Questions And Answers

Well tonight I was going to talk originally about the Lord's Supper the whole time but I think we'll just do a variety of different topics. It's almost kind of random night. I have a few things that I'd like to speak about and we'll almost set it up in Q &A style.

Sunday mornings when I ask a question they're rhetorical questions. I'm just trying to get you to think you can think about four hundred words a minute. You can listen to about. You can speak about one hundred words a minute.

And so I try to ask questions on Sunday morning to prompt you to stick along with me and not think about the bills that you have to pay the Patriots beating the bills or any of those kind of things and so I ask those questions.

But on Sunday night when I ask a question you can raise your hand and answer your question. Answer the question and we'll work it that way. In case you don't know the format the first question I have tonight for the congregation what are the four different views of the Lord's Supper.

I think I'll have about ten questions. Maybe we'll see how far we get what are the different views of the Lord's Supper. And why does it really matter. Remember what we believe matters. But it just depends how we get to the end of that.

And it has to be through a biblical means. What are the different views of the Lord's Supper. There are a variety of different views. Yes John. Okay. Well that would be kind of who gets to take them. But in terms of what they mean when someone takes the Lord's Supper there are four main views on what it means to take the bread or the wine or the juice.

Yes Bruce. Okay. Consubstantiation. Transubstantiation. Those sound like big words. Memorial. Good. Alright. Does anybody know the fourth. We're going to take a look at those tonight. Well but without telling you what those four are the Lord's Supper is also called communion.

It's called breaking of bread. It's called the Lord's table. It is also called for you Protestants. You may throw stones at me now. It is also called the Eucharist because first Corinthians 11 it says when he had given thanks.

And basically that's what Eucharist means in Greek to give thanks. And so if you say this is a giving thanks that would be fine. It is not proper to call the last supper because that last supper was only one time.

It is not proper to call it a mass. But we come to the Bible. And why don't we just turn our Bibles to first Corinthians chapter 11. And I want to talk a little bit about what we should think about when we take communion what actually happens.

And there are four views. And of course in post-modernism if long as your view is true for you it's true. But we don't believe in post-modernism in terms of that we believe in truth real truth. And so all four could be wrong.

But all four could not be right. And so there are four different views. And I want to make sure that when we have communion in two weeks on Sunday night that you're approaching the table thinking things that are biblical.

And first Corinthians chapter eleven does discuss this. Who else talks about communion besides Paul. Does anyone know? It is found also in three other books. Christ speaks of communion. Yes in Matthew and Luke and Mark the first view of the Lord's Supper as Bruce said is transubstantiation.

And what does that actually mean without Bruce giving us that what is transubstantiation mean. And if you don't remember the word that's okay. Okay the blood and excuse me the bread and the cup are actually the body and blood of Christ.

And which major denomination or religion would believe that Roman Catholics. Yes transubstantiation is when the bread turns into the literal body of Christ and the wine turns into a blood. If you've been to a mass before and you hear that little tinkling of the bell that's the exact moment when it turns into those things Lefranc in one thousand five the Archbishop of Canterbury said quote.

The very body of Christ was truly held in the priest's hand broken and chewed by the teeth of the faithful. Is that true or false. And why? Jesus said in John chapter six. Unless you eat of my body and drink of my blood you will have no part with me.

Does it actually turn into that? No. And why doesn't it turn into it. Or why don't we need it to turn into the real blood and body of Christ. Christ died once. Certainly Hebrews makes that clear. He's not going to have to be offered up again.

Where is Jesus by the way? He's in heaven. He's not there at the time. Yes it is. We don't need some kind of sacrifice as Dallas said to satisfy the demands of God. We are doing this as a memorial. For some of you that know Latin when you I would read this it would be this is my body hoc est meum corpum.

This is my body. And some other people would come along and say if the priest says that this is my body and in fact has turned into Christ's body that is not hoc est meum corpum that is hoc est pocus.

And you think I'm making that up. But I'm not making that up. The priest must be ordained properly. It is a double miracle actually changing Jesus's blood changing the wine into his blood but not changing the appearance of that.

And we would not believe that transubstantiation could be found. The main reason you'll find it. And I know I told you to turn to first Corinthians 11. But if you'll turn to John chapter 6 just quickly because I want to give you a reason that you might answer.

Some of your friends and family members who are Roman Catholic certainly want to be kind to them and give them a real answer. You just don't have to slap them around with some kind of statement. But you want to explain to them Jesus way before Passover was taking place way before he had the Lord's Supper ordained was talking in a certain way when you look at the words to the Jews in John chapter 6 verse 41.

Therefore the Jews were grumbling about Jesus because he said I am the bread that came down out of heaven. They were saying is this not Jesus the son of Joseph whose father and mother we know. How can this Jesus be this person.

He's a local boy. He's a regular man. How does he the son of Joseph the person whose father and mother we know say I have come down from heaven. Jesus answered and said to them do not grumble among yourselves.

No one can come to me unless the father who sent me draws him and I raise him up on the last day. It is written in the prophets. And they shall all be taught of God. Everyone who has heard and learned from the father comes to me.

Not that anyone has seen the father except the one who is from God. He has seen the father. Truly truly I say to you he who believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Now stop right there for a second.

When Jesus says I am the bread of life what. What kind of language is he using. What figure of speech would Jesus be using when he says I am the bread of life. I am bread. Anyone is a metaphor or a simile.

If he said I am like bread it would be simile. If he says I am bread it's a metaphor. He's not saying I'm really bread. He is saying something quite different using medical metaphorical languages language.

And he says there in verse 49 your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness and they died. This is the bread which comes down out of heaven so that one may eat of it and not die. Moving from temporal to spiritual.

I am the living bread that came down out of heaven. If anyone eats this bread he's talking about him he will live forever. And the bread of bread also which I give for the life of the world is my flesh.

Well the Jews how do they respond. Then the Jews began to argue with one another saying how can this man give us his flesh to eat. I mean what's he gonna do. Cut off part of his arm. So Jesus said to them truly truly I say to you unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood you have no life in yourselves.

Hence the Roman Catholic passage where if you're not eating his literal body and blood you don't have any part of Jesus. Verse 55. For my flesh is true food in my body is to true drink. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me and I in him.

Verse 58 this is the bread which came down out of heaven not as the fathers ate and died. He who eats this bread will live forever. And just as Jesus used metaphorical language to say I am the shepherd I am the door I am the bread of life.

He says to that you must partake of me to have eternal life. He's not saying you actually have to eat of me. So faulty reasoning from the get-go. The second view of communion I grew up with and it's not called transubstantiation.

It is called consubstantiation if you don't remember the word that's fine. And this is basically a Lutheran idea. And the Luther realized that the forgiveness of sins could not be found in a piece of bread and some wine actually getting turned into the actual body and blood of Christ.

But there had to be something there and so Luther pretty much reasoned this way true or false God is omnipresent true. If God is omnipresent true or false then God is in the bread. I mean we start working over the kind of pantheism here and a wrong view of omniscience where you know he's in the tree he's in the wood.

And basically Luther was a sacramentalist and he said sadly in the shorter catechism that in the sacrament forgiveness of sins life and salvation are given us. And so the Lutherans would believe that the body of Christ is in with and under the elements.

He would not think you had to sacrifice Jesus again but he would see a real presence of Christ in the elements. The third view that nobody got today is the reform view our spiritual presence view. And you think is this class?

Is this a seminary class? I think it's interesting to know there is no physical presence in the elements but there's some kind of of grace conferred to the people. This was Calvin's view. Robert Soce said not a physical eating and drinking but an inner communion with this person which uses the outward action as an expression of inward spiritual faith.

That is the reform view. And then finally the Zwinglian view. Ulrich Zwingli from Zurich is the memorial view. And that's what we do. There's a memorial and there's no grace conveyed at any time. Well let's go back to first Corinthians chapter 11 and talk a little bit about communion.

When it comes to this memorial view we do it as a memorial. First Corinthians 1124 and when Jesus had given thanks he broke it and said this is my body which is for you do this in remembrance of me. And then you see also congregation verse 25 do this as often as you drink it in remembrance of me.

How many people think the original Bible is written in English. How many people think it might be good to look up a word that is in our English Bible. But find out what the Greek or the Hebrew or the Aramaic might actually say.

What word do you think would be really good to look up in these verses. So we would get the right view of communion. Remember what is happening when the Bible says I want you to remember something. Oh you know the light goes on.

You know continually do it. Okay. Anybody else do you remember the four presidents on Mount Rushmore. Is that kind of remembering what is to remember. Is it an action. Is it all cognitive intellectual remembrance.

Well let's find out how about Genesis chapter 8. Let's try to explain the Bible with the Bible. It's kind of a good way to do it. Genesis chapter 8. The key to all of the flood account Genesis 6, 7, and 8 is found in Genesis chapter 8.

By the way as we're turning there another trick question that I like to think about when we're discussing Noah. Why did God choose Noah to be the one who would be on the ark any reason. Because he was good.

Because he could. Oh I thought you said because he's good. And I was gonna say how long have you been coming to the church. God chose Noah. Because he was good. Because he could. Yes that's always good.

Because God can do whatever he pleases anytime he pleases the way he pleases because he could. If you go back to Genesis chapter 6 verse 9 the typical answer is this is why God chose Noah. Because Noah was a righteous man blameless in his time.

And Noah walked with God. Basically God looked at Noah and said Noah you have such a good life. You get to be the one who's on the ark with your wife with your three sons and their wives. That's it. 8 shut the door.

But we know that's not the case because there is a verse before verse 9 we know a little bit about Noah. And we know that Noah was like us dead in trespasses and sins fallen his mind will emotions and everything were fallen and sinful.

And here is why God chose Noah. And the answer really is what Pat said. But Noah found favor are what's the synonym for favor there in verse 8. Grace in the eyes of the Lord. He didn't merit it he didn't earn it.

He found grace in the eyes of the Lord. And because God did grace him he was blameless righteous and he walked with God. So here we have this man Noah. And in the middle of all the flood story you see chapter 8 verse 1.

Now the water is prevailing the flesh has perished it has been on the land. He's blotted out every living thing. In verse 23 of chapter 7 from man to animals to creeping things to birds in the sky they were blotted out from the earth and only Noah was left together with those who were with him in the ark.

The water prevailed upon the earth 150 days. But God did what remembered Noah. Oh yeah I kinda was was doing a bunch of spiritual warfare with Satan and I was thinking about people in the future. And I was talking to Jesus an inner trinity Trinitarian discussion.

And I forgot about Noah. And so for a hundred and fifty days he was forgetting Noah. And then he he had a V8 moment he remembered Noah and thought yeah that's right. How can remember. Just be remember recall to bring to our minds.

It doesn't mean some kind of objective memory image of something can't just be that. Listen to these verses as I'm trying to develop this judges 1628. Then Samson called to the Lord and said oh Lord God please remember me and please strengthen me just this time oh God that I may at once be avenged of the Philistines for my two eyes.

Samson said God remember me. Hannah said in chapter 1 of 1st Samuel. And she made a vow and said oh Lord of hosts if thou will indeed look on my affliction of thy maidservant and remember me and not forget thy maidservant but will give thy maidservant a son.

Then I will give to him the Lord all the days of my life. And a razor shall never touch his head. When the thief on the cross was there he looked over Jesus and said Jesus what. Remember me. When you come in your kingdom remember my it remembering in the Bible specially here in the Old Testament is more than action that is directed towards someone else.

It is not some kinda psychological thing. When God remembers Noah it spurs him on to do something. In this case send the wind. God remembered Noah by what. Sending the wind you see it in chapter 8 verse 1 of Genesis.

But God remembered Noah and all the beast and all the cattle that were with him in the ark. And since he remembered him God did something about it. God caused a wind to pass over the earth and the water subsided.

When God does something I mean when God remembers he does something about it. So now let's think about for us when we are having communion and it's remembering time. Do this remembers me. Would it be good to say God I'm taking the bread now or I'm taking the cup.

And I remember that I'm sinful and my only way of salvation was your son. I'm remembering that. Would that be good to do. Yes. Would it be good to say a God thank you for Jesus because without him there's no other way that I could be right in your eyes.

And I remember that. Would that be good to do. Yes. Would it be good to say I'm glad Jesus had to only die once and there was a great propitiatory sacrifice. God your wrath was poured out on Jesus. He drank the cup to the fullest and he did that in my place.

And I would have killed you God if I could have. But Jesus loved me more than than my hate was for you. And I remember that and I am so unworthy. Thank you. Would that be good to remember. And the list could go on and on and on.

But if Hebrew idea of remembering means there's action involved what would be the good action when you come to the Lord's table and say God I'm remembering what you have done. Now what should the action be.

Anybody. What would be some good action on our part when we remember Jesus Christ. Do this in remembrance of me. God give me a greater grace so I might obey you. God I know I have fallen short and I've sinned this week and I don't want to and God grant me obedience.

I am pledging to you obedience now. That would be good. Any other action that should be involved when you take communion repentance. Okay. Good. I think you're getting the idea God would you help me to live with greater dependence on you in every aspect of my life.

God would you help me to stop relying on my own self and rely fully on you. So when Jesus says and then Paul says in first Corinthians 11 do this in remembrance of me there's a mental part and then there's an action oriented part.

So all that to say when you come to the table you don't get grace put in you. It's like me being Lutheran. I told you the story I could be drunk and walk up to the front and then have the bread and wine.

I feel like it would go in me and I could feel the kind of the hot wine. The wine wasn't hot but it seemed like that it had the hot alcohol feeling go down in my throat. I could feel almost as it were in my mind this is all wrong.

But in my mind I could feel the presence of the Spirit of God and God's grace kind of go down into my stomach and I would think I am pleasing God by taking that on the flip side we're doing this is a memorial remembering what Jesus have has done and then saying with a new pledge I want to be greater in my degree of faithfulness to you.

Alright well by the way when it comes to to using these symbols should we use wine or grape juice. Does it matter? There was a Methodist dentist and he didn't like it that the church used fermented wine in communion service and he wanted to come up with a non-alcoholic grape beverage because there were none at the time and his name was Dr. Thomas Welch and he came up with Dr. Welch's unfermented wine and he tried to go to the church officials and persuade them but they thought it was kind of innovation.

You know anything new must not be any good. A son Charles who is also a dentist changed the name to Welch's grape juice and he set up the production facility in a barn behind the family home. Response was so overwhelming that he gave up dentistry and devoted himself full-time to making grape juice.

We use juice. If you go to a church that uses wine sometimes they'll have on the inner circle the wine on the outer circle the juice. We just use grape juice. Here we try to use unleavened bread because one time someone came to me and said this is bread that has leaven in it.

Leaven's always evil. When I take leavened bread I think of evil and I can't see any leaven or evil in Jesus when I take the bread. And so it's kind of messing my conscience up. And so I said well you're so immature.

Get behind me Satan is what I said. No I didn't say that and I just thought you know what. For the sake of the one that was thinking about all this leaven. Leaven isn't always sinful. Sometimes leaven is just a permeating influence.

Well then why don't we just use unleavened bread and we'll break that and that'll be fine. And so why do we do that. Just we're not told that we have to use wine and we have to use actual Passover bread cooked in two thousand-year-old kilns or anything like that.

All right. Question number two tonight what would you respond to with more fervent obedience. God's audible voice or God's written word. If God spoke to you from Sinai. Are you read Psalm 1. Which one would you attempt to obey quicker and faster.

And why. This almost ties into this morning's message. There is basically a movement and it's very broad and so I can't speak for all of them. But there's emergent church scene coming on very quickly and permeating everything.

Certainly it's been around for several years and there's overall not in every case but overall a very negative view of scripture. And if God would say something from Sinai or say it in his word I think I should have the same due diligence and determination to obey him.

What's the difference. There is no difference. But the emergent church there they're saying things about the Bible that I don't like for instance in a book called velvet Elvis repainting the Christian faith this man said and I won't say his name because it would shame him.

It is not possible to simply do what the Bible says. We must first make decisions about what it means at this time in this place for these people. He talked about how Bible could be used to defend slavery and mistreating women.

And then he said sometimes quote when I hear people quote the Bible I just want to throw up. Well I believe all scripture is inspired. I believe it is profitable for teaching reproof correction for training in righteousness.

I believe that Paul was recognized as a scripture writer when Peter said some things are very difficult that Paul writes but they are scripture. I believe that Paul in first Timothy chapter 5 quoted Jesus and Deuteronomy within the same set of verses saying this is what scripture says.

And I believe church history has shown that Christian people believe that the Word of God is exactly that the Word of God. George Marsden who's no evangelical surveyed 85 percent of the students in a large evangelical seminary and they said they do not believe in the inerrancy of scripture.

Beyond that he pulled 10 ,000 clergymen in the US 74 percent replied and they said this when asked the question do you believe the scriptures are inspired and inerrant in faith history and secular matters.

The Episcopalians of which 95 percent said no. The students who are Methodist 87 percent said no. The Presbyterian said 82 percent no. 77 percent of American Lutheran said no. 67 percent of American Baptist said no.

What do you say. It is amazing to me that people will mess around with the Word of God when we have the Bible in Matthew chapter 5, 6, and 7 Jesus speaking or anyplace else. Would those words be Jesus's exact words.

I'm talking exact words or does it even matter. Are you ready for the big seminary words for tonight. You thought transubstantiation and consubstantiation were bigger. Here's the controversy. I'll tell you the controversy in the big words to kinda impress you.

No I won't do that. I'm way beyond that. Not that my heart's beyond trying to impress you but you already know me too. Well for that to happen. These are the two perspectives. And then we'll talk about them.

So if you ever read some commentary and they're talking about it you'll understand there are two views about Jesus's words. Are they his literal words verbatim. Or are they the gist of things. Kinda close.

Are they just talking about. Here we go. Ipsissima Vox or Ipsissima Verba. It's just kinda fun to say those words. I feel like I'm speaking in tongues. Ipsissima Verba or Ipsissima Vox. Are these the voice of Jesus generally the general tenor of Jesus.

Vox. Is it the voice of Jesus. We know he's speaking. But it might not be exactly that. Ipsissima Vox. Or are these the exact words of Jesus. Ipsissima Verba. The exact words or just the voice of why would it even matter.

I mean come on. Do we really need to have the exact words of Jesus. Or is just the voice. Fine. What do we do. Do you think Matthew chapter 5 when Jesus gives the Beatitudes are his exact words. I mean exact.

Are they just the voice of Jesus. We kind of have an idea. Well here's what people will say. Would you believe that evangelicals in America to the high 90s. Well I'm just making up things. But yeah I'm using hyperbolic language.

There are very many people at big seminaries large seminaries institutions that are big and large and have been faithful for a long time found in Texas and other places. They would say mainly it is Ipsissima Vox the voice of Jesus not the words of Jesus.

And they would say how can we have the real words of Jesus when Jesus spoke in Aramaic and the New Testaments in Greek. What would you say to someone who said you know how can we know anyway he spoke in Aramaic and the things written in Greek.

Something had to be lost in the translation. How would you respond to such reasoning anyone. Yes. Okay so the words are inspired. Yes. I think that's a good response. You could give them the sermon from this morning might be a response.

Here's what Jesus thought about the historicity of the Old Testament. Can you prove that Jesus. Gladman go ahead. Okay the preservation of God's Word. But come on Jesus spoke in Aramaic and the text is in Greek.

Okay so now we have superintending the translation now. Well that's pretty good. So now you've got a God who reveals inspires, illumines and then oversees translation. Wow. That's Ipsissima Translationa.

Yes Bruce. Alright there were three main languages of the day. And the burden of proof is the people who somehow say Jesus spoke Aramaic. Did Jesus speak Aramaic? Yes. Did he speak Hebrew? Yes. And did he speak Greek?

Yes. That's the argument you always hear from people. We do not have the real words of Jesus. It's the voice as one scholar said Daryl Bach it's the gist of what Jesus said in an article called is it live or is it Memorex.

It's the gist of it all. When he says Jesus spoke Aramaic how could he really have the words of Jesus. I think that is frightening. Jesus actually was trilingual Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. Remember Alexander the Great was a conqueror.

And what did he bring into the Middle East. He brought in all kinds of things. The lingua franca of the day was certainly in the Roman Empire at this time Greek. When you see the writer of Hebrews quoting the Old Testament I wonder what language he quotes.

He quotes the Greek version of the Hebrew language that the Hebrew Christians in Israel used when Jesus speaks of the Old Testament most to the time he quotes the Greek version of the Hebrew language.

Do any of the apostles have Greek names. Andrew and Philip Peter had three names one Hebrew one Aramaic and one Greek. He was named Simon Cephas and Peter. He wrote two epistles Peter did in Greek in Matthew 1618.

In the Greek text Jesus plays on the difference between the words Petras and Petra in Greek. Where in Aramaic and in Hebrew you couldn't do the word play. Stephen in Acts 7 quotes the Greek Old Testament.

James in Acts 15 quotes the Greek Old Testament. Jesus must have spoke Greek when he was talking to the Syrophoenician woman who was a Greek the Roman centurion Pilate. Did he sometimes speak Aramaic.

Yes. And we hear from the text in Aramaic Talitha Koum which is translated little girl to you I say arise. Those few transliterations in languages other than Greek should support that it was not customary for Jesus to speak in Aramaic because now we're getting the translation.

They're making a point that this is an exceptional case. Dr. Robert Thomas said. Quote. No one has an airtight case for concluding whether they are Jesus's very words. Are there the gist of what Jesus said.

For one whose predisposition is toward evangelicalism and its primary focus on the human element of inspiration scripture he will incline toward if system a box the voice of Jesus. For the one whose inclination leads him to place a high premium on the spirit spartan spirits part inspiration he will certainly lean towards system a verbal yes.

It's a document put together now written by men but it's overseen by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Do I believe these are the exact words of Jesus in the sermon on the Mount. I believe they're exact and I believe he preached them in Greek so you could write them down in Greek.

Comments about that are questions. You think what does it matter. I'm just trying to let you know you could trust the Bible and don't let anybody tell you. It's the voice of Jesus not his actual words.

We call that something else. We call that neo-orthodoxy. When someone says these parts of the Bible over here about God's wrath and judgment all that stuff they're not really scripture but these parts over here that he loves me with an everlasting love.

Those speak to me. Therefore they must be true. We believe all the Bible is all true. Yes yes. It's a moral problem isn't it. That's exactly right. We either stand under the text or over it. Yes. I'll never forget when Ligon Duncan got up in front of 3 ,000 preachers last March and said if you can take the Bible where Paul says in a church context context and church setting where I do not allow women to exercise authority over men and you can turn it into I do allow women to exercise authority over men.

Then you can make the Bible say anything. So we either stand under it or over it. Okay here's my next question. Are you a Hindu. What kind of question is that. Alright let me temper it a little bit. Has Hinduism influenced your Christianity.

Has Hinduism affected America at all. As we have had this religion come over to America. Has it affected Christianity, religion at large, or has it affected even you. Now when I went over to India a couple times and Lord willing I'll be going over in January.

I just got my tickets. I thought it was interesting when I saw Western influence in India, Bollywood Bombay Hollywood put the words together. You get Bollywood. They make many many movies more than maybe Hollywood now.

Yes true Bollywood. I'd go over there. And when I couldn't take curry anymore for breakfast lunch and dinner I like Indian food. But I just had to slip away for a subway sandwich or a pizza hut. Tikka chicken pizza.

I saw boy we've influenced this country some but more than that I've been struck by the influence of Hinduism in mainstream Christianity. We kind of think it's some kind of religion that's different. But we have been infiltrated big-time on a secular level.

You tell me who said this. The force is an energy field created by all living things. It surrounds us penetrates us. It binds the galaxy together. It is all-powerful and controls everything. Obi-Wan Kenobi Star Wars character.

Very good. The television series Dharma and Greg Dharma means what. By the way it is a Hebrew Hindu term for moral duty. The Lion King. I don't know what's so funny young man. But I'll try to make it funnier.

So your laugh will match up to what I say. How about the Lion King. There's no creator. We have a circle of what circle of life. All is one. The star is one. The stars are Simba's father. It does sound funny doesn't it.

Once you start laughing you just can't go back. Hindu chant. George Harrison of the Beatles. My sweet what Lord. What's going on back there Brian. That's why I usually don't point to the sound booth and ask for wisecracks.

My karma ran over my dogma. Well certainly affected society. But what about the church. Satan is very tricky. He is very clever. And I like what the Puritan John Flavel said by entertaining strange persons.

Men sometimes entertain entertain angels unawares. But by entertaining strange doctrines many have entertained devils unaware. Satan wants us to think like a Hindu especially in this regard that there is no truth.

Your truth is your truth. My truth is my truth. There's nothing black and white right or wrong. Antithetical thinking is out the window. New age people claim no external source of authority only the internal one the God within.

As Shirley MacLaine said it's all in the plane. Truth as an objective reality simply does not exist. When I was a kid I used to listen to the radio a lot and we would listen to a song and it would go.

This is the dawning of the age the age of what Aquarius in the age of Aquarius is no evil no good liberation from all kinds of ethics. We don't want the guilt. We want to explore ourselves sexually. Forget the mores forget God.