Settecase Interview

Hello friends, and welcome to the Reform Rookie video podcast.

My name is Anthony Vigneault, and I'm your Reform Rookie host, bringing you all things Reform this evening. The goal of this podcast is to take the deep, rich truths of the Reform tradition and help you see the beauty in them and the joy you'll experience in understanding them better.

Understanding these truths will help us better know the God of the Scriptures and help us better appreciate the hope we have in Jesus, His plan of salvation. And to that we say Semper Reformanda. Well tonight I'm very excited to introduce my next guest to you.

His name is Joel Sederkais, and he's the founder of The Think Institute. I know you're going to be blessed and edified by his teaching. He's a careful and serious thinker, yet he also has ways of explaining things that even I can understand.

So welcome to the show, Joel. Thanks Anthony, great to be with you, man. Thanks so much. Please tell the audience a little bit about yourself and your ministry.

Joel Settecase’s Ministry and The Think Institute

Sure. I'm a dad of four kids, and you might very well be hearing them in the background right now. They're not quite in bed yet. I'm the very grateful husband of Elisa, who's my partner in crime, partner in ministry.

And the two of us are missionaries with an organization called CRU, or many people might know it as Campus Crusade for Christ. And within CRU, we're in the division known as Church Movements. I'm a former pastor by trade, and so I've got a lot of love for the local church.

And within CRU Church Movements, we started an organization called, as you mentioned, The Think Institute. And so The Think Institute exists to equip believers to explain, share, and defend the Christian message.

And so we're really based on the driving belief that no Christian should ever get caught flat-footed when asked what or why we believe. And so what we want to do is we want to reach the average, everyday Christian who is hungry and thirsty for more knowledge that they can put into action, and they're looking for ways to fulfill their piece of the Great Commission.

They want to make disciples, they want to evangelize boldly, and they want to know how to be able to answer objections that come. Because there's always objections, whether it's coming from an atheist, a Muslim, a Mormon, someone who's woke, someone who's a nominal Christian, a Roman Catholic, there's always going to be an objection.

And so my passion is getting resources and tools into the hands and into the minds and into the hearts of followers of Jesus so that to the glory of Jesus alone, they can explain, share, and defend the Christian message.

So that's really what I'm all about, and I'm sure we'll probably get into more as we go. But I've got a podcast, website, blog, I do various different things to try to deliver that stuff out there.

I'm going to call you Octopus Joel, you got your hands in everything. I love the mission statement and the heart behind it because it's so important that we equip the saints for the work of the ministry.

It's not the ministry is not designed for a few people to go out and do it. It's designed for the people in the pews to go out and just witness to their family and friends and bring the gospel with them wherever they go.

It's not a difficult thing. And if we're faithful, God's going to reward it and we're going to see revival and we're going to see a whole new reformation start in this country, which we certainly need.

We desperately need. Absolutely. Yeah. So I feel like a kid in a candy store with so much that you got going on. I got to narrow it down a little bit. So as a first time guest on the show, what I want to know is how did you come to be reformed?

Were you always reformed? How did this, how did it happen?

How Joel Settecase Became Calvinist and New Covenant Theology

Okay. Well, I have to start by disappointing you because I'm technically not reformed. Okay. The reason why I say that is this. When I think of reformed, capital R reform, I think of someone who is specifically confessional, meaning that they hold to either the Westminster or the like the second London Baptist confession of faith.

Now I am a Baptist and I am a Calvinist, but there are scruples that I take with both of those confessions. And so what I typically say is I would say that I hold to the first London Baptist confession of faith insofar as it agrees with scripture.

And there's a few other statements and, and you know, like the Chicago statement of biblical inerrancy. I gladly hold to that. But I'm not capital R reformed, although to like the average everyday person, when they hear reformed, they think Calvinist and like a hundred percent, like absolutely all five points and you know, give me some more points and I'll, I'll subscribe to those.

But I do, I hold to new covenant theology, which, okay. So I, I adopted new covenant theology right around the same time I became a Calvinist. So there was a period of time where I called myself reformed or reformed Baptist.

But and the church that we go to is reformed Baptist. Okay. Like they're very well known for being a reformed Baptist church. But for me I, you know, I grew up in, in a church that really didn't address the question between Calvinist, Arminian.

We didn't really hear those words. So I didn't, I didn't know those terms. But you know, the big, the big debate was predestination versus free will. That's kind of how we, are we predestined or do we have free will?

You know, that was kind of the big, the big debate. And you know, oh, and then the other big question, of course, Anthony is, can we ever lose our salvation? Sure. You know, so I would debate these things with my friends, but I didn't realize I was, I was talking about Calvinism and Arminianism or all the different, you know, five points, four points, Amaraldianism, you know, the different streams that are out there.

I just thought I was talking, you know, basic kind of Bible questions. So it was actually when I went to seminary, I started seminary in 2011. And by that time, I mean, I'd heard of like some of your entry level, young, restless reformed pastors, like, like your John Pipers, your John MacArthur's, those kinds of guys.

And when I first realized that I actually believed Calvinism, like, like strong God's sovereignty in all things, I was actually in a seminary class taught by an Arminian, like a pretty, a pretty avowed Arminian, a pretty strong Arminian.

And I was learning about compatibilism, which is the belief that human choice is real and we are responsible for our choices, but God is also sovereign. So those two truths are both equally true. And as my Arminian professor was, was, was talking about Calvinism and he was presenting it in this horrifying way, like a dad who locks his kids in a tree house and then sets the tree house on fire, that only saves one of them or something.

And I'm listening to this and I'm like, well, I don't believe that, but then he starts talking about, and I could tell, I could tell he was not being faithful to what he was. You know, I'd heard enough Piper and things like that, where I'm like, no, I don't think that's what they really believe.

And I don't think that that's the implication of what they believe either. But then when I heard him talk about compatibilism, I didn't realize that he was describing something he didn't believe in because the way he was teaching it, it just sounded so correct.

I'm like, well, yeah. So I actually raised my hand in class. I ask a lot of questions in class. I raised my hand and I'm like, well, I believe that. What is that? That's what I believe. And he started getting real flustered.

And he's like, oh no, no, no. Well, you see, that's not, that's not right. And then I realized, oh, wait a minute, he's, he's, he's teaching something right now. That's an opposition view. It's not what he actually believes.

And I started putting the pieces together. Well, I do believe that. So I don't believe, so what is he? And then what is this other view? And I sort of put things together. The seeds for this were laid down years earlier when I had a good brother in the Lord, a mentor, Hector Colon, who laid out.

He actually brought, I was going through a dark place in my life and he led me through Ephesians one, which talks about how God, you know, predestined us to be in Christ. So I, I, when I was, when I was hearing, by the time I heard Calvinism and compatibilism laid out, I was already, I was like a Ephesians one man.

So, oh, you want to, you want to give me a name that's called Calvinism? Fine. Yeah. That's what I believe. That's what the Bible teaches. I already love that. Just give me the name for it. So I remember it was, so that was like 2011, 2012, I started learning.

And then by I think like 2013, 2014, I was talking with my wife and this was like really at the apex of the young restless reform movement, which I was, I was in, I was, I was a part of, I, I didn't fully know.

I didn't know if I was Calvinist or not, but I'm talking with my wife and I'm talking about Armenians and this, and I go, but you know, we Calvinists, we believe this and she pauses and she looks at me and she goes, you just described yourself as a Calvinist.

I go, Oh, I guess I did. I had been thinking of myself as a Calvinist for probably a few months by that point, but I hadn't articulated it. And you know what, Anthony, it felt good to own that label. And you know, shortly thereafter I went through the cage stage, didn't know I was in the cage stage, but I started debating everybody, man.

And I'm like, I'm like, you know, I'm, I'm restless to the core. I'm still pretty young. I'm in my early thirties and I'm like, let's go. And and I, I mean, I used to, I was working at a church, I was a pastor and I'd getting these arguments and debates with my boss, which that didn't go well.

But but man, by God's grace, I think I made it through the cage stage and and you know, I'm at the point now I love God's grace. I love the doctrines of grace and I call them the doctrines of grace. And they're, you know, not everybody likes what, you know, they don't like when Calvinists kind of own that term doctrines of grace, but guess what?

I mean, that that's a technical term for the five points of Calvinism and, and so I love talking about them. I love sharing them with people. And they've really become the background programming for how I process, not only like theology and books and theology when I'm reading the Bible, you know, biblical theology, systematic, but also life.

So like, you know, my, my wife gets sick, my son gets sick. I'm processing these events through the lens of God's goodness, his sovereignty you know, the five solos of the reformation and then the five points of Calvinism, knowing that I'm safe and secure.

Also knowing that his ways are higher than mine, knowing that how I respond is, is meaningful. I'm responsible for how I respond, but also ultimately knowing that he's totally in control. And I got to tell you, God brought me to Calvinism at just the right time in my life, right before I went into some major trials and, and it was, it was what I needed.

It was, you know, just God's word strengthening my backbone and, and get me through a lot.

Praise God. That's actually, it was going to be the next question I asked you, you know, how has it changed or affected your Christian walk, obviously, you know, knowing God's sovereignty and his providence and provision in the midst of everything, knowing that his hand is completely in control and he has a purpose for whatever it is that happens is just such, so comforting, you know, to know.

And I can see why you're able to get so much done because you don't, you don't rest on the Sabbath. That's right.

Well, you know, technically that's not true, technically that's not true because, um, Jesus is my Sabbath. So, uh, so I'm always resting. I mean, I'm living that seventh day life every day. Praise God.

I'm with you on that. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I do take, I take, I take weekends off, but I don't, I'm not legalistic about it. I mean, if I need to do work and I, and not to mention, I used to be a pastor and I'm working Saturday night, Sunday morning, I'm working, you know, I'm working, I mean, I'm working when you're a pastor, it's like, man, give me any, any day off during the week.

Anything I can take. Sure.

And for kids and a wife. My goodness. I mean, you don't have a, you have a lot of things going on, Joel.

Yeah, I, I do by God's grace. But, uh, Elisa, my wife, uh, she's in the, um, like, like if there's two columns, one that makes life more challenging, one that makes life less challenging. She's in the less challenging.

She's a helper. She's, she's, uh, you know, she's my right arm, man. I mean, earlier today I was talking about ministry and I'm like, oh, you know, all the stuff that we're doing and she goes, oh, you know, it's nice of you to say we're doing it.

I'm like, what are you, what are you talking about? Like we are doing this. I don't, I can't do anything if you're not there doing what, you know, what you're doing. I mean, she is my right arm. She's like the right half of my body.

I mean, I can't, you know, uh, my right arm is my strong arm too. So I mean, you know, like she's, she's, uh, just an incredible, incredible woman. I'm so blessed to know her.

That's awesome. That's awesome. I, me too. I got a wife that just handles things at the house and takes care of it and it, she allows me to do things like this, you know? So it's, it's, it's a real blessing.

He who finds a wife finds a good thing. That's for sure. So one more question with regards to your Calvinism, do you ever get, um, opposition to these things or feel like going back to maybe not being so Calvinistic?

Opposition to Calvinism and Nuance Within the Reformed Tradition

Yeah, sure. I mean, it's been a while since, since, let me, let me say, uh, it's been a while since I've been really directly challenged that I can remember. I mean, most of the, most of the conversations I have now, if they're going to be like contentiously theological there with unbelievers, straight up unbelievers, I don't do a ton of debating with, um, Christians of different stripes because I mean, right now that's not really where the battlefield is, you know?

But I will say, you know, six, seven years ago, five, six years ago, there really, there was a lot of, uh, that was a, a, a major battlefield, you know, like the whole young restless reform movement and, and new Calvinism.

And you know, the thing is like, sadly, a lot of those new Calvinists have now gone off and they become the new woke, the new communists, you know? So it's like, that's where the battle line is now. It's with the guys who were watching Mark Driscoll, uh, five, six years ago.

Now they're following, uh, uh, well, I won't, if we can be, maybe we can name names later, but, um, so, so I don't get a ton of pushback now, but like I said, it has led to conflict at work, um, in the past.

Uh, and I'm very blessed now that within church movements, crude church movements, I don't really have any opposition there. Um, my, my supervisors are just really, really solid theological guys. I mean, they're, they're, um, just really want, I've had them on my show.

We've talked about, we talk about theology and stuff. And so, um, do I ever think about going back? Um, you know, I wouldn't say going back, but you know, I'd be lying if I said, there's never times where I questioned nuanced aspects of it.

I mean, you know, God's sovereign and like, can I, one question I've been wrestling with relatively recently is okay. I do believe God is sovereign over every little detail. R .C. Sproul talked about it.

There's even one errant, you know, uh, electron in the universe molecule. Yeah. Maverick mouth molecule. That's it. Right. Um, then, you know, there's big problems. My, so I believe that that's consistent within the system, but the, the challenge that I've had is, well, how do I show that biblically?

I can show how God uses evil. I can show how God is ordained trouble, evil disaster. But you know, that's still one step away from saying every single thing is, is part of that plan. Again, I believe that, but it's sort of the, I really want to be precise in how I articulate things.

And I want to be, I want to have an answer for every little minute point. So that's, that's not me wanting to go back. It's just me wanting to be consistent and, you know, making sure I can get biblical support for every, everything.

Cause again, I'm not confessional, so I'm not going to be like, well, the Westminster divine said this. It's like, well, okay, but what is, you know, show me, show me in scripture, stuff.

Like that. Yeah, no, I, I have some very, very dear friends who, you know, who don't hold a Calvinistic position and, you know, we go back and forth in such a loving way. It's such a blessing to have, you know, guys who see things differently, who press me on my position and it makes me hone in on the scriptures and examine things from a different perspective.

Cause you can get real comfortable in what you believe and sloppy. And these guys hold me accountable and they're asking me questions and it makes me go back and then I'm able to go back to them. And it really is iron sharpening iron.

And although we don't, you know, hold the same theological viewpoint, that's my brother in Christ. And I love him. And I always tell, you know, for Calvinists, they, they tend to look down their nose at other people.

And I, and I warned them, I said, listen, you hold to the doctrines of grace. Don't ever be outgraced by an Arminian. You lose the argument. You lose. If you hold to the doctrines of grace and then are not graceful, what good is it to them to see something like that?

So just another tidbit of information. Anyway, I wanted to talk to you with regards to logic. I, I listened to your, uh, your YouTube video on six reasons that logic is not a human conception. So did you remember going through that?

Why Logic Is Not a Human Convention

Uh, yeah, I do.

And, and I have it pulled up here. Yeah. It's just so, so I don't forget anything.

So could you, could you just give a quick, you know, list the reasons and a sentence about each of them? Sure.

Yeah. So I've been doing apologetics, AMAs, ask me anything's on discord, which is this, uh, it's a social app, I guess, where there's a lot of, uh, there's chat rooms and voice chats and things like that.

And there's a good brother who runs one of the, uh, the channels on there, one of the servers. And so I've been, he's been real gracious and allowed me to do these, um, these AMAs. And one of the little debates that I got in, uh, one of the questions that was, that came across, you know, my, uh, my, my, that was shot across my bow, if you will, was could logic just be a human convention?

Um, meaning look, there's nothing ontological about logic. There's, there's nothing logic doesn't exist out there. It's just, it's, it's a convention. It's, you know, it's like, um, speed limits or something, you know, we all sort of agree, but there's nothing like, there's no law of the speed limit that's out in the universe, unless you count the speed of light, that probably is one, you know what I mean?

But, but you know, there's no law out there that says you can only drive 65 on the highway or something. So, so this, this came out and, um, what I did was I went back and, uh, I think actually maybe somebody messaged it to me.

So I had some time to go back and think about it and, and what they said, what this person said was what's the best way to prove to people that logic is not just a human convention. So very good question.

And I think as Christians, especially who want to engage in presuppositional apologetics, which, you know, I know, um, you're good friends with Eli Ayala and, you know, he's Mr. Presupp, right? You know, I mean, he's like, uh, he's got presupp you and he's just all got all this great presuppositional apologetics.

But, um, one of the hallmarks of presuppositionalism is if you, if you believe in logic, if you believe logic is, is a real thing, then that presupposes God, that's actually impossible without God. It only makes sense within the Christian worldview.

But so what if logic is a convention? Okay, well, so six reasons why logic could not be, and is not a human convention rule, uh, reason number one, uh, a world where logic wasn't real, would actually be an incoherent world because if the laws of logic are not ingrained into the universe, then that is to say that they're, if they're just conventional, then they're, then those laws aren't governing the universe and, um, metaphysically and epistemologically.

So the way things are and the way we know things would actually be illogical because logic is just something we impose on the world, not something that's actually there. So that would mean out there in the universe, a can equal not a, there is no excluded middle.

Um, a thing is not itself. And that's, that's actually an incoherent world. That's not an intelligible world. You literally could not make any sense whatsoever in that world. And even me saying you can't make sense of the world, that wouldn't be true either because it's opposite would also be true.

So every statement, um, could be true and not true in the same sense. At the same time, that's an incoherent world. Reason number two.

So laws of life. Yeah, that would, that would, that would mean that we would be a world without truth because I could contradict you. And that would be just as good as me agreeing with you. There would be no co coherence or consistency in the world.

That's right. And logic is also one of the necessary foundations for language. And so language would be meaningless as well. Um, you know, the, an easy way to refute this is just, that's just self evidently not the universe we're living in.

And the fact that we're conversing right now, my mind, your mind, the, and the words that I'm speaking and you're speaking and the way we're processing them. So the, the interaction between us are self evidently not incoherent.

Now we might make logical mistakes, but like you said, the iron sharpening iron, that's a real thing. But even the way that we correct one another's illogicality is done in a, in a way that just assumes that logic is a real thing.

Otherwise, you know, a hair downward pizza picture. Therefore the much, we don't talk that way. That's not, it's evidently not true. Um, laws, reason number two, then laws of logic that are merely conventions are actually false because the universe isn't that way.

So if we're imposing logic, see our skeptical friend would have to explain how and why in a universe, in a cosmos that is not inherently logical. Laws of logic aren't real. So the universe is actually incoherent.

How do we suddenly come along and develop laws of logic that are actually false? They're not actually true about the universe. So this is, this is not like coming up with your own set of morality. This is like a, a set of morals that are completely diametrically opposed to everything that is moral.

So it'd be like, um, you know, like, like if we had a moral code that said, you must murder, you must steal, right? Like those are self self evidentially morally wrong. That's what, what laws of logic would be if they were merely conventions in an illogical universe in a, in a, um, in a cosmos that is not logical, human conventions, logic that is human convention only are false.

And, um, so they would not only inadequately describe reality, they would actually be lying about reality. And that kind of goes back to what you were talking about. Truth wouldn't exist. And the very laws of logic that we want to appeal to would actually be false.

So when an atheist accuses Christians of being illogical, and then they also want to believe that logic is a, is merely a convention, what they don't realize is they're accusing Christians of Christianity is problematic according to that worldview, because it's not false.

You see what I'm saying? Like the laws of logic are false. You're not in accord with the laws of logic. Therefore, Christianity is wrong because it's not false. It just, it gets so jumbled and, and mixed up.

It's, it turns into this totally incoherent argument. And it's like, okay, so your problem is that my worldview is not false. Well, no, that's not what I meant. Well, that's what, that's what your argument is actually saying here.

Absurdity, right? Yeah.

It's total absurdity. In fact, not to interrupt you, but in, in, in listening to your video, you know how sometimes, you know, you'll hear something somebody says, and it'll just, it'll create a question in your mind as you're going through this.

I said to myself, you know, if, if, if logic was a human convention and men came up with, with the laws of logic, you know, by themselves, my question to them would be, did you use the laws of logic to come up with these laws of logic?

Did you use logic in order to come up with the, because if not, then it's, it's a lot, your illogical Ness came up with laws of logic. It just doesn't make sense at all. Right, right, right. Totally.

Does it make sense? Yeah. That's a good point. Because if, if, if logic is a man-made convention, then that means the human mind and the rest of the cosmos is ultimately illogical, which means that the foundation of logic is illogic, which is itself incoherent, self-refuting.

Right. Yeah. Um, yes. Yeah. Yeah. The atheist who says that Christianity is illogical and logic is a convention. Yeah. Okay. I'm actually writing this down because, you know, I didn't even think of that point.

Yeah, no, it was just, I don't want to use the word triggered, but you triggered me to start thinking, and I'm saying, if they came up with the laws of logic, did they come over, come up with those laws logically or illogically?

I, I also love, you know, in, in talking to people when, and I've talked to several people that said the laws of logic didn't exist prior to humans, humanity. Right. So I, I, I immediately asked him, I said, was it true that the laws of logic didn't exist?

Right. And they said, yes. I said, well, that's a law of logic. And if, if it was true that they didn't exist prior to humanity, then it's false. Then it's false. Then it's false. So you can't have it both ways.

Yeah. That's a good point.

But yeah, keep going. I love this. No, this is great. So reason number three is that laws of logic that are merely conventional aren't really laws at all. They have no teeth. Who's going to enforce that?

You know, the police officer enforces the speed limit, but who is, who's going to enforce the laws of logic? So imagine a situation where, um, you know, where it's not hard to imagine, but let's say a skeptic accuses a Christian of violating the laws of logic.

Again, that skeptic is accusing the Christian of actually being in accordance with the way the universe actually is because the laws of logic don't actually describe reality. So not only can you go to the atheist and go, okay, so let's say Christianity hypothetically isn't logical.

So what that's, that's the first thing. Second thing is, Hey, Mr. Atheist, if, if logic is just conventional, you should be rejoicing. That that I don't follow logic. You shouldn't, you have not, not only do you not have any like, uh, like actual authority to enforce this, but actually you don't have any moral authority, moral high ground to enforce logic upon me because I'm actually being in accordance with the way the universe really is.

And so, um, there's no teeth to it. If logic is conventional and their problem is that Christianity is not, not logical. You just say, so what, you know, and, and your point is what, now you're not, of course, granting the Christianity is illogical.

You're just reducing their argument to absurdity, which is who am I obligated to? Right. That's right. Convention. Who am I obligated to? Yeah. And you know, uh, uh, that's good. Who am I obligated to?

Um, so reason number four, by, by proposing the argument, by even accusing the Christian of, of being illogical and saying, well, even, even by saying logic is a convention, the skeptic is showing. He doesn't really believe it.

Why? Because he wants to be understood logically. He's not saying he's not making a statement and hoping you'll think he means the exact opposite or, or even that it would be perfectly acceptable if you thought he believed the opposite, right?

And if logic is just a convention, then that means the way, you know, the, the, again, to use the phrase, the background programming is illogic. And so really what's really going on in his worldview is if he says logic is just a convention, what's actually true in the universe is that logic is not a convention.

Like that's because there's no logic in the back or at the very least, that's, that's possibly true. Um, if logic is just a convention, it isn't objective. It's not real. And if you say that logic isn't real, then, and then you shouldn't hope to be understood logically.

You shouldn't even, you shouldn't even think that it matters if the person you're speaking to believe is the diametrically opposed, you know, opposite of what you're saying. And, uh, and, and this is just sort of like a, um, it's sort of a common sense piece of the argument.

It's like, well, you're clear, you clearly don't believe that because you expect me to take you logically as if there's a law of logic that transcends your mind and mine. And it wouldn't be morally acceptable or epistemologically acceptable for me to just believe the opposite of what you're saying.

You know, if logic is just a convention, then it really boils down to preference, human preference, you know?

And I, and I, and I could change, uh, the convention to support my particular view on something. Right. I think that's exactly right.

That's a great point. Not a big deal. Yeah. Maybe Christians have their own convention and who are you to judge between one convention and the other.

Right. So when my favorite football team loses by two points, I can say, well, if you lose by two points, you really won. That's right. It turned into golf all of a sudden. Who's to say? Turned into golf.

That's great. Great point. All right. Keep going. All right. All right. So, uh, number five, human experience reveals that logic is discovered, not invented. So human conventions are useful for organizing things that humans can control, like the grammatical rules of language.

You know, I studied French in high school and I remember that there's, there's an academy in France. English doesn't have this, but there's an academy in France that makes rules for the French language.

And those rules are the rules of the French language. English is a more free flowing language. There's, you know, our dictionaries record how we use language, but there's no one out there dictating how we're supposed to use it.

You know, we've got other societal laws that, uh, and, and, and the French academy that does that, that's perfectly fine. I, they're coming up with rules and they all sort of agree. We're going to follow these rules.

That's perfectly fine. Um, but are lots of logic really like that? Of course not. Logic is something that even though most people don't study it, they conform to it all the time. It's discovered. You can analyze your own thinking and you can analyze the way that language is used in general, not just English or French, but just the, the structures of thought that give rise to language.

You, you study those and you analyze them and you discover logic. Logic is, um, our, our natural bent is not to treat logic as a manmade convention, but as the way things actually are. We instinctively think we instinctively act logically.

See, it's only later that we go back and we reflect on it and then we learn, Oh yeah, this is logic. There are these three laws of logic and they're, they're discovered. They're not invented. So that's reason number five.

Excellent. And then a reason number six is if logic and you, I think you said this very well earlier, if logic is just a human convention, it would not exist where no humans existed. So prior to humanity, it didn't exist, but it also wouldn't exist on Mars.

Now this is a problem because there we've, we've got equipment on Mars right now. But, uh, there's no human being on Mars. So even if you want to say, well, we've got cameras and we're looking through the camera.

So logic is, is sort of there on Mars by proxy. Well, that would mean that Mars is totally illogical until we flashed that camera on it and then it becomes logical. And then we moved the camera away and it's illogical again now because there's no humans there.

And it's like, well, no, I don't think so. And then let's say you went and started your own society on Mars. You know, Elon Musk wants to be the first one on Mars and what have you. And God bless him.

I hope he, I hope he come. I hope he gets it. And I also hope he repents and trust in Jesus Christ. That'd be awesome. You know, but, but if he were to go up on Mars and start his own Martian society, is he free to then come up with his own laws of logic?

I mean, there's, there's earthbound logic. Why not? Martian logic? Why not? Yeah. You know? And then on, on Mars, now you've got a situation where someone says a statement and it's both true and false and it's, it's not itself and it's equivalent, you know it, it's something in the middle between true and false and all those three things.

So Mars is now at this incoherent planet simply because we've got humans up there who just started their own conventions. I mean, the whole thing is just so absurd that it's, it's really amazing. Anybody would even make the assertion that logic is a human convention.

What we have really going on here, Anthony, is this human beings want to bend reality to suit our desires. It's, it's, it's a sin as old as Eden itself. Yes. It's, it's the pride of life, you know, lust of the eyes, lust of the flesh, pride.

And it's us wanting to make God and God's creation bend to our will. Instead of saying, this is God's world. He created it. He's the Lord over it. I have to figure out the way the world actually is. And I have to abide by God's rules.

And when we function that way, guess what? We get logic. We get a coherent universe, but it also means we're not sitting on the throne. But because man suppresses the truth and part of that truth, according to Romans one is the eternal power and divine nature of God.