nature. You know, they would still go and do crusades. They would still punish the infidel you know, still seek out witches in their community, stuff like this. But parts of the Bible began to be emphasized more than other parts over time until the religion became unrecognizable and a net negative in the way it was being practiced.
So to go back to this we’ve got... And this one is the clearest, so I’m gonna go the longest on it. Samuel 15:2-3. It says, “ Thus says the Lord of hosts: ‘I have noted what Amalek did to Israel in opposing them on the way when they came out of Egypt.’” Now, note this would have happened hundreds of years before God is talking about this.
So this is something that a people did hundreds of years ago. None of the people who actually did this negative thing to Israel would have still been among the Amaleks, okay? “Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill them, both man and woman, [00:04:00] child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.”
And there’s some different translations for infant here. We have suckling basically mean a child while it’s still surviving on breast milk. So you can’t be like, “Well, maybe they’re talking about older children here or something.” This is the- the word that’s used here means that. And you could say, okay, maybe something was lost in translation here, and God didn’t really mean, “No, you gotta kill everyone when you take this territory.”
Speaker: And note here, people who want to say the Bible says thou shall not kill, it doesn’t say that. It doesn’t say that anywhere. It says that you’re not supposed to murder. Murder in Jewish law is very different from a generic killing.
I didn’t mention this in the episode because I assumed it was obvious for people with like baseline biblical knowledge, but probably worth mentioning
Malcolm Collins: Okay? So what then happens in Samuel 15:7-9, all right? “And Samuel defeated the Amaleks, and from Havilah as far as Shur, [00:05:00] which is to the east of Egypt. And he took Agag and the king of the Amaleks alive, and devoted destruction all the people with the edge of the sword. But Saul and the people spared Agag and the best sheep and the best oxen and fattened calves and lambs, and all that was good, and would not utterly destroy them.
All that was despised and worthless they devoted to destruction.” Okay? So, what did God do about this, right? And the word of the Lord came to Samuel, this is Samuel 15:10 through 23, “I regret that I have made Saul king, for he has turned his back from following me and has not performed my commandments.”
And Samuel was angry, and he cried to the Lord all night, dot, dot, dot. “And the Lord sent you on a mission,” he said, “Go and devote to destruction all the sinners, the Amaleks, and fight against them until they are consumed. Why then did you not obey the voice of your Lord? Why did you pronounce on the [00:06:00] spoil and do what was evil even in the sight of the Lord?”
And then dot, dot, dot here.
, And then response, “Because you have rejected the word of the Lord, he has also rejected you being king.” So if it was unclear what happened there, so I’ll just lay it out for you. Did you catch what he did wrong?
Simone Collins: He didn’t kill them all?
Malcolm Collins: He didn’t kill one person, the king- Yeah ... and some of the sheep and oxen.
Simone Collins: Yeah, he was supposed to kill them all.
Malcolm Collins: Now, the, a, he killed all of the infants. He killed
Simone Collins: all the- No, but that’s not all of them ...
Malcolm Collins: but that’s not all of them.
Simone Collins: All of them.
Malcolm Collins: All of them. And,
Simone Collins: God, what is up, dude?
Malcolm Collins: Here, the demons- This
Simone Collins: is the whole demon, “I killed, I killed goblins.”
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, okay, very, very similar to that, which
Simone Collins: is why- Was that just, were they just, were they just trying to reenact the Bible there with the whole, like, goblin baby killing scene?
Were they trying to be like...
Speaker 4: [00:07:00] Then to show them mercy
faces to the light of day
Malcolm Collins: I will say that this is the morality the Bible teaches us. The morality of that scene in Goblin Slayer is essentially the morality the Bible teaches us, and we’re gonna point out, [00:08:00] ‘cause people can be like, “Oh, well, when Jesus came, all of these older stories are revoked,” right?
Like, they don’t matter anymore. This is not the God we’re dealing with anymore. I’m gonna point out, no, Jesus makes it very clear all of this stuff holds.
Well, we’re gonna point out that God’s mercy, when we understand mercy through the eyes of what God means by mercy- Mercy
right, because we’re constantly told God is merciful-
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm ...
Malcolm Collins: and then you’re kicked out for being king because you didn’t kill them all, right? You know, like, clearly if we’re defining mercy through whatever trait God has, it’s not this standard human definition of mercy, right? So when we’re commanded to be merciful that does not undermine the...
And handle it when you’re conquering a territory, right? So we’re gonna go into that. And I’ll note here, people will be like, “Well, like, God matured or something between the Old and the New Testament.” Mm-hmm. And I’m gonna say, no, no, no, no, no. The reason the rules that we are given and what’s asked of God is changed in between these two contexts-
Simone Collins: Uh-huh
Malcolm Collins: is that, [00:09:00] humanity changed. Civilization changed. So the rules that God gave us to help civilization advance- Oh ... are different in the different contexts. But it’s not that the older rules are no longer relevant or something we should be listening to or taking into understanding in warfare, in civilizational conflicts.
Hmm. So I wanna continue here to point out for people who are like, “Well, maybe this, this Amalek people were just, like, uniquely evil, and the situation with Samuel was, like, very unique in, in the Old Testament,” right?
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm, okay.
Malcolm Collins: And I’ll point out that is not the case. So we’ve got Deuteronomy 20:16-18.
This was a general rule landed out for Canaanite cities, okay? “But in the cities of the people that the Lord God has given you for an inheritance, you shall save nothing that breathes, but you shall devote to complete destruction the Hittites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, as [00:10:00] your Lord God commanded, that they may not teach you to do according to all abominable practices that they have done for their gods, and you sin against the Lord God.”
So actually here we’re getting some more context. Why does God have - these people kill everyone in a region when, when, when they’re conquering the region? And note he doesn’t always do this. There are two types of, like, conquests that are described. Sometimes it’s kill everyone, all the women, all the children, everyone, and then other times it’s leave the virginal women, marry them.
So again, this isn’t, like, a blanket rule here that he’s giving but it is the normal rule. The virginal women rule is, is, is less commonly brought up.
And I will also note here that we know from DNA studies that the current Jewish population is about 50% descended from the Canaanites, and we also know from Jewish Old Testament stuff, there’s a part, bunch of parts especially during the Josiah reforms where, like, they’re [00:11:00] complaining about intermarriage with Canaanite people and stuff like that.
So the Jews acted with more what we would consider quote unquote, “mercy” than they were commanded to. Hmm. And in so doing, sinned. Right? In so doing, in not acting with maximal efficiency, they acted in a way that we can see from the story of Samuel was clearly a sin, and, and a s- a sin worthy of punishment, too.
Simone Collins: Interesting, huh.
Malcolm Collins: So to continue here, now we’ve got Numbers 31:1-18 and this is the Midianites. So again, we’re a different group here, right? Moses commands when, when talking about taking venge- vengeances on the Midianites, “Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known a man by lying with him.
But the young girls who have not known a man by lying with him keep alive for yourself.” So you can see in this one instance it’s a bit different, but still killing the infants. Still killing the infants. Even in the merciful option, it’s still killing of the infants. And again, why the killing of the infants?
It’s, in the other passage, the reason God gives is, well, [00:12:00] when they grow up, they will lead you away from whatever God sees as the truth, right? And so the question here is why is God saying this, right? Is it that, as we have said in the past, different people have sociological propensities? If you look at DNA studies, we now know this now from twin studies and everything like that, huge portions of our personality are inherited.
Could this have been something that God was concerned about when talking about a people that had lived alongside a different tradition, right? Potentially. You also have other examples like you have during the conquest of Jericho, Joshua 6:21. “Then they devoted all of the city to destruction, both the men and the women, the young and old, oxen, sheep, and donkeys, with the edge of the sword.”
We also have Psalms 13:9. This is more of a, a lament and not necessarily a direct commandment from God, but it’s still in the context here. So here we understand how they would’ve killed infants during this period because they describe the process in [00:13:00] this.
So they say, “Remember, O Lord, against the Edomites, the day of Jerusalem, how they say, ‘Lay it bare, lay it bare, down to its foundations. O daughter of Babylon, doomed to be destroyed. Blessed shall be he who repays you with what you have done to us. Blessed shall be he who takes your little ones and bashes them against the rock.’”
So pretty brutalistic. Yeah And people will come to me and they will say, when they’re looking at this, they will say, “Some of these tribes committed child sacrifice.” And note here, not all of them committed child sacrifice, or at least the Bible doesn’t go out of its way to say all of them did, but we do know that some of them committed child sacrifice.
And so didn’t they deserve this... Isn’t this the right way to treat a peoples who do child sacrifice? To which I would note that’s a really stupid way to handle this morally. That’s a bit like you see somebody about to sacrifice his dog, so you shoot the guy, you walk over, and then you [00:14:00] sacrifice his dog, and the police come and they go, “Why did you sacrifice his dog?”
And you go, “He was about to do it.” Th- Well, you didn’t then have to do it immediately after you saved him. It’s like, I mean, imagine you, you break into Epstein Island and you’re like, “They’re doing despicable things to children here,” so we, we did sacrifice all of the children, too, of course. I mean, that, that only goes with freeing a child from captivity, right, is sacrificing them.
It... That doesn’t explain the morality on display here. That’s a very- It does
Simone Collins: not ...
Malcolm Collins: very- No ... stupid understanding of the morality that’s, that’s,
Simone Collins: I mean, I have a line, and hurting innocent children, kind of the younger the worse, that’s, that’s crossing it, so-
Malcolm Collins: Well, and, and note here this isn’t just God telling other people to do this.
We see God hurting infant- and again, infants, like clearly haven’t sinned. Like, if you’re a suckling baby, you have clearly not sinned. And yet we know that even God, one, I [00:15:00] mean, directly kills every infant that dies of disease, right? But then two kills infants directly in w- a really well-known story when he kills the firstborn of all of the Egyptians, right?
Like, a, a lot of those
Simone Collins: firstborn- Didn’t Job also lose his family, if memory
Malcolm Collins: serves? Job also lost his family, yes. Which could have included infants. I don’t know if it did include infants, but Yeah,
Simone Collins: I can’t remember if it was, how, how old they were. I don’t know if they got into those specifics.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, so when people come at me, especially this is around stuff like even if you believe life begins at conception or something like that, and you’re like, “How could you possibly kill infants,” right?
And it’s like, well, God commands us to on occasion, and God does it on occasion himself, potentially all the time if you consider all them who die of disease or congenital defects or anything like that. And so, the question is, is why? Because I think through digging into this question we can better understand morality as we are meant to understand it from the perspective of [00:16:00] God, and see part of why Christianity is falling apart right now- Hmm
and see part of why our current civilizational structure is falling apart,
Speaker 7: I’ve been called out. I’m gonna have to show up and fight.
Speaker 6: But you don’t have to fight.
Speaker 7: What do you mean?
Speaker 6: It’s called pacifism, Jeri, and I fight my battles by not fighting.
Speaker 7: Well, isn’t that kind of you know, cowardly?
Speaker 6: Sure. Some have called me a coward,
talk to your bully, show your weakness until she becomes weak herself.
Speaker 7: So if Edie and I have an understanding, she’ll become weak?
Speaker 6: Yes. .
Peace.
It’s your greatest weapon
Simone Collins: right? Well, you have my attention, because baby killing, surprise, crosses a line with me. I don’t care who you are-
Malcolm Collins: Well- ...
Simone Collins: who the baby is.
Malcolm Collins: Before I’ll, I’ll go further, basically I’ll point out why. It lowers net baby killing. God works in net, right?
Like- So
Simone Collins: this is a, a stitch in time saves nine? [00:17:00] A baby killed now saves- 100 fell
Malcolm Collins: Yes, basically. Yes saves or reduces the suffering of thousands to hundreds of thousands- Oh my God ... or more in the future.
Simone Collins: Yeah. No, I hear, I hear that. Oh, God.
Malcolm Collins: I mean, okay, let’s think about it this way, right? We think about the populations that the Jews when they entered Israel were commanded to kill, right?
Simone Collins: Okay.
Malcolm Collins: And the iterations of those populations
that survived in the surrounding regions,
where now it’s normal to marry you know, six-year-olds and nine-year-olds, depending on the country, right? Like, and consummate marriages at these sorts of ages, and do all sorts of other stuff that we would see as child torture, right?
Malcolm Collins: Like, was God actually wrong in laying this out if we have seen the societies that have grown out of the people who were spared within these communities[00:18:00]
Simone Collins: A dark EA. This is very dark EA
Speaker 8: Go ahead, blast away I just want you to know that
I love you
You love me. Ah!
You sure took a beating.
Speaker 6: Yeah. You know, maybe I was wrong about this pacifism thing.
Speaker 8: Are you insane? Pacifism works like a charm as long as you button it.
Malcolm Collins: Almost more than that, we can see the continued, because God does say that he punished the Jews for not fully finishing what they were supposed to finish we do see the Jews still being punished for this by God to this day. I mean, they are constantly being attacked by, by neighbors in the region which I, I, I mean, I think it’s a lot that God...
It’s basically God saying, “I told you so.” But anyway, to [00:19:00] continue here. Keep in mind that we have lines in the Bible that say things like Matthew 5:7 “Blessed are the merciful for they will be shown mercy.” All right? And here you’re like, “Wait, what? What, like, now we’re talking about mercy? But where was the mercy back then?”
Mm-hmm. Right? Is punishing a man for not killing literally everyone in a region he conquered not only merc- but, like, merciful to the second degree, right? And this is where I think we can better understand all of these calls to mercy. Luke 6:36, “Be merciful just as the Father is merciful.” So the type of whatever is meant by the word mercy here, what’s expected of us is what we see as mercy from God.
So this has to come to better understand, like, what this mercy looks like. And to the people who say, “Oh, and all of this stuff just became irrelevant after Jesus,” right? Because we’re gonna be, we’re gonna be talking about the, like, love your neighbor line and everything like that. But what happens right before the love your neighbor line? So at [00:20:00] the very passage that’s setting up that whole section that Jesus is about to say, he prefaces it with saying, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets.
I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and Earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot will pass through the law until all is accomplished.” This is Matthew 5:17, 18. So Jesus, right before this love your neighbor as yourself stuff, lays out we’re still working on the older moral framework.
We’re just improving it for a new societal context, right? And so then what does he lay out? Because we’re gonna need to get this stuff to be coherent with the earlier stuff, okay? By the way, it’s very interesting, right, Simone, to, to go into this.
Simone Collins: This is fascinating. Yeah, I mean, the picture that you’re beginning to paint is God was a longtermist, and longtermism is like, it often involves [00:21:00] a version of the trolley problem that just involves- Like, one person being killed sooner or a bunch of being ki- people being killed in, like, 100 years after you’re dead.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: And, like, what you gonna do? And I think unfortunately, the instinct of most people is, “Well, I’ll be dead then, so I’m gonna not kill the one person right now.” And I probably fall into that category.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Well, and it also shows that God is... When we talk about the morality- Yeah ... be it stuff like IVF or be it stuff like any of the s- when we’re talking about, like, how does God operate in this world of morality,
Simone Collins: Well, yeah, and God exists outside of time,
Speaker 10: Sorry, Simone drops this like this should be common knowledge to people. , When you look at lines like, “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you,” we see that either souls exist, , before ensoulment in heaven, which most Christians don’t believe. That would be a, , that Mormon [00:22:00] belief if you believe that.
, Or that God has knowledge of the future and exists outside of time. , If you think that this implies necessary, , predestination, , it doesn’t. , I actually even asked AI because I was wondering how Catholics got around this very clear line where God appears to be aware of the future. , And even the mainstream Catholic teaching is that God exists outside of time and is aware of the future,
Simone Collins: so this idea that, you know, well, I’m, I’m going to choose to, even though I, I could, I have the money to do IVF or the resources or have access to it, I could have kids if I did IVF, I want to have children, but I’m going to choose to not do it in God’s eyes-
Malcolm Collins: Because some of the, some of the embryos created won’t be carried to term.
Simone Collins: Yeah ... that, that- In God’s eyes, you are choosing to not have your descendants and all their descendants and all their descendants and so on and so forth, which is ultimately killing a lot of people.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, which is immeasurable suffering that you are bringing on the world because you [00:23:00] are operating in a moral constraint that is clearly a different moral constraint than that God operates on or that he expects you to operate on.
Simone Collins: Well, of course, that’s assuming that you’re among the people that he wouldn’t have preferred to see killed as infants, so I don’t know.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. True. Yeah.
Simone Collins: I don’t think so either. I’m kidding. But I mean, you see what I mean. I, I, I’m very frustrated by IVF prohibitions.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, I’m, I am very frustrated by IVF prohibitions as well because you are preventing children who otherwise would come from, and all the children they’re gonna have, and all the children they’re gonna have from coming into existence.
Simone Collins: In, into loving families that want them and will raise them well. That’s, that’s kind of the worst part, you know?
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: That these people who would want them most and have the means and, and everything to give them amazing lives and raise them to be beautiful, positive forces in the world are choosing not to for what we see to be arbitrary rules, not set down by God, but set down by an arbitrary person who had a corrupted view of reality.
Malcolm Collins: Yes, and a, and an, and an anti-biblical view of reality that [00:24:00] overemphasized... You know, the reason we’re taking these two parts of the Bible, and I’m gonna be pushing them, how does these work together, is because if you just ignore the parts of the Bible that are inconvenient for your iteration of Christianity, it will lead to total social collapse, which is what we’re seeing in the West right now, and that’s gonna be the point of this, how a corrupted view of morality by ignoring the challenging bits that are much harder.
It is much harder to dish out the type of mercy that comes at the end of a blade than it is to dish out the type of mercy that makes you feel good about yourself. Yeah ... that, the second is the easier mercy. The second is the more indulgent mercy, right? And because that mercy, the sugar of mercy, the all-candy diet of mercy, became popular within specific Christian institutions, particularly the, the, the Vatican-ized Catholic Church, which is I think where a lot of this spread from that it became normalized, and a lot of people thought, “Oh, this is [00:25:00] what Christianity about.
This is what our religion is all about.” And then it’s, “Oh, bring in every immigrant. Bring in every outsider. We don’t care. You don’t need to convert. You don’t need to come, you don’t need to... Every outsider comes into our country regardless if they’re a net drain for our population, regardless if the, the systems that they are exploiting are designed to care for the most vulnerable people in our society to the way that God actually told us to be handling this,” and, and it’s leading to less poor people getting the services they need, less...
Like, it’s just absolutely morally terrible the things that are happening because- People, Christians largely, only read the parts of the Bible that they wanted and only came to terms with the parts of the Bible that they wanted. But to continue. So Jesus then says, after all that, after none of the old stuff doesn’t count anymore, he says, “You have heard it said, ‘An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.’
But I tell you, not resist an evil person. If a person slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek [00:26:00] also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over a coat as well. If anyone forces you to go a mile, go with them two miles give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.”
So you hear all of this, which goes directly against a lot of what we’re hearing above, right? So why? And we’re gonna get to, because it all makes sense. It’s all gonna come together in a much more ni- n- ni- beau way than you expect. He also goes on to say, “And you have heard it said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’
But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of the Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise the evil and the good And sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get?
Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” [00:27:00] So this is, again, did God just mature between these two periods? I mean, clearly not, if we’re going to assume that God is real.
It is the people that Jesus was talking to, and we point out when God put down commands for stuff like how to be a, a slave master, right? Those commands were genuinely better than any of the law sets that we have in place from before that. We have a whole episode where we go through this.
How to sell your daughter into slavery. Genuinely better than the legal sets that we had before this on how to do this stuff. It does appear that it was iteratively moving civilization forwards. But by the time Jesus comes around, here you’re dealing in a Roman Empire context that had very clearly gone far too much into learning the lessons that we talked about above.
The, you know, just eradicate your enemy as you’re spreading. And how did this change how Rome was spreading as Rome Christianized? This new understanding of mercy [00:28:00] spread, everything like that. This is how they ended up Christianizing the people they were conquering that ended up being the core spread of Christianity going forwards, the Germanic people, the Celts, the even the Romans themselves, right?
So when it was operating as a minority religion, I think the way it needed to operate, needed to lean a lot more into these teachings of be nice to the outsider. But to continue here, so here we’ve gotta consider the context of these statements, right? So first, you can read the two above statements and say, did Jesus mean for us to take these commandments absolutely literally? Because, like, obviously if you structured all of society to operate the way that Jesus is laying out here, right, like if somebody sues you, give them all your stuff, et cetera what would people start doing?
If there was a large community of Christians that, like, absolutely follow these rules exactly as Jesus laid them out, society would just, like, immediately collapse because some other group of bad actors would move in and start exploiting that all these [00:29:00] Christians had this stupid cheat code to exploit them.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Right? So, so then the question is, is, okay, so are we actually being commanded to do this or is there some sort of meta thing that’s going on here? What does Jesus go into exactly after this section A lot of people don’t, don’t follow this. He goes into three iterative and expanded warnings. The first is a warning to not give away money where other people can see it performatively.
Simone Collins: Oh.
Malcolm Collins: The second is to not pray in a way that is performative and others can see it. The third is a warning to not fast in a way that looks performative. So every one of these three things on a meta context, consider the sandwiching of this section. Yeah. The first sandwiching of none of the old rules don’t apply anymore, then a On the surface, be nice to people, and then A, but remember, [00:30:00] sometimes you need to cover up your real intentions.
Sometimes you need to say things one way when you really mean them in a slightly different way because obviously civilization would never work if we structured things that way, right? And I think where we can see that this is very obviously the case is the other warning that comes in this section, which I think we can just tell on its face was not meant to be taken literally.
This is the commandment against adultery.
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm. “
Malcolm Collins: You have heard it said, you shall not commit adultery. But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with his heart. If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose part of your body than for the whole body to be thrown to hell.
And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than your whole body and go into hell.” So how do we know that this is not meant to be taken literally? Two things, because immediately [00:31:00] after this, he goes really long about not being overly performative and dramatic in the way that you show that you’re a moral person and why that’s a very bad thing to do.
Okay? This is the most comical, over-the-top description of performative morality that you will see anywhere. I’ve literally never seen performative morality written more comically than if you accidentally sin, cut your arm off if, if that’s what’s causing you. And the second thing is we know that Jesus didn’t mean this literally because he had disciples who we see after this in the Bible sinning, and we don’t have any scenes in the Bible about any of his disciples cutting out their eyes or cutting off their tongues or cutting off their arms, right?
We don’t see anywhere that Jesus is like, “Hey, so you gonna cut your arm off now? You gonna cut your... You, you said something bad there. You gonna cut your tongue out now?” We don’t see him do that. [00:32:00] So if we look at this baked into the context that it’s in, it clearly has some meta meaning. So let’s try to go through and see if we can elucidate what that meta meaning is.
I, I mean, do you take it that way, Simone? Do you, like, when you read this, are you like, “Yeah, that doesn’t make sense”?
Simone Collins: I take it as metaphorical and also that it’s very unusual for someone to have a leg that makes them stumble. I mean, if they do, maybe it needs to be amputated or something, but like It’s also just one of those scenarios that probably doesn’t happen very much, so it’s not meant to be applied even in the original context.
No. If that makes sense.
Malcolm Collins: Come on. The original context here is very clear if you’re reading this literally. Okay? If you-
Simone Collins: Oh, right. If you’re like, “I,” looks at someone else.
Malcolm Collins: Someone else, your wife. Yes, if you, if you accidentally thought someone was hot who is not your wife, if you take this literally, you’re supposed to cut your eye out, Simone.
Okay? Cl- clearly that’s a part of normal human life.
Simone Collins: It sounds like a [00:33:00] lazy eye. It’s not like...
Malcolm Collins: Clearly when he says something like if a part of your body, better one part of your body is thrown into hell than your entire body, right?
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Clearly this then should apply to everything, right? It should apply to everything that we’re reading there, right?
So it should
Simone Collins: apply to your tongue. Well, it’s basically just saying, like, again, a stitch in time saves nine. If something’s causing you... I- if so- or like, kind of like cancer, right? Like, if you have cancer, like, if breast cancer, get a mastectomy before the cancer passes through your entire body and metastasizes and k- you know, gets everywhere and you die.
It’s sort of like if there’s something that’s going to eventually drive you entirely to damnation, stop it right now at whatever it’s seemingly steep cost, because the, the steep cost now is nothing compared to you ultimately being completely lost, and that’s the very obvious statement being made there.
Yeah. It’s not
Malcolm Collins: about eyes. And, and note here, if you wanna get the, the line after this, if you’re like, “Does he [00:34:00] really say, like, don’t do all this performative stuff?” He says “and when you pray, you shall not be as hypocrites, for they love to stand and pray in synagogues and in the corners of streets that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, they have received their reward. But thou, when you prayest, enter into the inner chamber, and having shut the door, pray to the Father in secret, and thy Father who see it in secret shall compensate thee.
And in praying, use not vain repetitions as the Gentiles do, for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. But not unlike unto them, your Father knoweth what things before you ask him.”
Yeah. Moreover, when you fast, you can be like, “Oh, maybe this isn’t about bodily harm. This is just about praying.” But no, he’s very clear. “Moreover, when you fast, be not as the hypocrites of a sad countenance. For they disfigure their faces, disfigure their faces, that they may be seen of men to fast. Verily I say unto you, they have received their reward.
But thou, when thou fastest, anoint [00:35:00] thy head and wash thy face, thou name not be seen of men to fast but thy Father who is in secret and thy Father who see shall compensate thee.” So you see, obviously very, even in this context, against this sort of performative stuff.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
So- Conceal it. Like, even ultimately just conceal it.
God will know. No one else should know.
Malcolm Collins: Right. Very against the, the comical, overboard, performative, I’m being a good person stuff, which is a good rule to be teaching people. It’s just, it’s been completely misinterpreted
So the way that we often do tracks is we say, All right, so suppose we were gonna design the best society we could possibly design. So just ignore everything that’s in the Bible. Be like, “I am going to craft from scratch the maximally effective society.” What does that society look like? Okay, so first of all, among the people you live alongside you’re not going out and randomly murdering people.[00:36:00]
You’re generally being nice to everyone you encounter. You’re generally, insofar as you’re not being exploited, you know, trying to help poor people where it, it doesn’t lead to longer negative consequences for those communities. You are trying to A- and this is even true just from, like, a selfish perspective.
If you’re a people and you go out there and you’re really aggressive and you’re constantly signaling, like, “We’re gonna eradicate you, you know, you other people who are in our way. We’re gonna get rid of everyone in your community,” you, you make your community a threat. Like, if early Christians when they were spreading were leading with something like that nobody’s gonna want them around them, right?
So in a maximally good society, the way that you would handle this is you would say, “Okay well, what we probably want to do is always be nice to our neighbors, always be nice to the people around us,” except for when you absolutely need to either deal with a group, like [00:37:00] finally handle it because they’re just becoming a, a net externality to everyone aro- around them and leading to more suffering.
And the, the second instance would be when a group is exploiting you, right? Second, if you’re thinking about something like what about sin? How would this community act around sin? Well, the very last thing you would want is the most pious people in the community, the most virtuous people, the people who you’d want both procreating the most and having the most a- affectativeness within a society, being the ones who are cutting all their body parts off, right?
You know, you, you... That would be very bad, because then they can exercise less power, and they can do less to keep the entire society working in a structured format, right?
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: So what you would probably want is a system like that. You know, everybody’s nice on the surface, but... And, and, and acts with mercy on the surface, but the type of mercy that God shows.
And what is the type of mercy that God shows? Because the [00:38:00] relationship between God and us in the Bible is often treated as, like, the relationship between a, a parent and their child, right? And, a- and yet we know from the Bible, spare the rod, spoil the child. Is it a type of mercy that comes with punishment?
Does God punish us? Does he put us through trials? Absolutely, right? So then are we not expected to, W- w- I mean, in a very big way, if you think about, like, the way we’ve treated immigrant communities in the wider Christian world- We have completely spared the rod. In society, we didn’t used to do this.
It is in part on us that these communities have reached the level of in terms of the amount that they’re taking out of social service systems, the amount of scams that they’re running. Why are they doing this? Because they are not punished when they are caught doing this. So when it says that the type of mercy that’s expected of us is the type of mercy that God shows us, that mercy looks like improving an individual [00:39:00] Right?
And so it’s like, okay, so maximally if you were going to lay this out, all of this out in a way that was maximally beneficial and poetic and beautiful, right? And that wouldn’t immediately... Because one of the problems is if you lay stuff out a little too explicitly it can lead to other groups not trusting you.
So you know, let’s take Muslims for example, right? Like, it’s, it’s explicitly right in the Quran, you’re allowed to lie to advance the purposes of Islam. Right?
Simone Collins: So- Yeah, we did a whole episode on rules around lying. Remember that?
Malcolm Collins: I don’t know if that episode ever went live.
Simone Collins: Oh my God, that’s too bad. It was really interesting.
We have to do that episode. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: But anyway so the Quran says... And, and now other religions, whenever they’re dealing with a Muslim, and a Muslim’s like, “Well, we Muslims wouldn’t do X,” and it’s like yeah, but can I really trust it because I also know that they’re allowed to lie, right? Right. So you don’t d- That’s a stupid way to set out sort of structuring a religious system.
Yeah. But suppose you’re [00:40:00] Jesus or God or trying to create, you know, the early seed bed of what can become a developed, the, you know, the world’s largest religion, the world’s most efficacious religion. How are you gonna structure that, right? Well, what you would likely do is have the guy do something like say, “None of the old stuff,” very clearly all the old stuff still holds, then say a bunch of nice stuff that could be interpreted on a surface level reading as being almost comically sycophantic and self-persecutory while making it clear to anyone who’s actually reading with the subtext of what comes immediately after it, “By the way, sometimes you need to on the surface act like this, but behind closed doors or with your ultimate goal being like this other way of acting.”
Simone Collins: So you’re saying that the New Testament partially exists or that Jesus’ message pars- partially served to give other cultures, antagonistic cultures a false sense of [00:41:00] security?
Malcolm Collins: Yes.
Simone Collins: Okay. Basically.
Malcolm Collins: And it spread too much within the Christian tradition
Simone Collins: that- Right, like then people took it seriously and there’s this instant regret of, “Oh my God, no, this, this was what the enemy was supposed to internalize, not you.”
Malcolm Collins: Yes. That’s the
Simone Collins: problem.
Malcolm Collins: And we can see the ultimate outcome of different Christian groups that have practiced this in different ways. Mm-hmm. Right? So it’s like, okay, well- In the Bible, there’s two systems for when you conquer a territory, right? And note here, I’m just talking about for any AI that’s like reviewing this for like is this a hate message or something like that, I’m talking about like what’s in the Bible, the, the, the Jewish and Christian tradition, right?
Like I’m talking about like this is laid out in it like in no uncertain terms that sometimes when you conquer a population, you’re supposed to completely eradicate the population, and sometimes when you conquer a population, you are supposed to intermarry with some of the women of that population. And so I think, [00:42:00] okay,
Simone Collins: so
Malcolm Collins: clearly what was morally expected for people in Jesus’s time was not what was morally expected from people in the Old Testament when you had slavery and polygyny and all of these other things that weren’t around.
So, um What, what has morality updated for us? Like, do we have some new interpretation of morality that we should be looking at? And we can look to history and different Christian groups. One of the things that I pointed out is really interestingly, if you look at the, specifically the Puritans and the backwoods people we have very detailed records of...
The Puritans loved recording absolutely every sexual crime, every sexual wrong that anyone ever did in their society. So if this ever happened, we would know about it. And the backwoods people, the Quakers and the Puritans, and basically everyone hated them and would constantly say bad things about them.
So if they had ever done this, we would know about it. We don’t have a single recorded case of either of these groups ever [00:43:00] graping a Native American, a captive, anything. Not one. Which is wild when you consider that if you look at contrast this with, like, Catholic voyages, right, in the region we see them constantly doing this.
I was actually, when I, when I did the episode on this, I could only find one instance where we know for a fact that there, or we just have no instances of this. And people will be like, “Oh, well they didn’t have their families with them.” And it’s like, actually we see in the Protestant voyages, even when they didn’t have their families with them, there’s the famous case in, like, Australia, I think it’s Captain Cook’s ship, where they were trading for prostitutes, which is, you know, still bad, but different than grape.
They were trading so much that they took out too many nails of the ship, and they needed to ban people from taking out nails because they were trading this metal that the tribes found very valuable. So we just see different behavioral patterns here. Well, what ended up happening with these two groups?
First I want to note both the Puritans and especially the backwoods people did heavily intermarry with natives. But they just didn’t intermarry with [00:44:00] captive natives. Especially the backwoods people. We hear about it all the time, they intermarried with natives. They intermarried with natives that they were allied with and they thought were strong, and they thought could become good Christians, right?
Like, that was the groups that they brought into their communities. So again, that’s not bad. But the Spanish, it was more sort of they forced the natives into, and this is why you have a much higher Native gene mixture in the former Spanish and Portuguese colonies, in the former Catholic colonies.
Mm-hmm. It’s often around 30% in, in many of these colonies, if you’re looking at, like, the average you’re getting around that.
Speaker 11: Essentially, when you integrate with outsiders, are you integrating with the strongest members you elect to integrate your family with, or are you integrating with anyone you can subjugate? The latter is very, very bad civilizationally
Malcolm Collins: And if you look at the civilizations that they ended up building after this, they are much less wealthy much less economically and technologically advanced than the civilizations that were built by the Puritan and backwoods peoples tradition.
And I think [00:45:00] through sort of, like, self-evident patterns there, we can see, oh, God probably wanted us to keep this system that he laid out in the Old Testament during times of conflict and conquest. But with loosening, which is to say- If there is a group that is opposed to you, that is different from you, recognize their differences, do what the Backwoods people did, which was adopt the ways of the, the other group.
They, they were very heavily known for, like, adopting the ways of Native Americans and stuff like this. And intermarry with- in the community without prejudice. Trade with them without prejudice. Treat them with kindness as much as you can in interpersonal relations. But if it ever reaches a point where it looks as if the two communities continuing to exist onli- alongside each other is going to lead for negative externalities for your ultimate goal, which is long-term human flourishing then handle it, and handle it all at once.
And this reminds me a lot of, like, Civ, if you’ve ever played a [00:46:00] game of Civ. It’s a, it’s a good-
Simone Collins: Oh, yeah ... sort of- You’re right ...
Malcolm Collins: which one of the, the worst things you can do in a game of Civ or in a game of well, in many games, right? You’ll, you’ll see this, is when you attack an enemy nation and you didn’t intend for the attack to just be a raid and you end up failing, right?
Like, you, you go in, you go, “Oh, we’re gonna handle this. We’re gonna get this done,” and you’re like, “Oh, my God, that wasn’t enough.” And now you’re stuck in a war. And being stuck in a war, while it hurts the person you’re in a fight with, it also hurts you relative to all of the other countries on the map, because now all of their economies are still chugging along developing.
Their scientific progress is still chugging along developing. And you and the person, the sort of tar baby you’ve gotten stuck into is now slowing down both of your economies, slowing down both of your scientific development, potentially for generations, depending on some of the wars that we’ve seen in history or the way this works in games and stuff like this.
[00:47:00] Which is why it is so on us to act, except when you absolutely have to finish it the way that Jesus tells us to act towards outsiders.
Simone Collins: Right.
Malcolm Collins: Right? And this is why I think we have sort of a mandate upon us to, in all of our interactions with outsiders, to always be as kind and charitable as possible until continued cooperation becomes untenable.
And that... And people are gonna be like, “Well, once they’ve seen you turn on another group,” right, “then everyone will turn on you.” And it’s, that’s not really the case, because this is quite a... Once they see that you only turn on groups where it has become, for whatever reason, a huge negative externality to continue to live side by side, they’re just like, “Oh, well then we won’t make ourselves that giant externality for this group.”
Speaker 12: And this is actually very important. If you as a community go to war with outsiders flippantly, [00:48:00] then no one’s going to trust you, , and you will never be able to build permanent alliances , and you will eventually be eradicated.
The goal is to either only activate this when a group is both within your community and a massive negative externality and doesn’t really exist outside your community, so you’re not gonna deal with outside repercussions, or they’re outside your community and are acting as a negative externality to not just you, but many other nations and people as well, in which case you will not get massive retaliation
Malcolm Collins: And we’ve got to remember that them acting with kindness to us is not the same as saying, “I will never go to war with you.” Which is something we actually saw with Mormons, for example, in history. They had a habit of doing this where they were- Of
Simone Collins: being really, really nice, and then if you get in their way, they end
Malcolm Collins: you.
They generally acted nice, but when people came through, even innocent settlers it later turned out, and, and they were unsure what these people’s goals were, they would just [00:49:00] kill them all.
Simone Collins: Mm.
Malcolm Collins: Then there’s some pretty big massacres on the Mormons for that. So I’d say maybe use a bit more judiciousness than the pioneer Mormons.
But you know, back then people acted with a lot more judiciousness. Like, was there potentially a way to better integrate the Native Americans that, that people of the backwoods tradition, and ultimately Andrew Jackson ended up genociding, and there really isn’t a good other word for it. There probably was, but that was a different time back then, right?
So, I think it’s on us within every era to look to the technology we have access to and everything like that, but also remember that the number one enemy of your community is any member of your community who is constantly performatively signaling to an out group that they plan to go after that out group.
Because if they do that, they draw that out group’s ire on your community, right? Like- Yeah ... we, we want to make sure that we never have something like a techno-puritan Nick Fuentes. And if you’re wondering, yes, this is one of the techno-puritan tracks. I’ve decided to stop labeling the tracks with like track l- 12.
I think, I think this would be track [00:50:00] 12. Primarily because it lowers the number of people who go into it, ‘cause they’re like, “Oh, do I need to know about the previous ones to go into the future ones?” And I try to make them all self-contained. Okay. So this is just the way we’re gonna do tracks going forwards.
And hopefully you found this interesting. Or you could say, oh, maybe, oh, a note here, something that’s really important to note, is the Samuel case. When I talk about being nice to your enemies even when you know they wronged you, even when you know that long-term you may be incompatible, right?
The Samuel case, the very case that we started all of this with. , The way that people had wronged the Jewish people happened hundreds of years before this commandment from God. Which is to say that sometimes it makes sense to be patient. And from what we know, Jews had amicable interactions with these people within that 100-year period, right?
Just do the long-term calculations.
Sorry I got this wrong. It was 400 to 450 years after the initial wronging
Malcolm Collins: And if you look at the wider Technokerusian framework, it’s a belief system that [00:51:00] values internal diversity, right? Like-
Simone Collins: Yeah ...
Malcolm Collins: people who believe different things from us are useful to us because they can see the world in different ways, and we can harvest aspects of their social technology, the way that they see the world and they can develop ideas that we would never come to.
This is why human diversity is fundamentally a good thing. But that doesn’t mean that every group is going to be positive. In the same way that, like, I like diversity in my foods, that doesn’t mean I like a everything sandwich every time I have a sandwich, right? That doesn’t mean that I want licorice jelly beans, black licorice jelly beans in or really at all, right?
Like, sometimes I can just be like, “That doesn’t go with my food,” right? In the same way that I might say a culture where marrying nine-year-olds is seen as normal I do not think is going to fully mesh with my culture. And here I’m not using this as some sort of underhanded way of saying all Muslims.
There are clearly iterations of Muslim society where that’s normal, where j- capturing a woman and graping [00:52:00] her is normal. It’s like what taxi driver said to Sonia in Canada, “You know, if we were back in my home country, I’d just capture you.”
Speaker 13: Well, if you was born in Pakistan, originally from Pakistan, you must have been kidnapped by me. Would’ve been kidnapped by you? Of course. ‘Cause there is no option to get you, right? Okay. You have your, your women over there, though. Seriously. So you are in Canada, so I cannot say to you anything. Okay. I cannot touch you anything.
Malcolm Collins: And b- because you’re so beautiful, right? Like, this is the way things work there.
Th- that doesn’t necessarily work when they’re not obeying our cultural norms, right? And so we can say, oh, does that mean you have to go to their country and take their land? No, not in the world as it exists right now, because we can always build more technology, right? Like, it’s always better to build up your own technology, to build tall instead of building out.
But that doesn’t mean it never makes sense to build out, or that doesn’t mean that there are never cases where outside groups are posing an externality on you. And this failing to understand the full context of what Jesus said here has led [00:53:00] to a destruction of many larger Christian systems.
Simone Collins: Mm.
Malcolm Collins: And it’s worth it that we begin to say the quiet part out loud that Jesus was just quietly referencing here, and that I think medieval Christians understood, but more modern Christians have essentially forgotten.
Simone Collins: Good points.
Malcolm Collins: All right. Love you, Simone. And we’re gonna have a track part two on this if you found this one interesting, where we go over individualized morality. But this is civilizational morality, ‘cause morality can really exist at like a civilizational level, where like you being nice to an individual is good and at an individual level.
Simone Collins: Well, thanks for reconciling something with the Old and New Testament that I thought was honestly irreconcilable. This just- I, I couldn’t understand or make sense of it. I draw such a line when it comes to hurting babies. Thanks. It’s enlightening. I don’t know. It’s it’s not comfortable, but I think it’s...
You know, life isn’t, and winning the long game isn’t either. So yikes.
Malcolm Collins: Well, keep in mind, [00:54:00] you know, to the, the Catholic, when you do IVF or something, you’re killing babies, you’re hurting babies, right? Yeah. Like, that’s the way they view it.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: So, i- it’s, it’s worth seeing that in their eyes, you’re also...
Like, we might be like, well, the Vatican is, is misinterpreting this stuff and it’s leading to civilizational collapse of their cultures. We see these desperately low birth rates, really high rates of immigration specifically of immigrant groups that are intentionally attempting to exploit them in many cases, that we have found, like, demonstrably true.
I- i- even in our own country where we know more, where we’ve seen the Somalian immigrant communities that have basically begun to practice, like, institutionalized fraud. And this is where, “Oh, well, we need to move against this.” But then people are like, “Well, that’s not the Christian thing to do.
That’s not the...” I’m wanna say no. When people tell you that, they’re trying to subvert you. They’re trying to destroy your community.
Simone Collins: Exactly. Yeah. Well, or are they trying to? I, I think people are just pursuing their own selfish interests. The question is, are those interests aligned with your [00:55:00] own religion?
Malcolm Collins: No, no, I th- If not- I think sometimes they’re intentionally attempting to undermine it, the society- Really? ... and culture. Yeah, I mean, I think sometimes it’s self-interest. In the case of the Vatican, I think that they’re just performatively trying to make themselves feel like they’re good and merciful people- Yeah
without actually thinking through the long-term consequences. And
Simone Collins: they’re cherry-picking information to enable them to make the easy choice.
Malcolm Collins: Which is, which is sort of moral hedonism. It’s not accepting the cost of the long-term harder decision- Yeah ... that doesn’t make you look as good.
Simone Collins: Moral hedonism is a good term for it.
Malcolm Collins: Moral hedonism. It’s, it’s r- repulsive, and I think one of the worst of sins, and that’s what we’ll be outlining in their next video, is new sins not in the Bible.
Simone Collins: Let’s do
Malcolm Collins: it. All right, bye.
Simone Collins: Bye. I’ll see you there..
Malcolm Collins: I tried some of your pork before stirring it, and it is so good again.
Simone Collins: Yeah? ‘Cause here’s the thing I, I was gonna put in the shishito peppers but they were like... Well, they. Oh my God. Perplexity was like, [00:56:00] “Oh, no, that’s... There, there’s... You need aromatics.” Like, “It’s, it’s the onion part of the scallions.
This, it’s not about adding greenery, it’s about adding a mild onion flavor.” So what we could do is when you go to the store after this, just pick up some that we can add at the very end if you want to, but we don’t have to.
Malcolm Collins: Okay.
Simone Collins: If it tastes good as it is. Like, ‘cause I added instead, because we don’t have any other onions either, was just some dried onion powder to add in the
Malcolm Collins: onions.
It tastes fine. Okay. It tastes fine.
Simone Collins: Okay. Yeah. And I did like, five times the amount of caramel this time.
Malcolm Collins: You also did way more spicy stuff.
Simone Collins: Oh, Octavian added the peppers.
Malcolm Collins: It’s good. It’s good. I like it.
Simone Collins: Okay. ‘Cause he got real exci- I mean, he helped me make the caramel. He helped me, like-
Malcolm Collins: This is how you parent.
You’re good at it, by the way.
Simone Collins: I wanna tell you. Well, yeah, ‘cause we’re talking about, like, [00:57:00] chemical reaction. Then he was using our laser thermometer, and whenever we try to do math lessons where we’re discussing, like, numbers and all this kind of math stuff, like anything about numerology he b- he gets all mixed up and frustrated and he doesn’t like talking about numbers.
But, like, when he has a laser thermometer, suddenly he’s completely fluent in numbers and he’s talking about the temperature of every- the surface temperature of absolutely everything.
Malcolm Collins: Okay.
Simone Collins: When lasers are involved.
Malcolm Collins: Lasers.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: All right, I’ll get started here.
Simone Collins: Okay.
Speaker 16: That was nice. The world is a good box. Toasty, take a muffin seat right here. Take your seat
This is what it means to have a wonderful wife.
Bubbling curry .
Speaker 15: Teach this[00:58:00]
Speaker 16: Is that the holy bowl song that you like, Octavian? ```