Did Pete Hegseth Quote Pulp Fiction or the Bible?

Added: 2026-05-05

[00:00:00]They they call it Cesar 25:17, which I think is meant to reflect Ezekiel 25:17. The path of the downed aviator is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

[00:00:15]>> The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

[00:00:24]>> Did Secretary Hegsth quote Pulp Fiction?

[00:00:27]And how can you know if it was a quote from Pulp Fiction or from something else? Hey, I'm Jordan and this is Bible and Archaeology. You've likely seen these headlines here in the last day or so. And when these came out, Dr. Peter Miller, friend of the podcast, text me to say, "Do you want to talk about this?" And I said, "Yes, please.

[00:00:44]Absolutely." So, Peter kindly agreed to come on for a quick conversation about what's happening here and what we as scholars think is going on in the traditions that are being passed down.

[00:00:56]We're going to look at what Secretary Hegsth said. We're going to look at the quote from Pope Fiction. And then we are going to see how this relates to the regular scholarly process of looking at text and manuscript traditions. Because a lot of what is applied to understanding how changes show up in things like the biblical texts or manuscripts can be applied to understanding how this moment is using a tradition and adapting it in the way that it has. how authority is being cited and used, the role of this thing coming from someone, the way it's presented, and even little small changes like using a you instead of a them and what that tells us about the possible source behind what is said. So, if you have questions, I think we will help answer some of them. We've also got links down below. If you're interested for more conversations with Peter Miller, check out the description.

[00:01:48]They've been on for all kinds of fun topics. But for now, let me get out of the way. And I hope you enjoy our conversation about what is or isn't being quoted here. Peter, thank you so much for taking the time to come back to talk about something that is in the news right now that you text me about and I was like, I would love to talk about this because someone is maybe definitely not quoting Ezekiel, kind of quoting Ezekiel, not quoting Ezekiel. U so thanks for taking the time.

[00:02:15]>> Yeah, thank you for uh having me. I know I texted you with the functionally the question of so who's going to be on to talk about this and your response was are you free and >> you >> so it's been a bit of a whirlwind 24 hours but here we are with our I think timeliest intervention on uh some uh news breaking the cycle here.

[00:02:34]>> Yeah, this is if you're seeing this hopefully this is coming out shortly thereafter and there's been lots of discussion and people are taking a lot of different paths and talking through things. So, what we're going to be looking at is some of what Pete Hegsth said in uh a speech that is maybe quoting some of Ezekiel 25:17.

[00:02:54]And you've likely seen a lot of commentary talking about how this is pulling from a line from Pulp fiction.

[00:02:59]And we are going to talk about that some. But we also want to look, I think, one step further back behind that in some of what this tells us about the process of unpacking a text and presentations of texts and the manipulation that can go into that type of thing. Because the initial thing just to say like does some of this come from Ezekiel? There's parts of it that sound like what you have in Ezekiel 25:17, but a lot of it sounds more like what you get in pulp fiction, which also itself comes from another movie. So like it's a it's quoting a movie that's quoting a movie that's quoting part of a text and you have this long like tradition being passed along. So Peter, when you first saw this, um, where where did your mind go? I guess before you text me, what were your initial impressions?

[00:03:47]So, my immediate thought um when I saw the news and heard the quote um like I I initially was like, "Okay, so he's quoting Samuel L. Jackson."

[00:04:01]>> Yeah.

[00:04:02]>> Um but what what stood out to me initially was where Secretary of Defense Hegsth actually claimed he got it. Yes.

[00:04:13]>> Um, now my I'm going to cards on the table. Um, I'm going to go ahead and admit um I love the book of Ezekiel. Um, he is my favorite of the major prophets.

[00:04:26]Um, and so I'm excited anytime Ezekiel is making the rounds. Um, and for these reasons, Ezekiel 25 is uh 25:17 especially is on my radar. Um, just a thing to watch for the pulse of. Um, and what I noticed was that the combination of claims for where this passage, this prayer came from, as well as the subtle alterations that were made either by the anonymous airman who provided this prayer or by secretary heath himself. Mhm.

[00:05:05]>> Um those subtle differences help us to understand some of the attitudes going on behind the uh motives here. Um, and as I sat with it and as we were texting yesterday, it occurred to me how wonderfully illustrative of an example this specific citation is as a way to think about how scholars approach identifying chains of transmission, claims of quotation and citation. um and in a way really participate in a popular arena in the same kind of debates that you're going to see scholars having about things like the existence or non-existence of the Q gospel. Um as someone like Bark Gooder has a lot to write about. Um >> so >> um a lot of ideas percolating about this being a real time example of exactly what ancient Jews and ancient Christians were doing in their own texts. But here in our time, >> yeah, it's it is an an interestingly modern expression of this process because it's moving now just from text into the multimedia expressions that we engage with. And for some people, you you may have simply heard this if you've seen Pulp Fiction and you hear that reference. Again, it draws on a number of interesting legitimacy ties to say either this group told me is one way that this comes up that we'll talk about or Ezekiel 25 says. And sometimes that's enough to simply go, okay, well, this is there and I don't need to check it because you've you've given me the citation and we can move along. But the the attitudes and motives I think is a good framing to say we're not here to to completely pick through why or how. We want to look at that transmission process behind this. So can we start by going through what was presented what was said there is this is what I was told and some of the what we have in pulp fiction to start to look at that process of transmission.

[00:07:10]>> Yeah. So, let's let's start with the most recent iteration and kind of trace our way back as best we can. Um so uh Secretary Hegsith prefaces this prayer by saying that um the lead of the combat search and rescue team, the CESAR um that was dispatched to recover the downed combat pilot in Iran um presented him this prayer um calling it CESAR 2517 um which he then says as that he takes to be a reference to Ezekiel 25:17.

[00:07:51]And he goes ahead and presents this prayer which um we might cut into if we have here. Um but as he as he reports it, this is the prayer.

[00:08:01]>> The path of the downed aviator is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

[00:08:10]Blessed is he who in the name of camaraderie and duty shepherd the lost through the valley of darkness. for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to capture and destroy my brother. And you will know my call sign is Sandy One when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

[00:08:36]>> This is a nearly direct parallel of Samuel L. Jackson's speech. uh just an incredible speech from his 1994 performance in Pulp Fiction. Um one of my favorite moments in cinema. Um it's just a wonderful recitation.

[00:08:56]Um and it it reads very similarly. So, I want to let us listen to the text and then point out where these key differences are because there are some subtle reworkings um both to add the context of the aviation rescue unit, but also that betray things outside of that immediate context. Um so, Samuel L.

[00:09:21]Jackson um after saying that he has a memorized passage that he finds appropriate for holding a man at gunpoint before he kills him says >> the path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

[00:09:39]Blessed is he who in the name of charity and good will shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness. for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who ATTEMPT TO POISON and destroy MY BROTHERS. AND YOU WILL KNOW MY NAME IS THE LORD WHEN I LAY MY VENGEANCE UPON THEE. There are between those two speeches by my quick count about a dozen words in a roughly 100 to 150word prayer that have changed >> which is a not a small number.

[00:10:24]>> Not a small number. It's a minority but let's call it like between five and 10% of the text has been changed. Um the key changes I broadly categorize into two camps. Um, one of them is to make this a prayer for a combat uh and search and rescue aviation material. The path of the righteous man is changed to the path of the downed aviator. That's we're just putting it in a specific context instead of a general context.

[00:10:57]Um, the other change that could fit into this is where Samuel L. Jackson says, "You will know my name is the Lord."

[00:11:11]Betraying that this is at least in the claim of what the Bible is saying. Um, in this we are in the passage that is legitimately in some form in Ezekiel. In this sentence, um, we change the name the name of the Lord to the call sign of the rescue unit. We change from, uh, my name is the Lord to my call sign is Sandy one. Um, I have some immediate personal thoughts on choosing to put your own name or signifier in place of the divine tetrogrammaton. Mhm.

[00:11:46]>> Um but we should note okay we are personalizing the vengeance away from a divine one into a explicitly military context.

[00:11:58]Um, now the other changes are interesting in the ways that they choose to reframe some of the, let's call it more emotive elements of the prayer. Um and in these what we see is a movement away from uh characterist characteristics that might be considered undesirable from a warrior mentality context.

[00:12:33]>> Um >> yeah like the impact of that combat shift goes into other areas.

[00:12:38]>> Yeah. So early on we get the um blessed is he who in the name of camaraderie and duty from Heg Seth. Um whereas Samuel L.

[00:12:48]Jackson's line is blessed is he who in the name of charity and goodwill. We've replaced a broad sense of service to others and good intention with camaraderie and duty. A sense of like loyalty to units, loyalty to country.

[00:13:03]this sort of maybe nationalistic reading here, but like we are removing some words and replacing them with other virtues. We're highlighting a different set of virtues here.

[00:13:13]>> Yeah.

[00:13:13]>> Um Samuel L. Jackson goes on to say that the person who does this um who shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness um we can't call a downed aviator weak. So this prayer there's a real >> real problem there.

[00:13:30]>> Yeah. So Hegathth instead calls him lost. Um so shepherd the lost through the valley of darkness instead of the weak. So we're we're removing some value judgment here. Um the other major change is um the threat being posed to um the the weak or the lost one in this prayer.

[00:13:51]Um Samuel L. Jackson describes it as an attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. Um, this has changed to capture and destroy my brother singular.

[00:14:02]Um, which is in some ways a context shift. This is just altering it to this material. Um, an attempt to capture a downed aviator instead of poison and destroy. This maybe fits into my first category a bit, but I think there's there's some nuance valuation of what's going on here. Um, and so even at this like quick comparative read between these two sources, um, we can see that no, it's not a perfect retelling, but the parallels are overwhelming. Um, if I can borrow some apocalyptic prophetic language here, one might even call it damning. Um, >> but what we should note is there is sort of some actual Ezekiel in here.

[00:14:49]>> Yeah. But not as much as you think. Cuz if you're looking at this and you're hearing like, "Oh, this is reflecting Ezekiel 25:17 or Samuel L. Jackson points to 25:17." You go, "This is a kind of long verse." I mean, we have long verses around, but not all of this is reflective of what Ezekiel 25:17 is.

[00:15:11]If you go and just pull that part up.

[00:15:13]>> Yeah. So I think what I would like to do is we we've talked a little bit about what Heg Seth is doing and how he's pulled pulling from um either by secondary report or directly himself from Pulp Fiction here. Um I think we should now talk about where the writers of Pulp Fiction Quentyn Tarantino and Roger Avery assembled this quote which they themselves say is not really a scriptural citation. They use the word pastiche for this. It's this kind of assembled madeup thing that is rooted in part in some scripture but is itself as you said earlier pulling from another movie in this case a Japanese film from I think it's >> 70 76 yeah >> yeah like a Japanese martial arts film >> yeah it's called the bodyguard um and what this film is doing when it has some of this monologue and this is from some of the opening monologue in the film um when They're laying out this question about the path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by iniquities. Um these are Japanese nationals in some cases like ninja um discussing whether or not to progressively accept or conservatively combat western influence on Japanese culture. Um but it kind of passes the vibe check of sounding vaguely scriptural. And so we get this opening monologue about the path of the righteous man from this martial arts film retoled a little bit to sound in the line of something like the King James version of the Bible um with some additional line work built in to make it sound continuous here. Um but it does end on a kind of a brbridgement alteration partial quotation of Ezekiel 17 itself.

[00:17:16]Um and so what is presented as a single verse from Ezekiel um is partly that but is multiple pieces of media stitched together in a new creation that is being presented in in this case Tarantino's film delivered masterfully by Samuel L. Jackson. Yeah, because like if you just look at 25:17, it reads, "I will execute great vengeance on them with wrathful punishments. Then they shall know that I am the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon them." That's the NRSVE. Ezekiel 25:17.

[00:17:55]So, you do hear some >> of what you have at the end of that line, but again, not a perfect pass between these things. Can I ask when you're talking about the the shifts, we have kind of like that combat specific move and then we have some of these things that are making adjustments to characterization because of how we're wanting to portray or speak to this specific moment, the attitudes and the differences. You had a a twinkle in your eye when you were talking about the divine name earlier >> and that change.

[00:18:28]>> Does that fall into either of those categories or is that a third category for you yourself? because it is taking some of that combat thing but then they are stepping into the role of this position.

[00:18:40]>> So part of what I think is happening here is as the passage is presented in pulp fiction. We need to be aware of the kind of like meta narrative purpose this quotation is serving. So in the moment in the scene of this film Samuel L.

[00:19:01]Jackson is holding a man at gunpoint and is about to kill him. Um, following this gangster lifestyle, right? He is not a good man in this moment in the narrative. Um, but he is using this and he is in some ways quoting the Bible asterisk in order to explain the gravity of the situation. um and explaining that this is going to be an act of vengeance for the person employing the character of Jules in this moment. Um and so we see that what he does is he personalizes the claim. He doesn't change and you will he doesn't say and you will know my name is jewels in this >> but he changes what the passage says. If we look very carefully at Ezekiel 25:17 in the NRSVUEE or if we go to the King James version, which is a little bit closer to what Samuel Jackson is reading here, um the King James version says, "And I will execute great vengeance upon them with furious rebukes, and they shall know that I am the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon them."

[00:20:20]for dramatic effect for the camera.

[00:20:25]The character of Jules pointing the gun here says, "And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon you."

[00:20:35]He doesn't step into the person of the Lord here, but he personalizes the target of the vengeance to this character of Brett and he says, "Brett, you will know this punishment which will be like a divine punishment for the severity inflicted on you." Um, and that is itself an interesting change being done for cinematographic purpose, right?

[00:20:59]This is a choice in the form of media trying to push this personalized vengeance. Um, but maintaining that ring of biblical authenticity. It to borrow and as cringey a way as possible from my 18-year-old students, this passes the vibe check of the Bible, right? This sounds adequately biblical. Um and so that subtle change might go unnoticed and when we go to hegth speech it has preserved that change to the second person address of the target of the vengeance and you will know my call sign is Sandy 1. not what the biblical text of Ezekiel 25 has when it's proclaiming an oracle of vengeance against the Philistines. Um, and it's not talking to them. It's speaking to the people of Judah, to the Jews in exile about what will befall their enemies who are not here present.

[00:22:04]>> Um, it is speaking of them over there.

[00:22:08]And so that very subtle change is exactly the kind of little detail that careful critical readings by scholars are picking up on. U this is part of why I I have a suspicion and I would put some scholarly weight behind this if pressed that I feel confident saying he says speech is cribbing specifically from Samuel L. Jackson's speech in Pulp Fiction. Not just because of how well the lines pass up, but because of where those little details of the them versus you still align with this other piece.

[00:22:43]If HSA's speech had against them instead, I would put more consideration on whether this is purposefully trying to quote back to Ezekiel cuz I do not know of a version of the Bible in an English translation that changes the them to a U. The only place I know the U address from at the end of here is in pulp fiction or in sources descended from pulp fiction.

[00:23:14]>> Yeah, it's like a family tree there. You can you find an origin point and you can trace back as as you do in text criticism all the time. You find a change and you can follow the pathway of those derivations back to a thing.

[00:23:25]>> Yep. And in manuscript studies, we might call this something like, you know, building the stemma, the like lineage of uh transmission down here. And so I would very clearly put Hanks speech in direct lineage beneath pulp fiction here. Um it is directly deriving from this in the stemma and the pulp fiction is borrowing some from Ezekiel but also a little bit over here from the bodyguard to create a new text. Um so yeah it's these small changes that matter. Um and it's also even in Samuel L. Jackson's speech here so far removed from the original context of Ezekiel um that you almost lose the sense of the weight of this kind of proclamation um from what our kind of exilic era prophecy is doing um because at it at its core um Ezekiel is an incredibly important prophet. Um now we don't know for sure that Ezekiel the historical figure wrote the book. There's questions about how this is transmitted, how his oracles are being preserved, that this is a school of prophets and priests working together. Um, but I'll just for ease of shorthand, I'm going to say Ezekiel wrote the book of Ezekiel. And then we can catalog a collection. Tell you what, um, when we when you get to the live later today, um, go ahead and, um, just preempt about five different commentaries on Ezekiel for this, um, and we'll be good.

[00:24:55]>> Um, but have we we can put a pin in coming back to Ezekiel to talk about people love Ezekiel and and people love to quote Ezekiel because of the stuff like this like the prophets >> especially the major prophets can be useful when taken out of context in very specific ways to fit >> all types of of different things. I I want to cycle back to something at the beginning of this when when Pete Hexath comes forward, right? They as you noted, they say they got this from someone connected to the combat search and rescue and and when you watch them say it. There is this moment where you're like, do they did they get that from them? Are they passing authority to say like the oh Ezekiel type of reference giving a claim to say I did get it from them? Did that person tell them this draws from Pulp Fiction? Because it it feels like in another way we have on the one side we can trace the family tree of differences. And something that came up to me was like it kind of feels like a pious fraud tradition which is like Deuteronomy. We found the book of the law in the temple. Look at this thing.

[00:26:02]Oh, it's let me bring it forward. It has authority behind it now because of who found it and from where. and to come forward and say this combat search group gave me this thing. Now there's a different chain of authority that has given this and has used this and has a different weight behind it than just him coming forward and say I love this line from Pulp Fiction.

[00:26:23]>> So what's interesting to me you you went to Deuteronomy um I went to Numbers mentally and I thought of the book of the wars of the Lord.

[00:26:32]>> Yeah.

[00:26:33]>> This like here's another text that goes into greater detail. I'm just gonna say the important bit here and then we're gonna move on. And we don't have this book.

[00:26:41]>> We don't have it.

[00:26:42]>> Um and so what Haggath has provided us in this moment is a glimpse into some of the frustration of classical kicology.

[00:26:52]Um trying to work with absent sources or sources we can't interrogate. Um but this idea of the pi is fraud, the I got this talking to this, you know, particular individual. Um, I think of something like the tradition of the hadith in Islam, the like sayings of prophets or of the prophet specifically or of his immediate companions. Um, there's a way to build authority in here, right? Um, now notably, um, Secretary Hegs has said he got this from the leader of the combat search and rescue team. Um, so he's appealing to an amount of authority figure. He is appealing to a kind of assumed reverence for the military forces in the United States at this moment. Um, but he also left that person anonymous. Um, >> yes.

[00:27:44]>> Now, I can't I can't prove that Hegsth did not get this from an airman as he said. Um, and I think this is maybe where some of that scholarly nuance and caution gets frustrating for a popular audience like >> which is because people want to go well it >> like the heming and hawing of like maybe it came from this, maybe it came from Pulp Fiction, maybe it came from the Japanese martial martial arts film, maybe and they're like, "Well, just can't you tell us?" And you're like, "Well, no, because of all of these reasons."

[00:28:17]>> Yeah. And so >> there's reasons to have doubts on some things, but it's not like a super clearcut here.

[00:28:25]>> Yeah. In this kind of manuscript stemma that we're building of this this prayer from as at time of recording yesterday morning, um what I would say is I am confident this prayer derives from pulp fiction first and foremost as its mo most immediate uh predecessor.

[00:28:47]What I can't say is did Secretary Hegsth design this and then attribute it to an airman because he thought it would be a cool prayer to say.

[00:28:59]>> Mhm.

[00:29:00]>> Did he in fact receive this from an anonymous airman and by virtue of protecting armed service members, not name said person? Um, is this in fact passed around by combat search and rescue people? I was friends with a lot of ROC guys in college and a lot of those guys really like Quentyn Tarantino movies. Um, it this is the kind of thing that I could see a certain genre of military man or woman adopting and manipulating to their own discretion.

[00:29:33]Um, I can't prove that this doesn't have its origin in legitimate authentic use and adaptation by combat airmen. I can't. Um so that question of lineage is this direct from pulp fiction or is this coming from uh it's an authentic use in the 20 no 30 years since Pulp Fiction came out. Um going to go ahead and internalize that passage time for a moment. Uh in the 30 years since Pulp Fiction came out um this passage has taken on a life of its own. It was referenced in um Captain America: The Winter Soldier, as the engraving on Nick Fury's tombstone, as homage to Samuel L.

[00:30:16]Jackson, the actor, citing to a different character he said. And it starts with the path of the righteous man and cites 2517 on the tombstone in a Marvel movie. Um like this speech has taken on life its own. For a lot of people, this is probably a more authoritative version of 2517 than if you were to open up the text of 2517.

[00:30:40]>> Yeah.

[00:30:41]>> Because it's the one you've engaged with most. It's the one you've seen most.

[00:30:45]It's the one that is maybe quoted most in your contexts.

[00:30:47]>> Yeah.

[00:30:48]>> Which is a part of how what wins out in textual traditions is the same way authority. It's either on the inside for the right crew or it is more popular and it can win out. But it's that same type of argument that comes come comes through that.

[00:31:02]>> Yeah. And you know who's doing some really interesting work on this right now is Ian Mills is looking at how uh I think third and fourth century Egyptian Christians create this kind of um almost like collective imagination of what a certain line from the Gospel of John says in order to pursue certain um anti-Judaic rhetoric. Um, and so you can see that like we're not unique in this mass media culture >> coming up with some of this material here. Um, this exact process of an oral tradition of it being passed around.

[00:31:39]What passages are so beloved that they get passed on and take on a life of their own. I mean, look at John 3:16.

[00:31:48]Like I can just say those words and most people can quote that even if they are not themselves deeply embedded in the biblical tradition.

[00:31:56]>> You see it on a sign in the back of college game day. And it's it's Yeah.

[00:31:59]No, this this moment >> has so many interesting avenues into >> the world of scholarship and when people ask the question of like, well, why does scholarship matter or biblical scholarship? These are the types of things to go well it pops up in lots more places and paths because we're talking about manuscript traditions and oral tradition and pious fraud things and what is legitimate and not like all of these little areas of gray area that can come up in studying texts >> also come up when you get here because another wrinkle can also be I've seen people discussing you know well if the leader did give it what's that tradition behind how they got it did they come up with it? What's the history behind it?

[00:32:42]It's all these places of, you know, murky gray. It's it's the lost to time type of things for when it first came about. Did the person know? Because the first person could have known that it came from Pulp Fiction and that's been lost to time and people don't watch that movie or something and they don't know and they they just think it's this. Like there's all of these little spots that getting hung up on can be the a trap maybe and and there's other conversations to have which we won't get into about other implications of this.

[00:33:11]We wanted to focus on some of this like hey here's these pathways behind because it does feel like a interesting example into the way those questions should be asked about the multimedia landscape and the reuse landscape that we live in.

[00:33:25]>> Yeah. And I I hope that uh getting to kind of walk through how biblical scholars and scholars of ancient history approach these questions is illustrative for uh listeners about the kinds of ways we listen to and read these materials and the kind of work that goes into um finding these links because at the end of the day a lot of the work of scholarship is a kind of fundamental skepticism. Like I get excited about these links, but the first question I ask myself is why am I wrong in thinking this is what's happening and I need to convince myself through the evidence I find that the my gut instinct is worth following. Um it's the only way I know of to try to combat that kind of inherent confirmation bias threat, right? Like I want to be right. Um, so I have to approach these questions by starting from the place of why am I wrong and can I convince myself back to my opening position. Um, which is why I go find, well, what version of the Bible is even being quoted um, here? How much of this is from Ezekiel? Um, I mean, we didn't get into it in our immediate conversation, but like the ancient Hebrew and Greek texts, they don't have quotation marks to show where things open and close. nor does an oral tradition. When Jules in Pulp Fiction says that he has a passage he has memorized, should we understand his direct citation beginning immediately after this when he says the num the number of the chapter and verse and so that path of the righteous man is what he sees as the beginning of the quotation or is he ramping up to it and then entering a quotation and we see that this is actually how a lot of early Christian and rabbitic commentators have worked through um understanding ing and explaining texts is providing some context to ramp up into it and then quoting it. But when you don't have what feels to us like a very natural technology of quotation marks, what begins and ends what's being quoted is so vital. Um, and this has implications for um when you say, "Oh, I got this from this now heretical source." What's the beginning and end of the heretical quote? what's the beginning and end of the quote that a person said versus my elaboration and how those quotes get passed on um as well as who we're saying gave us the quotes. Like all of this is at play in a really interesting moment um in present quotation.

[00:36:04]>> Well, Peter, I'm I'm glad that you text me and I'm happy that you had time today because this is this is the the stuff behind the stuff. So, thank you for taking the time to come and chat a little bit about this. We haven't touched every corner of this. If you have a question about some of this process of looking behind materials and sources and things, I'm going to put links to a number of interviews we've done with Peter in the past that you will probably enjoy talking about how we see these types of traditions building up around biblical characters. So, I'm going to put links to those down below.

[00:36:36]And yeah, I'll reach out to Peter to come talk about Ezekiel, too, as cuz Ezekiel itself is a whole thing that we need more time for. But yeah, thanks for taking the time to come and chat about something uh topical and timely and maybe biblical and lots of other things.

[00:36:52]So, thanks, Peter.

[00:36:53]>> Yeah, thanks for uh help uh squeezing me in here at this last minute. I feel almost like we need a little like news flash bulletin for your uh for your beginning intro. Some kind of little ticker at the bottom. De Here we go.

[00:37:06]Coming in quick. Yeah. So happy happy to be able to get something out. Hopefully this helps answer maybe some questions you've had about this. Be sure to like and subscribe. It helps us. Hopefully it helps you stay in touch with us. But for all of us here at Bible and Archaeology, until next time.