Questions & Answers

When it looked like Mike was going to collapse this morning, we decided that perhaps we should send him home and that Dave and I would take Q &A tonight. We thought about letting us have a session of Stump the Elders, but we chickened out and decided that we would write the questions out ahead of time.

So, I basically have one question that I'm going to discuss, and of course, as we always do on Sunday night, feel free to raise your hand and ask questions and so forth and so on. This morning, Dr. Bach made the comment, very well taken, that when Moses wrote Genesis, he did not have a refutation of evolution in mind, evolution that never even occurred to anybody.

It is significant, I think, that throughout the world, in all major religions, as well as the Christian faith, they all assume that there is some kind of a creator. They come up with some pretty wild ideas about who this creator might be and how the steps were that led to the creation of the universe, but none of them assume that out of nothing, there was something, and it just sort of occurred.

And so, what I want to look at this evening, the question is, can Genesis be reconciled with theistic evolution? Now, there are a number of explanations for creation, because we do have to answer the question, we're here, how did we get here?

An even more fundamental question is, why is there anything, as opposed to nothing? It would be much more reasonable, almost, to assume that nothing had ever been created, but since we're obviously here, there has to be some explanation for how we got to be here, and beyond just the physical universe, when you get into the biological universe, not only is there life, but there is an almost endless variety of life, in the sea and in the air and on land, and of course, at the pinnacle of all of that, stands mankind.

And the Bible tells us that we are created, specifically created in the image and likeness of God, as opposed to all of the other animal life on this world, which is not so created. But, the question does come, and it's natural of scientists to want to ask, where did we come from?

And so, first of all, starting with Charles Darwin, he proposed an idea called natural selection of how you might get from a very simple one-celled organism to the extremely complex organism that the human being is.

And lots of people jumped on that for all sorts of reasons. Most of what I'm going to say tonight is taken from a little book that I will recommend to you, called Darwin's Black Box, by Michael Behe. And if you are really interested in this, or in the whole idea of what is called the design theory, the conscious design of creation, I would recommend that book to you.

It is easy to read. It is a scientific book. There are portions of it that you can skip over, if you don't want to go through the math. But, the average layman, it was written for a layman, and the average layman can read it.

It is significant, I think, in that he, by his own admission, Mr. Behe, is not an evangelical Christian. And so, he goes to some length to point this out. But, his basic premise is that if you look at the human body, that there has to be a designer.

That it is not possible for the human body to evolve step by step. Now, we reject atheistic evolution. It is completely ruled out as an explanation for why we are here, because it is atheistic. It does not involve God.

And since, as evangelical Christians, we are committed to God, we are committed to His Word, we are committed to the inerrancy of the Word, we cannot very well accept atheistic evolution as the explanation for how we got here.

And so, we just reject that out of hand. However, a number of decades ago, the idea came out, because they were trying to reconcile scientific thought with theology. And someone came up with, Asa Gray was one of them, there were two men, and I can't think of a second name, but a man named Asa Gray came up with this idea of theistic evolution.

And that basically says that there is a God who created the matter that everything started from. He sort of wound up the evolutionary clock and just watches it run and sort of nudges it from time to time to make it go in the direction that He wants it to go.

And He did plan where it's going. But basically, He allows natural selection to work. And so, that's what we want to look at. Is that a viable explanation? Not necessarily is it the correct one, but is it a viable one that we could actually adopt in good conscience as Christians?

And we've got to answer some questions. First of all, as I already brought up, the issue of first cause. Even if we say that, okay, everything developed from lower forms to higher forms, where did the lower forms come from?

Even if we accept that the universe started with a big bang, what lit the fuse and made it go bang? And people come up with some really wild ideas for this. Some people postulate a steady state universe in which everything has just always existed.

And they just duck the question of where it might have started from. Stephen Hawking is arguably one of the most learned men on the face of the earth today, alive today, and he has proposed a universe which stays in steady state.

And you can actually work out mathematics to make that work. But the thing about mathematics is you can prove things mathematically that you cannot actually create physically. Sometimes you run into this in the real world where a mathematician will design something except it can't be built because you can't physically do in the real world what the math can do.

So just because you can come up with math for something doesn't necessarily mean it's a good way to go. Another question that we've got to answer is how did life emerge from inanimate matter? Wherever the inanimate matter came from, how did life emerge out of that?

And then, of course, how does one account for starting off from basic animate matter and coming up to human beings which are set apart from the rest of the animal kingdom by the fact that they have a God consciousness.

They are also self-conscious. We look in the mirror and we say, I am a man or I am a woman. Dogs, believe it or not, don't do that. A dog does not look in the mirror and say, I'm a dog. And so, theistic evolution, as I said, does postulate God.

But how did we get to this step-by-step process? And is it even a reasonable explanation? We'll look at that for just a few minutes here. First of all, to the evolutionists, time is the answer to all of their issues.

Billions and billions of years, you've heard that phrase, are sufficient to do anything that you need to do. Time and chance, collisions of atoms and billions of years and enough time and anything comes out of it.

But would it? Would it? Well, first of all, what you're doing here, what's going on here is an attempt to reconcile biblical truth, what we see in the Bible, with what is perceived to be scientific fact.

You ask the average man in the street if he has any knowledge at all about science, and he will probably tell you that evolution is the accepted scientific theory for how we all got here. You would certainly get that idea reading the popular press, even the popular scientific press, you would get that idea.

And yet, that is a long way from being true. There are all kinds of competing theories of evolution. There is no THE theory of evolution, if you will. There's a whole bunch of competing ideas running out there, and they change practically by the week.

Because there's some serious problems with evolution as a philosophy, and what it does. First of all, if evolution, if we are the product of the chance, of time and chance, chance collision of atoms, and a long time, there's no reason for our existence.

There's no purpose to our existence. It leads to despair, if you think about it, very long. And most people avoid this by just not thinking about it. Another problem is that man, under these circumstances, is going to operate as an end in himself.

He didn't come from anywhere, he's not going anywhere, and again, he has no purpose, no ultimate meaning. But while you're here, try to have a good life, that sort of thing. Man becomes his own lawgiver, and there is no ultimate accountability.

So, under those circumstances, you can do anything. And the only basis for ethics becomes pragmatism, which is the statement of the greatest good for the greatest number. But right away, you run into a problem, who's going to say what good is?

Who's going to define what that is? And so, you've got philosophical problems with evolution. And these apply both to atheistic and theistic evolution. But then, when you get into theistic evolution, you run into more problems of its own.

First of all, you are postulating the truthfulness of evolution itself. You are postulating that natural selection is, in fact, the mechanism by which, by how we got to where we are. And even though natural selection certainly does take place within species, we can demonstrate that.

We can see that happening. If you will, within narrow limits, species do indeed evolve. If you define evolution as changing over time, they do change over time, adapting to conditions and what have you.

But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about fundamental changes in species, how it works. And the problem with postulating the truthfulness of evolution, one of my physics professors in college, who later became a good friend, was also a very strong believer.

He used to love to quote Mark Twain to us in saying that, too much of what we know ain't so. And you run into that all the time, particularly in the world of science. And here's an interesting quote from a man named Klaus Dose, who is a researcher in this area.

He said, quote, more than 30 years of experimentation on the origin of life in the fields of chemical and molecular evolution have led to a better perception of the immensity of the problem of the origin of life on Earth, rather than to its solution.

At present, all discussions on principle theories and experiments in the field either end in stalemate or in a confession of ignorance. At least the man is intellectually honest. Now, along comes the idea of a designer.

And this is an idea that is coming to the forefront very rapidly now. You see more and more about it, and it's entering mainstream science. Men like Bahey are its proponent. The idea being this, stated basically, is that you have in the body, in the human body, a large number of what are called irreducibly complex systems.

These systems could not possibly have evolved. That is, there is no way to come up with one step by step by step by making small steps to a previous model and improving it. You can't do it. So what's an irreducibly complex system?

Well, you're full of them. But just two that I'll mention very briefly. One is the eye. See, what has happened over the years and how we stand different from Darwin, Darwin saw on a very, very high level.

He had no idea what was actually going on inside the organisms he was studying. He did not have the tools necessary to get down inside to the molecular level. But now, we have molecular biology. And molecular biologists, of which Mr. Bahey is one, they actually understand now, step by step, what actually goes on in the body.

They know what's actually happening in a cell. A cell is not a black box to them anymore. You all have heard the phrase black box. It's what it says, it's a black box. And something goes in and something else comes out.

But we have no idea what's happening in the box. That's what a black box is. Well, the molecular biologists have pretty well plumbed the black boxes of the human body now. So that they do know what's going on.

At the molecular level, at the cellular level, they can describe, step by step, what happens. What happens when light strikes the retina of your eye, it strikes one of the little photocones, how does that actually generate a signal that stimulates the brain, so that taken together, you actually see, you see an image.

Well, they can explain to you how that happens. And even a very limited explanation of it takes several pages. It takes several times reading over it before you begin to get a hang of how this is working.

It involves minute chemical reactions. It involves cells changing shape, physically changing shape. And it's a marvelous thing. Well, Mr. Bahey and I share something. I'll confess to you. We both have a love of Warner Brothers cartoons.

And in particular, Foghorn Leghorn. And if any of you are familiar with Foghorn, there's always a little chicken hawk that's trying to capture him. And he comes up with these huge machines that involve usually bowling balls and cannons and sticks of dynamite and telephone poles falling over and all of this, trying to capture the rooster.

And that's a perfect example of a irreducibly complex system. It's complex, number one, because it has all of these inner working parts. But if you take any one of the parts away, it won't work anymore.

Yet another smaller example of an irreducible, irreducibly complex system is a mousetrap. You all familiar with how a mousetrap works? If you take any one of the pieces off the mousetrap, it will no longer work.

It needs every piece there in the shape that it's in to work. Otherwise, you're not going to catch any mice. And the eye is an irreducibly complex system. Everything in the eye must be there or it won't work.

So what this means is there is no way to go step by step from a simple system up to this complex system because until you get to the complex system, you don't have an eye yet. And you have no way to see until you get there.

You cannot step by step work your way up to an eye. Another example is something as simple and basic as blood clotting. Except blood clotting is not simple and it's not basic. When you cut yourself, the reason you don't bleed to death is that your blood clots and it does so very quickly.

But if you look at the mechanism that causes this to happen, there are a whole series of enzymes that have to kick in at precisely the right time in precisely the right amounts to make blood clotting work.

However, you can't let them sit in your body unused because they would clot everything. So what has to happen is an elaborate scheme of several dozens of steps. You cut yourself. The fact that you have now exposed the inner layers of skin to air triggers off what is called the clot cascade.

As things start happening, enzymes that have been stored in their dormant forms suddenly kick in and become into their active forms. And they come to the site very quickly, they come to the site and they start making a mesh.

Just like that. They start meshing it all together to catch the blood cells so that they can't come out. And this has to happen very quickly. And it does happen very quickly. But then, the whole thing has to shut off to keep the process from clotting every drop of blood in your body and killing you.

And so here is this elaborate system which runs through all of these steps very quickly, does its job and shuts off. If you miss any one of the steps, you won't get a blood clot. In fact, if you suffer, if you know anyone that is a hemophiliac, they, actually what they do is they miss one of the steps and their blood doesn't clot and they are in fact in danger of bleeding to death with the smallest cut anywhere on them.

If they don't have medication to stop that, they will in fact bleed to death. It's a marvelous system, but again, it's an irreducibly complex system. Every step in there has to happen. It has to happen in the right order.

It has to happen in the right amount for the whole thing to work. Any piece of it, you remove any piece of it, it doesn't work anymore. And once again, there is no way to ease up to this. There is no way to ease up to this.

And so, Mr. Bahey has come to the conclusion that these systems and other systems like them in the human body must have been designed. Now, when you design something, those of you who are engineers, you know what you do.

When you design something, you have an end state in mind. You know what you're trying to build and you work from there, backwards to the components that you need and then everything is assembled and put together and hopefully it works.

That's what it means to design something. And all of these irreducibly complex systems in the body scream that there has been a designer, that it didn't just happen, that someone, some entity, whatever you want to call him, has put conscious thought, intellect has been behind this.

And of course, we know who that is. Another thing that this system designs, the conscious design has by no means been adopted across the board in all scientific circles. But one of the most telling arguments about it is when someone says, well, we just evolved our way from point A to point B, no one has ever explained exactly how did we do that.

Precisely what are the intermediate steps that we went through to get from A to B, whatever A and B happened to be. And exactly what were the intermediate states. Evolutionists hate questions like that.

They don't like to work with that. So, what else? Back to our basic question. What about the theistic evolution? The theological problem with theistic evolution and why to me the answer is, is this a viable explanation for creation for a believer, is no, is that it presupposes a deistic creator.

But a deistic creator is not the God that is shown in the Bible. A deistic creator is remote. He's out there maybe watching what's going on, he wound up the cock, but he's not doing much more than that.

But God says he is approachable. God says he is approachable. John chapter 12 is just one of the many, many instances. In this case, God the Son. Verse 32, he said, If I be lifted up from the earth, I will draw all men unto me.

He is interacting. This is a God who interacts with his creation, not one that's off remote somewhere. Another problem with a deistic God is that he is unknowable. But God says of himself that he has revealed himself.

And there's many texts for that, but Hebrews 1, 1, and 2 is one of them. God who at sundry times and in diverse manners spake in times past unto the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son.

He speaks. Or as we saw just in this weekend, the children of Israel gathered around the foot of Mount Sinai, heard God speak. God spoke to them. God has given us his word. He speaks to us. Another problem with a deistic God is that a deistic God and deistic creator is beyond the reach of prayer.

But our God says that he is there and he takes a personal interest in his children.

Psalm 91, Psalm 91 and verse 15.

He shall call upon me and I will answer him. I will be with him in trouble. I will deliver him and honor him. And then he goes on. With long life will I satisfy him and show him my salvation. Again, God reveals himself as one who interacts with his creation.

He interacts with his children. He has a personal interest and takes care of every one of the sheep. He personally watches over them. Jeremiah 33, 3 is again, call upon me and I will answer thee and show thee great and mighty things that thou knowest not.

And finally, a deistic God is silent. But as we've already said, God speaks. God speaks. We saw that in Hebrews. We saw it in Exodus. We saw it in many other places where God has revealed himself. In short, the whole problem with deistic evolution is that it postulates a non-biblical view of God.

That's your problem with it. Are there any questions, comments? Yeah, Nate? Say that again. I'm still not sure that I understand the significance of your question, Nate. See, this is why we write the questions out ahead of time.

Oh, okay. All right. I see what you, yeah. Yes. Basically, the answer is that deistic evolution, evolution is not a valid theory. It is not a valid theory for anyone, really, but especially a Christian to consider.

I've said before to other people, never in here, even if I was not an evangelical Christian, I would not believe in evolution because of my background as an engineer. It's an absurd theory when you think about it.

If nothing else, it violates the laws of thermodynamics right there because in the universe, you just look around you, things run what? Down. Things do not run up in the universe. Everything proceeds from order to disorder.

If you want to say that in a scientific way and sound learned, you can say entropy increases.

You can use that one. Mark, yeah, that's true. It is interesting.

It is interesting that several of the people that I've read who are pushing the design, the conscious design theory of creation, themselves, they're not willing to go the rest of the way. I mean, they come to the point and say, there's got to be a creator.

There's got to be a designer, but they are unwilling to take the next step and say, well, that designer must be divine because the designer is always greater than what was created. Yeah, Mark. Of course, the philosophical answer, too, is what would you not want there to be a creator God?

Because if there is a creator God, then we are accountable to him. If we are his creation, then we are accountable to him. But on the other hand, if there is a creator God and we are made in his image, then we do have meaning.

We do have purpose. There is more than what's right here. There is a future. Our lives become meaningful. This is what Solomon said in the book of Ecclesiastes. Without God, nothing has meaning. But with God, everything becomes a gift from the Father's hand.

And now it's Dave's turn.

I said to Louis, this is like the tag team here. Got Louis the bagged down brown and Dave the Starbucks kid. Last time when I taught Sunday school, I gave the example of an illustration. What if Pastor Mike came up to you and said, in 10 minutes, ladies, you had to come to one of the ladies and said, you have to teach the ladies tea in 10 minutes.

Or one of the men, what if you had 10-minute notice, you've got to preach at the Memorial Day Parade downtown West Boylston. Well, at least we had all day, Louis. I mean, we had three or four hours to prepare, which is good.

It's good for us to be able to be here tonight, to be able to look at and consider these things. I always consider one of the things when I think about evolution, I always think it takes, if you really study it and look at all the pieces, parts, and as Louis said, and how it all has to fit together and everything has to go just perfectly right, and yet it happened by chance or some explosion, it takes more faith to believe that than it does to believe the account is when you open the scriptures and it says, in the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth and created man and created the animals.

It's just a wonderful gift that God has given to us, faith. Repentance and faith, to believe upon him and to take his word and see that we are fearfully and wonderfully made, as Psalm 139 tells us. Well, what would a Sunday night be without a recommendation on a book?

Have you ever seen this book, 101 Hymns Stories by Kenneth Ausbeck? If you don't have it and you would like to know a little bit more about hymns, the volumes, the ones that I have is two volumes set.

Particularly, I wanted to just read something to you this evening from it because of the special music that was sung this morning by Elaine Crane. She sang, Come thou fount of every blessing. In that hymn, in the original version, I don't think it's in ours, in our hymn book number two, second verse in the old version says, Here I raise mine Ebenezer.

Here I raise mine Ebenezer, and you've sung that. Now, we're supposed to sing Psalm 47 .7, I believe, says that we're supposed to sing with an understanding. And here we are. We open our hymn book, and if we were to have one of the old ones, and it says, Here I raise mine Ebenezer.

Okay, what does that mean? Anybody got an idea? I mean, some of you might be right on. You know the music, but I mean, I hate to do this, and I'm not going to put anybody on the spot, but do we have folks that don't know what that means?

I mean, there was a time when I did not know what that meant. Here I raise mine Ebenezer. Okay, we have a few hands. Good. I'm glad you would go ahead and let us know that by raising your hand. Well, somebody tell me the Old Testament account.

You remember, Doug? Okay. If you want to write this down, you can. It's in 1 Samuel 7, and in verse 12, I believe the Philistines had come against the people of God. The people go to Samuel, and they say, Samuel, pray for us.

Samuel offers a sacrifice, and then he prays to God, and God delivers them out of the hands of the Philistines, and it says that Samuel and the people, they raised an Ebenezer. And in your margin in your Bible, it may say a stone of help.

And what it means is that God, in the last part of that verse, hitherto has the Lord helped us. Or God has delivered us, God has helped us, and we're raising the stones. And they raised memorials in the Old Testament.

God parts Jordan, and they go into the Promised Land, and they take 12 stones out, and they place them on the other side. And why did they do that? So they could bring the children back to those stones and say, God had brought us on dry ground over Jordan.

It was a stone of memorial, a stone of help, and that's where that is. And the songwriter, Robbie Robertson, wrote that when he was 23 years old, and he said that in that, we can see in those words, that he knew if you owe to grace how great a debtor daily I'm constrained to be, God is his Savior, God is his help.

And he's raising a stone in his song, here I raise it, it is God that has brought me to this place. The old song I used to hear on the radio, we've come this far by faith, leaning upon the Lord, God has done the work.

Robbie Robertson, I believe is his name, Robert Robertson, wrote, as I said that in him when he was 23, and in here it says, before that, his father, he was born in 1735, his father died when he was eight years old.

He took up to learn the trade of barbering. Cutting here. Here, for the next few years, he did that, but then he was associated with wrong people, and he lived a debauched life. One day, he heard a preacher preach.

Now it's 1740, and it's in England. Who do you think it was? Who was his contemporary? Whitefield. He hears George Whitefield preach, and God saves him. Robert Robertson. He's, yeah, this is a little bit later.

He becomes a pastor, theologian, writes hymns, and I don't know if you know this part of the story of his life, but you remember the last verse, I think one of the verses, it says, prone to wander, Lord I feel it.

Well, one day, he was riding on a stagecoach when he noticed that a woman on the stagecoach was engrossed in a hymn book. And during the conversation that came up, the lady turned to him and asked him what he thought about the hymn that she was humming.

And he burst into tears and said, Madam, I am the poor unhappy man who wrote that hymn many, many years ago, and I would give a thousand worlds if I had them to enjoy the feelings that I had then. Because in his life he had strayed into unstableness, lapses of sin, and even involvement in Unitarianism.

But you get that type of stuff in a book like this, so it's a good one. Okay, I've got a couple, three questions. I don't know how far we can get, but let's see what happens. One of the questions that I have is, in Dr. Block's Sunday school class this morning, do you remember when he put the foil up, projected it, and he said, this is what my college students think of the God of the Old Testament, wrath and fury and vengeance.

And then he says, this is what they think of the God of the New Testament, his love, his mercy, and his compassion. And then Dr. Block went back to the Old Testament to show how God is full of compassion and love and forgiveness and that in the Old Testament, but he didn't go back to the New Testament.

And my question is, if we go into the New Testament, and most people have a low view of God, we don't have people bowing down and worshiping totem poles in our country. We don't have a whole lot of that going on.

We do have some physical idols, but the idol that we have in our country is that people fashion a God of their imagination. They make up a God that they want because it's easy to worship the God that they make.

And, of course, you have that when you have these different views. There's a different God in the Old Testament than there is in the New. So he had brought up that in the Old, he showed that back there, Joel 2 and the Psalms, that God is full of compassion, of great kindness and mercy, ready to forgive.

What about in the New Testament? Are there any verses in the New Testament that show us, yes, we know that God is love and God is compassionate and he forgives and we see that and he heals and he's so kind and Jesus wept over Jerusalem.

But what about in the New Testament? Are there verses or thoughts in the New Testament that deal with this Old Testament type thinking that the students had that are opposite of what I just said? Any thoughts, Bruce?

Hebrews 12. Our God is a consuming fire. Yes. Right, it's a fearful thing. That's in Hebrews 10. It's a fearful thing. And that whole context right there is talking about judgment. It says it's a fearful thing to fall into the hands of a living God.

Yes, Wes? Yeah. What about the woes of the Pharisees? And he got so upset, he was upset with the way that they were leading people astray and that they were taking their doctrine and they were making the tradition of men more important than the Scriptures.

And he lashed out at that. Also, he went into the temple and what did he do? Two times, cleansed it. Overturning the money tables and he had a whip going through there. Lewis? Yes. And more on, or in other words, more on hell than he did heaven.

Yes. In Matthew 25 .46, but these shall go away in everlasting punishment, but the righteous into life eternal. Dallas? Yes. I was thinking today, is that the first mention of church discipline in the Bible?

I mean, in the book of Acts. Chapter 5, Ananias and Sapphira, when it comes to selling their property and lying to God the Holy Spirit about it, Peter didn't pull out a 47 magnum and shoot them. The elders didn't bring them up front, and I'm not trying to be funny, but they didn't bring them up front of the congregation and guillotine them or whatever form of punishment they used back there or death.

They lied and they drew their last breath and it was God that took their life from them. I mean, that is the God of the Old Testament, the God of the New Testament. Yes. Any other examples you think of?

Doug? Yes. Yes, exactly. I mean, we look in Revelation and we see the lamb that was slain and we see He has redeemed us, as our brother aptly put it this morning. But then you go forward a few chapters to Revelation 19 and you see this rider on a white horse.

And you see Him there in righteousness. He judges and makes war. His eyes are a flame of fire. His clothing is dipped in blood. He's got a long lethal sword coming out of His mouth. And with a rod of iron, He rules the nations.

And He's treading on the winepress of the wrath of God. I don't know if you've thought about that, but you go through the wine, and even today they still do it, making wine, stepping on the grapes, and the grapes bursting.

I think Jonathan Edwards preached a sermon on that when it had to do with, as far as that winepress is, the wrath of God upon sinners, treading upon them to their eternal doom. So we see this in the Scriptures.

Our God has not changed. Peter said in 1 Peter 1, verses 15 and 16, But as He which has called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation, as for as it is written, Be ye holy, for I am holy.

God has not changed. So we must be careful. Don't we need to be careful that we can't, we don't want to ever be caught with putting God in a box and saying, you know, like these people do. There's one God in the Old Testament and one God of the New Testament.

He is the same yesterday and today and forever. And if you go all the way back to the book of Genesis from the very beginning, Noah found what? Grace in the eyes of the Lord. And it's through the Bible.

And yet you see through the Bible that God is of such pure eyes that He cannot look upon iniquity from Genesis all the way through the books of the Bible. So we must be careful. And I just kind of wanted to, so that we could kind of, it helped me as far as just finishing up that little bit of Sunday school.

Wasn't Dr. Block wonderful? It was such a tremendous blessing to have him here. I got to get the CDs. I was at school Saturday. Missed them, but boy, I heard that it was even as good, if not better, on Saturday.