Hank Smith: 00:01 Welcome to followHIM, a weekly podcast dedicated to helping individuals and families with their Come Follow Me study. I’m Hank Smith.

John Bytheway: 00:09 And I’m John Bytheway.

Hank Smith: 00:11 We love to learn.

John Bytheway: 00:11 We love to laugh.

Hank Smith: 00:13 We want to learn and laugh with you.

John Bytheway: 00:15 As together we follow Him.

Hank Smith: 00:20 Hello my friends. Welcome to another episode of followHIM. My name is Hank Smith. I’m your host and I’m here with my miraculous co-host John Bytheway. John, we are starting with Jesus’ first public miracle today and I thought you’re kind of a miraculous guy. When I think of all that you’ve done, all the books you’ve published, all the talks on cassette, if anybody remembers those.

John Bytheway: 00:43 Well, when I introduced my dad to my fiancé, he said it was a miracle too, so I appreciate that.

Hank Smith: 00:51 So, we get to spend our entire day in the Gospel of John today, three chapters, chapters two, three, and four. We needed somebody who knows the scriptures backwards and forwards and we found him, John. Who’s with us today?

John Bytheway: 01:05 Well, I’ve been looking forward to this for a long time, to have Dr. Robert L. Millet back with us again. Robert L. Millet, former Dean of Religious Education at Brigham Young University is a professor emeritus of ancient scripture. After receiving bachelors and masters degrees from BYU in psychology, he earned a PhD from Florida State University in religious studies. Brother Millet is a beloved speaker and the author of numerous books.

  01:31 He and his wife Shauna are the parents of six children. On a personal note, I remember, I may have told you this last year when we had Dr. Millet before, but right after I got called to be bishop, I was getting on a 767, if you know what that is, there’s a lot of seats on that particular airliner, having some angst. And the Lord put me right across the aisle from Robert L. Millet.

Hank Smith: 01:55 Oh wow.

John Bytheway: 01:55 And I wrote him a note and said, “I’m trying to find some joy in this calling. It’s challenging me.” And he wrote me this beautiful response, which I kept in my triple combination ever since. So, he’s been a friend and a mentor to me and so we’re delighted to have him here. Welcome Dr. Millet.

Dr. Robert Millet: 02:16 Thank you. By the way, if you’ll give me that back, I will try to publish it. Okay?

John Bytheway: 02:22 It was that good. I think I had it laminated.

Hank Smith: 02:25 That’s fantastic. That rarely happens, John, to sit next to someone you know on an airplane, especially that size.

John Bytheway: 02:33 That size. We were not going to the same place. He was going some place… In fact, Pastor Greg Johnson was on that same flight. I don’t know if you remember that. You were going to some conference in Atlanta and so was I, but it was not the same thing. But the Lord put us right there and I was able to really get some help. So, that was a tender mercy to have you there. I appreciate that.

Hank Smith: 02:55 Yeah, that’s a really great story.

Dr. Robert Millet: 02:56 I remember it very well. Don’t remember what I told you, but I remember the occasion.

John Bytheway: 03:01 It was about half a page, but it was golden.

Hank Smith: 03:02 That’s just unfair.

John Bytheway: 03:04 Yeah.

Hank Smith: 03:05 Let’s jump in here, Bob. We are in the Gospel of John entirely. How should we enter into these chapters? Is there anything we want to know about the Gospel of John before we jump in, or should we just jump into John two?

Dr. Robert Millet: 03:17 John stands alone in so many ways. I forget what the figures are, but a high percentage, 90% of John is exclusive to John.

John Bytheway: 03:27 92% according to, I think you.

Hank Smith: 03:31 According to you.

John Bytheway: 03:32 In the Religion 211 Student Manual, there’s a chart that I think came from a book that you had something to do with that kind of showed 92% of John is unique.

Dr. Robert Millet: 03:44 This one is written for the church. This is called the spiritual gospel. I love all the New Testament, but I have to say when I want comfort, peace, settlement of my heart, I’m often reading either John or the epistles of John. John has conversations between people recorded that are priceless.

Hank Smith: 04:05 Long conversations with Jesus.

Dr. Robert Millet: 04:07 Long conversations of very different kinds of people.

Hank Smith: 04:12 Where the other gospels have sermons, the Gospel of John does seem to have these private conversations.

Dr. Robert Millet: 04:17 That’s right. The other thing I’d say about these conversations is very often what you see is Jesus speaking on one level and the people understanding on a different level. If it’s Nicodemus, he says, “Born again,” and Nicodemus says, “Birth.” If it’s the woman at the well, he says, “I have water.” She says, “Water?”

John Bytheway: 04:36 What? You didn’t bring anything. Yeah.

Dr. Robert Millet: 04:37 It’s just fascinating how that goes. Even into chapter 21 to Peter, “Lovest thou me?” “Peter, do you love me and with a godlike love? I love you like a brother.” “Peter, do you love me with godlike love? I just love you like a brother.” “Now Peter, do you love me with godlike love? I love you with godlike love.” It’s people hearing him, even his own apostles, they’ve been gone for food and they come back and he says, “I have food of this sort,” and they, “Oh, where did you get the food? Did you go to the market? We didn’t see you.”

Hank Smith: 05:11 We don’t remember you getting bread.

Dr. Robert Millet: 05:13 And so even the apostles sometimes, it shows there are levels of understanding here and I just love these chapters.

Hank Smith: 05:19 That’s awesome. Let’s just jump in. John chapter two. We spent some time in John chapter one with Dr. Eric Huntsman. Chapter two, where do you want to start?

Dr. Robert Millet: 05:29 Let’s start with verse one and I’ll read a few verses. In fact, we’ll read one and talk about it. “And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee and the mother of Jesus was there.” I think most scholars believe that the expression third day refers to it’s been three days since Jesus’ words to Nathaniel, or the baptism of Jesus. Third day since then, which is what is in chapter one. “Both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage and when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, they have no wine. Jesus saith unto her, ‘Woman, what have I to do with thee? Mine hour is not yet come.'”

  06:09 Marriages back then were generally handled in this way. It was the groom’s responsibility to provide funds for the occasion. The bride marched with the group to the groom’s home. It was an occasion that lasted sometimes up to a week. In terms of the story here, the Mishnah, which would be the rabbinic commentary of some of the teachings of the Old Testament, which was in an oral tradition for many, many years and wasn’t really written down until about 200 AD. The Mishnah says that a virgin, her wedding should always be on a Wednesday, for whatever that’s worth.

  06:49 I don’t know if it held true in that day, but that’s what the Mishnah suggested. What else? Village of Cana. Cana is only mentioned in the Gospel of John and is mentioned twice, here and in chapter 21. Approximately nine miles north of Nazareth, so from where Jesus had lived his early life. One apocryphal tradition holds that Mary was the aunt of the groom. Another tradition holds to the fact that the one being married was John, and if both of those are true, that would mean that Jesus would’ve been a cousin to James and John, but that’s just what authorities through the generations or traditions have held. We don’t know anything doctrinally that way, but clearly Mary seems to be concerned about what’s going on.

Hank Smith: 07:38 And involved, right? Yeah.

Dr. Robert Millet: 07:40 Very involved. In fact, scholars have said, “Why is she so troubled?” I’ve read where some scholars say, “She’s just stating a fact to Jesus.” “We have no wine.” We have no wine. But the way it’s put in the Gospel of John, it’s very clear she’s intending and hoping he’ll do something to solve the problem. Verse four, “Woman, what have I to do with thee?” Over and over I’ve heard people say, “Well, that’s a pretty disrespectful way of addressing your mother.” It isn’t. As Elder Talmage says in Jesus the Christ. It’s a lovely way to address your mother. Remember, Jesus uses that same word with Mary at the time he’s on the cross.

  08:15 “Woman, behold thy son.” He’s certainly not being disrespectful. The other reason it can’t be disrespectful is this, we know Jesus is the only one to be perfect. We know he is the only one that never committed a sin. We know that he was perfect in all ways. That’s hard for us to comprehend, us imperfect types, but he was. If that’s true, then it’s hard to conceive that he’s therefore going to be disrespectful to his mother, which is rude, which is in a way sinful. It reminded me of a story Joseph McConkie told me. He said, “I was teaching the New Testament, we’re well into the gospels and this one young woman raised her hand and said, ‘I have something to say,'” and he said, “Sure. What?” She said, “I think Jesus is being very unchristlike here.” And Joseph said, “Is that possible?”

  09:13 The principle coming out of this is I think it’s wise for serious readers of the New Testament to assume the best about Jesus.

John Bytheway: 09:21 And the JST softens that a little bit.

Dr. Robert Millet: 09:24 Yes, it does. Won’t you read it?

John Bytheway: 09:25 The footnote down below, if you’re using paper scriptures like I do, it says, “Woman, what wilt thou have me do for thee, that will I do. For mine hour is not yet come.”

Dr. Robert Millet: 09:38 To me, that’s simply a way of saying, “What would you like me to do? My mission hasn’t formally begun and I’ve got a little time.” Isn’t that sort of what he’s saying?

Hank Smith: 09:46 Yep.

John Bytheway: 09:47 You mentioned this, but I feel like it’s a little bit… I hear stuff like this in marriage seminars about direct communication, because Mary just says they have no wine and there’s no “therefore,” there’s just kind of, “Okay, you’re supposed to figure out what I’m thinking. They have no wine.” “Well, what do you want me to do about that?” And Jesus says that, “What would you like me to do?” So, he gets it when she uses that kind of indirect, “They have no wine.” I mean my response might have been, “Wow, that’s a problem. That’s too bad.”

Dr. Robert Millet: 10:19 Verse five clearly indicates that she’s expecting something from him. Correct?

John Bytheway: 10:24 That’s a good word. She’s expecting a response.

Dr. Robert Millet: 10:27 Do something, do whatever he tells you to do. We say this is the first public miracle, but we don’t know that there weren’t miracles performed by Jesus before this.

Hank Smith: 10:37 Sure sounds like she has something in mind where she says, “Hey, whatever he tells you to do, do it. No matter how it sounds, you do it anyway.” So, it does imply. I think it implies some previous experience, don’t you, Bob?

Dr. Robert Millet: 10:49 I do. I think that he has performed miracles before. If that’s not true, then I don’t know why she would come up with that. If she has no experience with him doing something miraculous, why suppose he’s going to do it here?

John Bytheway: 11:02 I don’t know how he’s going to do this, but whatever he says, do it.

Hank Smith: 11:06 Whatever he tells you to do, you do it.

John Bytheway: 11:07 Yeah.

Dr. Robert Millet: 11:08 Verse six, “There were set there six waterpots of stone after the manner of the purifying of the Jews concerning two or three firkins a piece.” This would’ve been water that was used for cleansing, for purification purposes. The estimate by most New Testament thinkers is they would have held about 20 to 30 gallons of water each, meaning at least around 150 gallons of water to begin with. Jesus gives instructions, fill them with water, they fill them. “And he saith unto them, ‘Draw out now and bear unto the governor of the feast.'”

  11:45 The governor of the feast was often a relative, someone who had responsibility for the oversight of the occasion. We might have called him the head waiter or we might have called him the master of ceremonies. The person that’s overseeing this, generally a relative. Verse nine, “When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine and knew not whence it was, but the servants which drew the water knew, the governor of the feast called the bridegroom and saith unto him, ‘Every man at the beginning does set forth good wine and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse, but thou has kept the good wine until now.'”

  12:28 We learn a little tradition that is in a typical Jewish wedding, they serve good wine to begin with and after a while when people can’t tell the difference, you serve them real-

John Bytheway: 12:36 Exactly.

Hank Smith: 12:37 The watered down stuff.

Dr. Robert Millet: 12:39 Yeah. Wood alcohol. The interesting thing here of course is that he changed the substance of the water. I remember Brother Matthews making a comment. He said, “Isn’t it interesting that when he performed this miracle, he not only changed the substance, he dated it. He dated the wine.” Why? Because we’re talking about fermentation.

John Bytheway: 13:01 By definition it’s aged.

Dr. Robert Millet: 13:03 That’s right. It’s aged. If you had a little conversation, someone drinks it at that moment says, “Whoa, this is good. I think this must be 20 BC.” But one of the people who were there and saw it would say, “No, no, he just did it a few minutes ago.” “I’m telling you this is 20.” He aged it, which I think is very interesting.

John Bytheway: 13:24 I remember Brother Matthews going through with us the types of miracles Jesus did. Did he have power over men? Yes. Women? Yes. Children? Yes.

Dr. Robert Millet: 13:34 Gentiles.

John Bytheway: 13:36 Gentiles? Yes. Plants? Yes. Animals? Yes. And then he said time and he brought up this, about this wine must have been aged and which we all kind of went, “Whoa,” at that point, but that’s an interesting thought.

Dr. Robert Millet: 13:52 Maybe sometimes the way we measure time or how old something is, maybe occasionally it’s not as long as we thought.

John Bytheway: 14:01 No.

Hank Smith: 14:02 Yeah.

Dr. Robert Millet: 14:03 Let’s go on. Verse 11 says, “His disciples believed on him.” Well, of course they did. “After then he went down to Capernaum, he and his mother.” I suppose if you say, where’s Jesus’ home, most people would think he resided in Capernaum, but it’s home in italics, because he often wasn’t home. But Capernaum seems to be where he and some of the disciples had been from.

Hank Smith: 14:28 It seems to me that John’s readers know that Jesus can perform great miracles, if they’ve already maybe even read Matthew, Mark and Luke. Why does John come along and give us this as a miracle? It’s not bringing sight back to the blind. Why do you think he lists this one first? Do you think there’s something in there for his modern current reader?

Dr. Robert Millet: 14:49 Well, if you’re talking about a miracle that changes the elements of a substance, you’re talking about a God-like power. To heal someone is very significant, but to put upon a substance your hands basically, and it changes in type, that’s a different kind of miracle even than a nature miracle.

Hank Smith: 15:12 This is kind of a creation type.

Dr. Robert Millet: 15:13 It is. It seems like a God-like thing, something that only a God could do.

John Bytheway: 15:19 Moses was such a powerful type of Christ in so many ways, and it’s interesting to me that his first miracle or plague through Moses that God did, was turning water to blood. And I’ve wondered about, “Oh, here’s Jesus turning water to wine.” Also, the idea of six waterpots, that number six being almost complete, almost whole, of the law of Moses and then Jesus doing something greater with that is kind of prefiguring what he was going to do and fulfill the law of Moses.

Dr. Robert Millet: 15:56 Moses is a type of the Messiah.

John Bytheway: 15:59 Yeah. So, what do you think about that? Do you think we’re supposed to see that, or is that just kind of a fun one?

Dr. Robert Millet: 16:06 I remember the first time I read Elder McConkie’s The Promised Messiah, and I came across this one page, and I’m not remembering the page number, but he said, “It’s healthy to look for symbolism and likenesses, things that point you to Jesus, to his ministry, to his life.” I think what you’re talking about is, yes, I mean we don’t always know if something’s intended, but if it strikes you as a testimony of the Savior, then it’s a healthy experience.

John Bytheway: 16:34 Yeah. Turning water to wine, we actually in the early days of the church used wine for the sacrament and representing the blood of Christ, and I kind of wondered if that correlates nicely there.

Dr. Robert Millet: 16:45 Yeah, I think so.

Hank Smith: 16:46 Another one that’s probably not intended, but I like is his ability to change things. If he can change water into wine, he can change someone who feels like they’re a bad soul into a good soul.

Dr. Robert Millet: 16:58 And someone who’s deathly ill into a healthy person.

Hank Smith: 17:01 Right.

John Bytheway: 17:02 And one more thing before we move on. There were days when we went through some verbal gymnastics to try to say that this wasn’t fermented wine, this was just grape juice. The Religion 211 Manual, I like the way it puts this. It just says, “In our day the Lord has revealed the word of wisdom, which does forbid consumption of alcoholic beverages. We should avoid judging the people of earlier dispensations by the commandments the Lord has given us in our day.” So, I think it was probably fermented wine, right?

Dr. Robert Millet: 17:34 It was wine, or you would call it grape juice. Let’s just make a quick comment about the cleansing of the temple. It can be discussed in greater detail when you get to the last part of Matthew, for example, and Luke. This would be an early cleansing. I would have to say most New Testament scholars do not think there are two cleansings of the temple. They think that doesn’t make sense. I don’t know. I think about it and I think the problem existed then and it existed three years later. The place had been turned into a den of robbers, so I don’t have a problem believing that this is the first cleansing of the temple and that the second cleansing takes place near that last week of the Savior’s life.

Hank Smith: 18:13 After the triumphal entry.

Dr. Robert Millet: 18:15 Right.

John Bytheway: 18:16 I just love that it shows us how the Savior regarded the temple. It was a sacred place to him. And we’ve been seeing that already in the New Testament.

Dr. Robert Millet: 18:24 Someone else wrote this and I think it’s really a good description. “Upon his arrival, Jesus would’ve found Jerusalem teeming with Jewish pilgrims from all over the Roman world there to celebrate this foremost of Jewish feast. Because of the multitudes who came, Passover meant big business for Jerusalem based merchants. And the temple complex,” which we would sort of say Temple Square. And by the way, when it says Jesus went into the temple, it’s he’s not going into the temple building, he wouldn’t have gone, they wouldn’t have let him go in the temple. He went on Temple Square.

  18:58 Going on, “Where they had set up shop,” probably in the court of the Gentiles. “Vendors were selling oxen and sheep and doves and the money changers were seated at their tables. Since it was impractical to those traveling from distant lands to bring their own animals, the merchants sold them the animals required for the sacrifices at greatly inflated prices. The money changers also provided a necessary service. Every Jewish male, 20 years of age or older, had to pay the annual temple tax, but it could be paid using only Jewish coins because of the purity of their silver content. So, foreigners had to exchange their money for acceptable coinage, because they had a monopoly on the market. The money changers charged an exorbitant fee for their services.”

  19:49 F.F. Bruce, who’s a great conservative Christian scholar, wrote commentary on the Gospel of John, a commentary. He suggested that evidence says that up to 12 and a half percent more than they should have charged.

Hank Smith: 20:02 If you’ve got the monopoly on it, what are you going to do? Well, sorry.

John Bytheway: 20:06 That’s what we call usury.

Dr. Robert Millet: 20:09 That’s right. That’s usury. And of course the question comes up in verse 18, “What signs shewest thou unto us seeing thou doest these things?” There are two ways you could look at that. I guess there are 20, but there are two I’m thinking of. Literally they could be saying, “What sign or miracle?” And he says, “Destroy this temple. In three days I will raise it up,” and he was talking about his body. We’ll come back to that. Or it could just be by what authority do you do these things? What authority do you do this?

Hank Smith: 20:39 To walk into this temple and do what you just did?

Dr. Robert Millet: 20:43 Remember John one, basically they’re saying to John the Baptist, “By what authority are you performing?” They don’t say, “What are you doing? Hey, what is that you’re doing?” No, they know what he’s doing. He’s baptizing. “By what authority do you do it?” Jesus says, “Oh, I’ll give you a great sign. I’ll be put to death in three days. I’ll come back to life.” Notice verse 20. They said to Jesus, “Forty and six years was this temple in building and wilt thou rear it up in three days?”

  21:11 The temple there had begun being built in 17 BC and it went until 30 AD. 17 BC would’ve been back in the 18th year of Herod the Great, they’d been working on it for 46 years. That seems like a long time, but when we think about how long it took us to build the Salt Lake temple, it took 40 years. “But he spake of the temple of his body. When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them.” Later in Matthew 26, that same kind of thing will come up. They’ll remember the cleansing and say it was his body about which he spoke.

Hank Smith: 21:43 This is one of those points you talked about, Bob, where he says one thing and they hear-

John Bytheway: 21:48 Something else.

Dr. Robert Millet: 21:50 That’s right.

John Bytheway: 21:50 And I think that verse 22 is important. We’ve talked about this a little bit, Hank, the idea that the gospels were kind of written after the resurrection and that it seems like at the time a lot of the apostles were in a state of not fully knowing what was going on. So, this verse 22 is clarifying. After he was resurrected from the dead, “Hey, yeah, he did say that, didn’t he?” And they remembered all this stuff.

Dr. Robert Millet: 22:15 I don’t know what your previous guest told you about dating and we’re never sure about that, but I think we usually conclude that John and the epistles of John were written fairly late. John could have been as late as 90 AD and the epistle somewhere around 95, 96. So, John would’ve had many years to reflect upon this story. And you notice how John blends in, much as Moroni or Mormon does in the text, the Book of Mormon, some commentary here and there. Okay, let’s go to chapter three. “There was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews,” and when we say a ruler of the Jews, we mean someone who belongs to the highest governing body of the Jews, which was called the Sanhedrin, made up of 70 members made up of scribes who would’ve been Pharisees, the priests who would’ve been Sadducees and other aristocratic types in town making up that body.

  23:07 And the body is presided over by the high priest, the senior high priest as it were there in the temple complex. “The same came to Jesus by night and said unto him,” let’s pause there. By night. There seem to be, and we don’t often notice this as we’re reading along, even in the first chapter of Acts you find reference made to many of the priests believed on him, but did not get public with it because of the fear they had for being put out of the synagogue. Clearly, Nicodemus has seen some things, has heard some things. He comes by night. I presume it’s because there’s a lot at stake in his case. He’s prominent in the Sanhedrin and known, as we’ll see in a few moments, known as one of the great teachers. Comes by night, so as not to be noticed, not to be seen, which I don’t think that’s too sinful. It seems to me like he’s doing what he needs to do. I want to have a conversation with Jesus.

John Bytheway: 24:08 Yeah, I want to find out.

Dr. Robert Millet: 24:09 Yeah. And this language, “The same came to Jesus by night said unto him, ‘Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God, for no man can do these miracles that thou doest except God be with him.'” That’s a great tribute to him, isn’t it? A teacher come from God, because you’ve done so many miracles. And then it’s as if Jesus answers the question that Nicodemus may have had in his mind. I’m wondering if Nicodemus didn’t have in his mind, “What must I do to gain eternal life?” What seems to be everybody’s question. But Jesus answers it before he asks it. And the answer is, verse three, “Verily, verily I say unto thee, except a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.’

  24:56 Nicodemus saith unto him, ‘How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb and be born?'” I want to talk about that. This is the one where I’m going to take a different slant. Latter-day Saints have usually interpreted this as, well, Nicodemus is pretty ignorant of what this is all about and-

Hank Smith: 25:14 Metaphor.

Dr. Robert Millet: 25:15 Yeah. Yeah. He just doesn’t know. He’s missed the whole thing. I don’t think so. I’ve read this so many times and what comes to my mind is this, I thought of Ebenezer Scrooge, “I’m too old to change,” he said. I think Nicodemus is saying, “Do you realize what you’re asking me to do? Can you conceive what you’re saying to me that I would have to do to gain eternal life?” I think it’s his way of saying, “I’m not sure I can pull this off.

Hank Smith: 25:44 Can an old dog learn new tricks?

Dr. Robert Millet: 25:46 Can an old dog learn new tricks? I don’t think he’s ignorant at all. This is the man that’s very bright and he seems to be a very righteous man. I don’t think he misunderstands. Let me give you, for example, I just made a few notes. The doctrine of spiritual rebirth is not just a New Testament doctrine. I’m going to read from a couple of Old Testament passages. Here’s from Jeremiah 31. “This shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel. After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts and write it in their hearts and will be their God and they shall be my people.”

  26:21 Here’s Ezekiel 36. “I will take you from among the heathen and gather you out of all countries and will bring you into your own land. Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you and you shall be clean from all your filthiness, from all your idols will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you and a new spirit will I put within you. And I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh and I will give you a heart of flesh, and I’ll put my spirit within you and cause you to walk in my statutes and you shall keep my judgements and do them.” Both of those very descriptive of spiritual rebirth. Do you know what I’m saying?

Hank Smith: 27:00 Were you going to do Psalm 51, “Create in me a clean heart, renew a right spirit-

John Bytheway: 27:05 Within me.

Hank Smith: 27:06 … within me?” Yeah.

Dr. Robert Millet: 27:08 Here’s even from the book of Jubilees, which would have been an Old Testament apocryphal work. Listen to this, “But after this, they will return to me in all uprighteousness and with all their heart and soul and I shall create for them a Holy Spirit. And I will purify them so that they will not turn away from following me from that day and forever, and their souls will cleave to me and to all my commandments and I shall be a father to them and they will be sons to me.” To say that Nicodemus didn’t understand new birth I think is naive. I think he knew what new birth meant. Now let’s analyze this a little more carefully. Except a man. Joseph Smith said, “It’s one thing to see the kingdom of God and another thing to enter into it.” He said, “A man must have a change of heart to see the kingdom of God and must subscribe to” what he called, “The articles of adoption to enter therein.”

  28:04 He must have a change of heart to see the kingdom of God. Let’s take this in something we can all appreciate. Two missionaries, two sisters, let’s say, are teaching the gospel to a family that shows some interest. And the sisters begin to notice the more times they come and the longer they’re there, things happening to these people. They begin to see what you’re talking about is true. They begin to understand things they didn’t understand before. Here’s something that I think you’ll find interesting.

  28:30 This is the prophet Joseph Smith again, “Daniel Tyler, a young man, heard the prophet Joseph Smith speak on John 3:3-5 in a sermon, and this is the way Daniel Tyler records it. ‘The prophet said that the birth’s spoken of in John 3:3 was not the gift of the Holy Ghost, which was promised after baptism, but was a portion of the spirit which attended the preaching of the gospel by the elders of the church. The people wondered why they had not previously understood the plain declarations of scripture as explained by the elders as they had read them hundreds of times. When they read the Bible now it was a new book to them. This was being born again to see the kingdom of God.

  29:13 They were not in it, but they could see it from the outside, which they could not do until the spirit of the Lord took the veil from before their eyes, like he does with the father of King Lamoni, or with Lamoni, he takes the veil from their eyes. It was a change of heart, but not of state. They were converted, but were yet in their sins. Although Cornelius later in Acts 10 had seen a holy angel, and on the preaching of Peter the Holy Ghost was poured out upon him in his household, they were only born again to see the kingdom of God. Had they not been baptized afterwards, they would not have been saved.”

  29:51 Jesus is really describing here a two-step process. You’ve got to first come to see the kingdom of God. Those investigators have to, as they hear the sisters preach and teach and as they now read scripture and suddenly the Bible begins to make more sense to them than it ever did, they’re coming to see the kingdom of God. They recognize those two sisters as representatives of the Lord, as servants of the Lord, and they’re seeing things with new eyes. But they can’t just stay that way, they must receive the articles of adoption, which are the first principles and ordinances of the gospel, the means by which we’re adopted into the family of the Lord Jesus Christ.

  30:31 They must do that before they can be saved. And so this is a pretty heavy conversation here about new birth, and I believe Nicodemus understands what he’s saying and I think he understands the cost that is associated with this.

John Bytheway: 30:44 I’m glad you talked about that, the difference between seeing and entering. And when I think of this, I think of the day of Pentecost, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” They just saw it and now it’s like, “How do we enter?” When they ask that question. Yeah.

Dr. Robert Millet: 30:59 That’s right. We see it. What do we do now?

John Bytheway: 31:01 What do we do?

Dr. Robert Millet: 31:02 Peter answers, “Repent and be baptized.”

John Bytheway: 31:05 I have never understood this and you have such a good understanding with evangelicals and especially Baptists. I’m wondering, we see being born again, being baptized in water. That’s an event in a process of being born again, but do the Baptists say baptism is a necessary thing, or do they want to say that’s a work and therefore… or is it just an inner being born again, a spiritual thing?

Dr. Robert Millet: 31:29 It’s a good question. Let me give you an example, an experience of my own working with some evangelicals. Generally speaking, I think this is pretty well across the board, evangelical Christians do not believe the ordinances are necessary. They do not believe they’re necessary and I can understand why they take the position. They would say, “Well, you’re saying that they need more than Jesus, they need more than salvation in Christ.” Well, I’ve been told that many times by my evangelical friends and no matter how I try to explain our position, they believe differently.

  31:59 The occasion happened back in 1997 that Brent Top, my associate dean and I, went with a pastor friend of mine and his associate pastor to California to visit with a prominent evangelical preacher from that area. We attended his Sunday morning service, Sunday evening service, and then we met with him to talk doctrine on Monday. But on Sunday morning he began his sermon by saying, “I want to tell those of you who are here that have been coming and coming and coming that haven’t been baptized, you need to get baptized,” and he chewed on them for quite a while.

  32:36 He said, “I know many of you, I love you, but you need to get baptized.” Well, after the meeting was over and we’re driving back to our hotel, I turned to one of them and said, “So, is baptism essential or not?” There was a pause, of course, and one of them said, “Well, it’s necessary but not essential.” I said, “You want to tease that apart for me?”

Hank Smith: 32:59 Clarify? Clarify those two words.

John Bytheway: 33:02 Sound like the same word. Yeah.

Dr. Robert Millet: 33:04 Yeah. He said, “Well,” and I can understand where he is coming from. He says, “It’s what Christians do. A good Christian will be baptized.” So, for us, if there is a major difference between us and the Protestant world, this would be it. Now with Catholics they would say, “Of course.” Let me say it this way too. There’s a huge chunk of the world, religious world, that believes that in order to be born again, you must participate in, partake of the sacraments of the church.

  33:36 There’s a huge segment of Christianity that believes being born again consists of having a personal spiritual experience with Jesus. Obviously this is the Catholics and here’s the Protestants. Now where are the Latter-day Saints? Think about this, how simple this is from Joseph Smith. He says, “Being born again comes by the spirit of God through ordinances.” Ordinances become so specific. We certainly have to have the ordinance of baptism. We then have to have the gift of the Holy Ghost, or as Nephi taught us in 2 Nephi 31, “You’re not going to gain a remission of sins, because it’s by the power of the spirit that you’re cleansed.”

  34:14 Remission of sins comes not through the water. We speak figurative of saying having our sins washed away, but that isn’t really the case. You’re baptized by water and the second part of the baptism is the baptism by fire and the Holy Ghost, and it’s the Holy Ghost that cleanses us of sin. Okay, here’s where we’re getting to some of the stuff I think is really interesting. By the way, in verse six, “That which is born of flesh is flesh, that which is born of the spirit of spirit.” I think he’s saying here, much like what Paul said in 1 Corinthians 2, he said, “Look, the things of God are only understood by the spirit of God. The things I’m talking about are spiritual things. These are not just rational expressions I’m telling you. These are things of God and this is the only way you’re going to understand this.”

  34:56 I had a dear friend, wonderful man, and I had many discussions with him on religion and he was very impressed by the church, very impressed by the members, had a brilliant mind, and we would have conversations and I would talk about things spiritual and he would come back with things intellectual. And I would try to encourage him to look toward the spiritual. And years went by and finally one day I just said to him, “You’ll never ever understand or feel the truthfulness of what we’ve been talking about, or you’ll never really be the person you know you can be unless you pursue this in a spiritual way.”

  35:38 He went quiet and I thought, “Oh, I’ve hurt his feelings.” But I didn’t. He said, “I know you’re right.” Well, not long after that he was baptized. In other words, the things of God, it cannot be an intellectual experience alone. It’s got to be a spiritual experience. A person who knows the gospel is true because it makes good sense. Heck, that’s a good thing. I mean you can’t fight that. Or, “It works for me,” I hear people say. Well, that’s good too, but there better be something in the soul. There better be something in the heart that God has touched. In fact, so much so that I know it’s spiritually true even though I can’t give you an intellectual explanation for this or that. Does that make sense?

Hank Smith: 36:20 So, there’s a learning by study and by faith element too.

Dr. Robert Millet: 36:24 That’s right. And too often in our day everybody just wants to learn by study. Verse eight, a strange verse indeed, “The wind bloweth where it listeth and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh and whither it goeth, so is everyone that is born of the spirit.” Now keep in mind that the word rendered here is wind. In Hebrew the word is ruach, and in Greek, which this would have been from, is the word pneuma, and they both mean wind, breath or spirit. It’s as if the Lord is saying, “The spirit goes where it will.” You sense it. You can even hear the sound by the way, the word sound could be rendered voice. You hear the voice, but you can’t tell where it came from and where it’s going. So, is everyone that is born of the spirit. Now, this is profound, I think. I think it’s important for Latter-day Saints, and frankly for all Christians to know, we cannot program the Holy Ghost.

  37:34 I remember sitting in a class once where the teacher began with this, “Welcome brothers and sisters to class today. We are going to have a magnificent, powerful spiritual experience.” And I remember thinking to myself, “I wonder if the Holy Ghost is saying, “Oh yeah? Well, we’ll see. Watch out.”

Hank Smith: 37:49 Yeah.

Dr. Robert Millet: 37:51 We can’t program, we can’t produce, we can’t manufacture a spiritual experience. We can’t use emotion to produce a spiritual experience. It doesn’t happen that way. It works in the reverse. You may have a spiritual experience which brings with it deep emotion. Goes where it will, you can’t program it. We can set the stage. If I’m a teacher, I can make the classroom a place that seems to be a reverent place. I might have beautiful, inspiring music playing in the background and so forth, but we can’t say, “If I do this, the Holy Ghost will do this, this and this.”

  38:27 No, he will not. We don’t have that kind of power. Now, there’s another way of talking about this verse and that is it’s one thing to have the spirit of the Lord and it’s another thing to feel it. People can have the spirit and not necessarily be overwhelmed spiritually, and I think this is crucial. Let me give you two illustrations. One of my favorites is the illustration with Mother Teresa. Here’s this wonderful woman, she becomes a nun at 18 and before too very many years she proposes to the Vatican that there be a special order of the Catholic Church set up just for those who would do things a little different. Who won’t wait for people to come to them, they will go out into the streets and bless the lives of people out there. Missionaries of Charity was the name of the order. She did that for 50 years there in Calcutta, India.

  39:25 Anybody almost in America that ever read a book or read the newspaper or listened to the news would’ve heard of Mother Teresa. Everybody knew her as the embodiment of a charitable person. But there was something about her they didn’t know and we didn’t find out about it until a year after she’d passed away. One of the men who had been one of her confessors, that is the person to whom she would go, perhaps a bishop or a cardinal to confess, one of her confessors compiled the letters that she had written to the Vatican and pulled together journal diary entries, all of which said things like this, “I just can’t feel God’s approval. I feel like I’m in the dark. I can’t feel close to God. I know he loves me, but I can’t feel it.”

  40:14 And it goes on and on and on and you say, “My goodness, how can a woman who is so involved in spiritual things not be overwhelmed with the spirit?” And my answer is, “I don’t know.” But what did she do? Did she stop because she wasn’t feeling the spirit or the feeling of love of God like she thought she should feel? No. She kept right on. And if you want to talk about faith, that’s faith. You act because you know it’s the right thing to do. The second illustration, when I had my heart attack in 2001, I was serving as the stake president. It was a terribly bad time to have a heart attack, I didn’t schedule it. It came.

John Bytheway: 40:53 It didn’t ask?

Hank Smith: 40:54 It didn’t say, “Hey, have you got time for a heart attack?”

John Bytheway: 40:56 Would now be a good time?

Hank Smith: 40:58 Yeah.

Dr. Robert Millet: 40:58 It didn’t say, “Thursday would be a nice day for us, what do you think?” It just hit. Here’s one of the things, not only did the world seem dark to me for several months, I’d never been depressed in my life. I’d had my bad days, but I’d never had this experience. I could not feel the spirit the same way. I was prone to interpret that as I don’t have the spirit, but weirdly enough, I carried on as a stake president as best I could. I spoke in stake meetings, I spoke at stake conferences. I continued as a teacher at BYU teaching, not feeling what I had once felt, but having students or members of my stake come up and say, “I’ve never been so moved. This was wonderful. Thank you. The spirit was so strong.” I meet people who are depressed often and one of the characteristics of some people is that they don’t feel the spirit in the same way.

  41:48 That doesn’t mean they don’t have it, it just means that for now they’re not feeling it the way they wish they could feel it. And so I think we can’t always rely upon, do I have overwhelming feelings of spirituality? We can’t wait for that before we can sense that we have the Holy Ghost. I think this verse is saying the Holy Ghost can come and go. It’s not something we can say, “I’m going to do this and I’m going to have the spirit,” and, “I’m going to do that and the spirit’s going to produce a marvelous experience.” Jesus could do that, but you and I can’t.

John Bytheway: 42:22 We can get stuck sometimes in thinking, “Well, I want to be a good ministering brother and sister, but I want to do it for the right reason, so I’m just going to wait until I feel the perfect motivation for it.” And if we did that, nothing would ever happen. So, we can stagnate that way. So, the test that Mother Teresa had having to persist in what she knew was right on whatever levels, even when she didn’t have the confirming of the spirit, I think that’s a test the Lord gives us sometimes. What will they do when things don’t make sense? What will they do when they’re not feeling? Will they continue in God to use a Section 50 phrase.

Dr. Robert Millet: 43:00 And sometimes circumstances in life, in this case a physical condition, a horrible physical ailment, can keep us from feeling like we wish we would feel spiritually, but it doesn’t mean we don’t have the spirit. Because we very well might and probably do.

John Bytheway: 43:17 I think that will bless a lot of people just hearing that sort of thing, that sometimes we move forward kind of not knowing beforehand, as Nephi, or not feeling that accompaniment. And maybe even sometime we’ll look back and say, “Huh, I was being guided back then. I didn’t know it at the time.”

Dr. Robert Millet: 43:38 Well, it’s the person that says, “The way I feel right now, I shouldn’t even go to church.” No, it’s better to go to church.

John Bytheway: 43:41 Yeah, it’s better.

Dr. Robert Millet: 43:42 And you come home from church and you say, “Yeah, that was good.” Or “I don’t feel like ministering today.” And so what? You do it and you have a good experience and you come home and you say, “That was the right thing to do.” Like you’re saying, we can’t wait for some prompting to get us to do things. I just think there’s some things we have no control over except putting ourselves in a position to enjoy the spirit.

Hank Smith: 44:04 I like that. You can’t go out there and try to control the wind. Challenge anybody. Go out there and tell the wind what to do and when to blow, and you’ll find out you don’t have a lot of power over that. You’ve just got to put yourself in a position to feel it.

Dr. Robert Millet: 44:18 That’s correct. So, we better move. “Nicodemus,” verse nine “Answered and said unto him, ‘How can these things be?’ Jesus answered and said unto him, ‘Art thou a master of Israel?'” That means really master teacher. Are you the master teacher and you don’t know these things? And then, “Verily, verily I say unto thee, we speak that we do know and testify that we have seen and you receive not a witness.” Interesting language. It’s similar to that verse up above, that which is of born of flesh is flesh, that which is born of spirit is spirit. We talk about the things that we know. If you’ve had spiritual experience, you can talk about the spirit. If you don’t have the spirit working in you, it’s hard to talk about the spirit with any authority.

Hank Smith: 45:06 And you’ve received not our witness. It seems like you won’t listen.

John Bytheway: 45:09 And who’s we? This is me and John the Baptist and my apostles when he says we. I love that he says our…

Dr. Robert Millet: 45:15 Sure. There are those of us who know and we testify we do know, we’ve seen. Kind of like the Doctrine & Covenants, what, 46. The gifts of the Spirit. “To some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know that Jesus Christ is the son of God and was crucified for the sins of the world.” And the next verse is so powerful, “It’s also given to others to know, to believe on their testimony.” To believe on their testimony and know that way, like most of us did. My parents believed. I believed my parents were people of integrity. I believed that was my beginning, or I had priesthood leaders that inspired me, or I had Sunday school teachers that touched me until I gained my own. Yeah, you believe on the testimony of others. Okay, this all leads up, of course, to the most quoted scripture in history, probably, verse 16.

  46:03 He talks a bit first about the experience in Numbers 21 about the Israelites being afflicted with serpents. What the Book of Mormon helps us understand, fiery flying serpents, meaning these are little critters that bite you. It doesn’t kill you, but it causes a lot of pain. Jesus tells that story and then says, “For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life.” I’m afraid, I remember my old friend Joseph McConkie saying this. He said, “Some of the other translations just don’t give it its due.” The NIV reads, “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son.”

  46:46 Or the New Revised Standard Version, “One and only son,” or Revised English Bible, “His one and only son.” Remember Joseph saying this is denying us our birthright, because we are his sons and daughters as well. We’re not just creatures. I read verse 16, the first thing I think of is in the Book of Mormon, “Knowest thou the condescension of God? I know that he loveth his children, but I don’t know the meaning of all things.”

John Bytheway: 47:14 Elder Bruce R. McConkie said about John 3:16, “This is perhaps the most famous and powerful single verse of scripture ever uttered. It summarizes the whole plan of salvation, tying together the Father, the Son, his atoning sacrifice, that belief in him which presupposes righteous works and ultimate eternal salvation for the faithful.” That’s from Doctrinal New Testament Commentary Volume One, page 144.

  47:42 And I have another Hank, Elder D. Todd Christofferson, closer to our time said, “The scriptures speak of the new and everlasting covenant. The new and everlasting covenant is the gospel of Jesus Christ. In other words, the doctrines and commandments of the gospel constitute the substance of an everlasting covenant between God and man that is newly restored in each dispensation. If we were to state the new and everlasting covenant in one sentence, it would be this. For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life.” That’s from April 2009, general conference, from Elder Christofferson.

Dr. Robert Millet: 48:23 You know the word condemn is interesting. “God sent,” the next verse, “Sent not his son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved.” I love that verse, because Jesus didn’t come to point his finger and say, “I got you.”

Hank Smith: 48:38 Yeah, I’m not looking for reasons to hurt you.

Dr. Robert Millet: 48:41 That’s right. And the word condemn comes up again back with the woman caught in adultery. “When Jesus had lifted up himself and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, ‘Woman, where are those thine accusers? Hath no man condemned thee?’ She said, ‘No man, Lord,’ and Jesus said, ‘Neither do I condemn thee. Go and sin no more.'” You know when a priesthood leader has someone confess a major transgression, it certainly isn’t his responsibility to condemn them. And for that matter not anybody condemn them is a harsh judgment on someone which we’re not in a position to render. That’s a beautiful, beautiful concept. He didn’t come to condemn the world. He didn’t come to catch the world in sin. He came to help us.

John Bytheway: 49:25 But isn’t Satan good at selling that the other way though? “Religion, oh, I would just feel condemned if I went to church.” “Oh, I’m not perfect enough to go to church.” And we’ve just been done looking at the Christmas chapters, which over and over described the gospel. And in the Book of Mormon too, as glad tidings, great joy. But Satan sells it as you’ll just feel worthless if you go to a church or something like that. I think he’s so good at making it the opposite. “I couldn’t go to church. I’d feel terrible.”

Dr. Robert Millet: 49:54 John, I think it puts upon us who are in church that day to help that not to happen. That is to rally around a person, say, “It’s so good to see you here. Gosh, it’s good to see. Come sit here with me and my wife.” This person brings a heavy burden probably, we all do. We need to lift it, not push it down harder. How about will you look at verses 19 and 20, “This is the condemnation that light has come into the world and men love darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.” In this verse, “For everyone that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth, cometh to the light that his deeds may be made manifest that they’re wrought in God.”

  50:43 Doeth truth. From the Greek perspective, truth is something you learn and you know it’s cognitive. But from the Hebrew perspective it’s something you do, it’s something you are. You do the truth, meaning you live truthfully. And what’s your standard? I am the way, the truth and the life. That’s our standard against which we judge. You don’t just learn the truth, you do the truth. You embody the truth. He says he is the way, the truth and the life. He didn’t say, “I came to show you the way.” He said, “I am the way.” He didn’t say, “I’ve brought you the truth.” He is the truth. He didn’t say, “I can point to you the life.” No, he is the life. He embodies this and we judge truth by him. We say, “Is it Christ? Would Christ do this?”

John Bytheway: 51:32 I actually have you in my margin, not literally, but I have that note.

Dr. Robert Millet: 51:37 That’s pretty serious.

John Bytheway: 51:39 Because I remember you teaching us that, that to know the truth is one thing. To do truth, and then I put Alma 53:20, you become truth. They were men, the strippling warriors are described, who were true at all times. It’s not that they were men who knew the truth. No, they were men who were true. You become a true person even. Could be described that way when you know what to do and you do what you know.

Dr. Robert Millet: 52:03 Yeah, well said.

Hank Smith: 52:05 And isn’t it in the Doctrine & Covenants where truth and light are brought together again? The Lord seems to always put these two together, truth and light. The more truth you live, the more light you receive.

Dr. Robert Millet: 52:17 Elder Russell M. Nelson spoke once at a large devotional for faculty and staff at BYU. He gave a talk called Truth and More. Almost always there’s something associated with truth. Light and truth. Truth and righteousness. It’s just uncanny how often truth is always linked to something. We learn in verse 22 the Joseph Smith translation helps us here with verse 22 and over on, in fact, in the next page over into chapter four helps us to understand Jesus did baptize people, but that basically in many cases he let the apostles do it, that they might have the experience.

  53:01 When my dad was bishop back in Louisiana, I was a priest, and I remember how many times we had people coming to the church and we could have had a number of people perform the ordinances, but dad would call upon me or my priest friends, not just to baptize them but to ordain them. If they didn’t have someone they wanted to ordain them, our priests would ordain them. Why? Giving us experience in that ordinance. And I think Jesus, he baptized people. He wasn’t opposed to doing it himself, but often he let the apostles do it.

Hank Smith: 53:34 We see that again at the Mount of transfiguration. He could give Peter, James and John the keys, but he calls upon Elijah and Moses.

Dr. Robert Millet: 53:40 How could you dramatize more which keys they’re bringing than to have people associated with the gathering of Israel and people associated with the sealing powers come and deliver them. Verse 23, John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim.” I don’t think we know much about Aenon. Most people have no idea where it is near to Salim, because there was much water there. Of course, implying there’s your baptism by immersion. If you only had a little stream that was only about six inches deep, you could pour and you could splash, but you couldn’t baptize them. You couldn’t immerse them.

  54:15 27, John the Baptist, “John answered and said, ‘A man can receive nothing except it be given him from heaven. Ye yourselves bear me witness that I said I’m not the Christ, but that I’m sent before him. He that hath the bride is the bridegroom, but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom’s voice. This, my joy therefore is fulfilled. He must increase, but I must decrease.” That moves me to the core. There was a man, John the Baptist, he knew his responsibility and he knew what was not his responsibility. He knew when to fade off into the sidelines and let the true voice be heard. I just think that speaks volumes about John the Baptist and his character.

Hank Smith: 55:08 He’s the friend of the bridegroom.

Dr. Robert Millet: 55:10 The friend of the bridegroom. That’s not a bad thing to be known as.

Hank Smith: 55:13 Yeah. It’s not my day, it’s his day.

John Bytheway: 55:15 He rejoices at the bridegroom’s voice. I love that too. He’s not threatened by it. It’s not a rival. I am so thrilled to hear the bridegroom’s voice and my job is to fade into the background here.

Dr. Robert Millet: 55:28 Let’s look at verse 34 and we’ll move on to chapter four. Verse 34, “For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God, for God giveth not the spirit by measure unto him.” The Joseph Smith translation at the bottom of the page in your Bibles, “For God giveth him not the Spirit by measure for he dwelleth in him even the fullness.” Christ had a fullness of the Spirit. Here’s an affirmation of that. The prophet Joseph Smith said, “Where is the man that is free from vanity? None ever were perfect, but Jesus. And why was he perfect? Because he was the son of God and had the fullness of the spirit and greater power than any man. Some of you, John, you especially might know, one of my favorite sermons that Elder Bruce R. McConkie delivered was delivered in September of 1976, entitled Jesus Christ in Him Crucified.

  56:31 It’s in that BYU devotional. Actually it’s a BYU fireside, Elder McConkie, he says, “We’re told we have to be perfect to be saved, but nobody becomes perfect in this life.” He said, “Only the Lord Jesus could do that, and he had an advantage over us, and that was he possessed the fullness of the spirit. He was the son of God.” Obviously, the principle here is thank heavens that he has power to do things we cannot do. C.S. Lewis gives the illustration of a drowning man out there and you see him and you go out as best you can, and you extend a rope or you extend a stick to him. Can you imagine him screaming back to you? “Hey, that’s not right. You have both feet on the ground.” “It’s his feet on the ground,” Lewis says, “That makes him possible to save you.”

  57:23 It’s his advantage that allows you to be saved. Thank heavens we have somebody that is of a different order than we are that has powers that we can’t even understand.

Hank Smith: 57:34 That’s a great example.

John Bytheway: 57:35 Great analogy, yeah. Please join us for part two of this podcast.