History of Huff and Rogan

Professing Christian and Christian apologist Wes Huff appeared on Joe Rogan for three hours.  I believe this is the first time Rogan had anyone like Huff on his famous and popular podcast.  Rogan was a fan of a man named Billy Carson.  Wes Huff dominated Carson in a recent debate.  This put Huff on Rogan’s radar, who according to him then watched twenty Huff videos.  Huff greatly impressed Rogan.

Before having Huff on his show, Rogan seemed like on a trajectory toward faith in Christ.  He is not there yet, but this was a significant jump for Rogan.  Other factors affected Rogan in this path, including the faith of some of his friends he interviewed on his podcast.  Rogan does not discount historical and even biblical evidence for Christ.  It helped him a lot to hear from Huff.

Minimal Facts Approach

Huff took a “minimal facts approach” in his defense of the faith to Rogan.  This means he focused on Christ Himself, targeting the historical evidence of the resurrection of Jesus.  He presented the most basic or minimal facts about Jesus that unbelieving historians will not themselves deny.  Then he connected that evidence with the biblical account.  To do this kind of presentation like Huff, someone must study it and practice it.  It worked with Rogan, who said, “Wow,” in response to Huff dozens of times.

Rogan is his own fact checker on the show.  If he doesn’t think you’re right, he questions you.  He challenged Huff, but not in any egregious way.  For an unbeliever, he asked good questions.  As an apologist, Huff gave him good answers too.  He was ready to give them.

Danger

As much as I agreed with most of what Huff said and was glad Rogan had him, I believe it is also dangerous too to overall biblical Christianity.  Huff is a non-separatist, culturally liberal Christian of the popular variety.

Huff was not well known at large before the Billy Carson debate.  That went viral.  He went even more viral with Rogan and now Huff is famous, just that quickly.  The trajectory of his entire life now changes because of that.  I believe that almost any Christian podcaster hopes for this series of events to occur.

It is easier for pop Christianity to appear on Rogan.  It surely must be someone who allows for all sorts of compromise to get to that place.  I’m not saying it is impossible for a separatist to go viral, but very unlikely.  This is the nature of celebrity Christianity today.  Nevertheless, like Paul in Philippians 1, I am glad for the information Huff got to Rogan and his audience.

Huff on Rogan will open up many, many more opportunities for Huff and even for those now connected with Huff.  Mark Ward will know that.  He appears on Huff’s website first as an endorser, so anyone who checks out Huff will see Ward there.  Huff has had him on his podcast.  I would say that just by connection, Ward might double his audience.  It’s probably already occurred.

Not a “Scholar”

As good as Huff was, I did not hear him as the scholar that people have projected him.  He is right now in PhD work, not finished.  He’s thirty-three.  What Huff did, just ordinary Christians could do.  They should, but most can’t.  He made obvious mistakes that a scholar would not make.  Someone does not need to be a scholar to do what he’s doing.  I would say he is a very good student, who is much better, talented in his presentation, the ability to put these podcasts together.  This is where we’re at today.

Someone who has technological capacity and knows how to use the medium for communication will move into the scholar category.  He is at least a popular scholar because he makes it into the forum.  Huff gets through the door with his abilities.  He can talk to a Rogan, who also is no scholar.  This is the new world in which we live.  That too is dangerous, because it really does matter in this world if you have the “excellency of speech” that Paul warned against in 1 Corinthians 2.

The Great Isaiah Scroll

Shot in the Foot

One never knows the ultimate effect of such an interaction as that of Huff with Rogan.  I saw negatives to it and I will list them in no given order.  One, Huff said that the great Isaiah scroll in the Jerusalem Museum was word-for-word identical to the Hebrew Masoretic Text.  This is a Dead Sea Scroll.  Since the appearance, Huff has said apparently that when he said word-for-word identical he didn’t mean word-for-word identical.  But he said word-for-word identical.  How does that mean something different?  It doesn’t make sense.

When I heard Huff say that, I knew he overstated his case, and it didn’t make any difference to Rogan, who believed him.  Problem though, after the debate all the fact checkers and critics make a multitude of answer podcasts and shows savaging his point.  It turns what he said a bit incredible.  If you are going to go on a big show like that in front of millions, you have to get it right.  You can’t say confident bombastic statements that come back on you.

The Dead Sea Scrolls are helpful.  I use them at times when I evangelize.  They are a net gain.  However, the great Isaiah scroll, which I’ve seen myself displayed in the Jerusalem museum, varies from the Hebrew Masoretic in 2,600 places.  That could be why it got buried at the Qumran caves for a few thousand years. It is not the text God preserved for His people.  That is the Hebrew Masoretic.

Other Points on the Scroll

The Great Isaiah Scroll, a complete manuscript of Isaiah helps for fulfilled prophecy in Isaiah.  The scroll shows Isaiah to be older than the fulfilment of Isaiah’s prophecies.  I’ve noticed that the lost have no answer for that.  Isaiah has a lot of prophecies and they predate their fulfillment, like any prophecy would.

I believe in word-for-word identical preservation, so that type of language I’m fine with it.  However, we can look at the Hebrew Masoretic and compare it to the Great Isaiah Scroll and see that they are not identical, that is, unless someone wants to change the definitions of “word-for-word” and “identical.”  I believe Huff shot himself in the foot with that one.

One more thing.  Critics, like Alex O’Connor, the famous agnostic in England, the cosmic skeptic, he jumped on Huff’s statement on Isaiah and made hay over it.  O’Connor overreacted though.  The Great Isaiah Scroll is very, very close to the Masoretic text.  That is still great evidence.  O’Connor reacted with glee to a mistake that really doesn’t help his cause.  That scroll shows that we have a preserved text that predates the fulfillment.

Four Hundred Witnesses?

Two, Huff said that four hundred witnesses saw Jesus ascension in 1 Corinthians 15.  How could a scholar get the wrong number there?  That was extremely curious.  I don’t know where Huff got the four hundred number, but missing it was an unforced error on his part.  If an ordinary Christian did that, I would not say it was a big deal.  Someone purporting to be a scholar like Huff does, he can’t do that.

Stolen Body

Three, when Rogan asked Huff if there were any early examples of people rejecting the resurrection account, Huff jumped hundreds of years forward and absolutely missed the biblical account at the end of Matthew when the Jewish religious leaders made up the stolen body theory.  That should have been instant recall of attempts to discredit the resurrection.  It’s a perfect story and it’s in the Bible.  Huff missed it there.  It’s hard to explain how he could do that.  My brain was screaming that passage to him as I watched.

The stolen body story shows what critics will do to discredit the resurrection, knowing how important it is.  This began a long line of those trying to debunk the resurrection.  The cover-up works as a force multiplier for the resurrection.  They knew how important it was and rather than believe it, they tried to cover it up.  And the cover-up is part of the record.

I liked that Huff used Jordan Peterson to discount moralism.  He showed how that Peterson’s rejection of the bodily resurrection, viewing as a mere archetype undermined the gospel.  Peterson explains the resurrection like a Phoenix rising from the ashes.  That misses the point of a true, actual, bodily, and historical resurrection of Jesus Christ.  Jesus is alive today in a glorified body.  Huff gave some respect to Peterson and then exposed that untruthful, unbelieving approach of Peterson.  I was happy with that.

Better at Preaching the Gospel

Last, Huff could do better with preaching the gospel.  He could have done better at going on the offensive and doing that.  I’ve been in hundreds of similar situations as Huff, and an evangelist should preach the gospel.  I get planting the seed and I’m glad he did.  Also, I’m not saying he didn’t preach the gospel at all.  He got some of it in.  So many people were watching and it was three hours.  He could have done better at going on the offensive with the gospel.  Someone can do that in a respectful way and weave it in, if he knows what he is doing.

I could write far more than what I’m writing.  Don’t get me wrong.  Huff did good things.  I rejoiced in those and still do.   The issues I addressed needed addressing.

The Huff interview was so big nationally in the realm of Christianity.  I don’t mean this at all like click bait.  It is an opportunity for input on such an event and commentary on what happened.