Creation and Culture with Dan Biddle

It's fascinating to me how easily someone in one religion can find the fallacies and biases in another religion.

I think that what's fascinating... You're razor sharp on your criticism of Islam here.

Yeah, but what I find fascinating, Jeff, is that you recognize that with other religions, but you don't do it with your own.

That may be the case. And there's that confirmation bite coming up again.

This is Apologetics Live. To answer your questions, your host, from Striving for Eternity Ministries, Andrew Rappaport.

We are live, Apologetics Live, here to answer your most challenging questions about God and the

Bible. And that's what we do here, and I can answer any question that you have about God and the

Bible. And if you doubt that, well, I welcome you to go to ApologeticsLive .com. There's a little icon there for StreamYard.

Click that, join us, and we'll answer your most difficult question. Just remember one thing, though.

I don't know is a perfectly good answer. So we're going to do things a little different today because we have a guest.

I am co -host -less. Drew is not here tonight, but I have

Dr. Dan Biddle will be with us. We're going to talk about creation. We're going to talk about a new film that he's working on.

And then he's got to jump at the second hour, so we're going to have him in only for the first hour.

So we're going to jump right into that, and then I'll jump to other people that come in and questions that folks have.

So with that, we're going to do things a little different. I have some things for in news section, but we're going to do that second hour.

Let me bring in Dr. Dan. How are you doing? I'm doing great. Thanks for having me on.

We have a mutual friend that said, you know, basically, I think she put a gun to my head and said,

I had to get you on. I think that's sort of how it happened. But for my audience, if you wouldn't mind introducing yourself and your ministry that I just put up on the screen there is genesisapologetics .com.

If you wouldn't mind just introducing yourself and the ministry. Sure. Yeah. We are a student focused ministry called

Genesis Apologetics. The distinctions about us is that we are very video based, heavily video based, and all of our materials and books are free.

They're all downloadable. We also have books available on PDF that can be downloaded, but we really focus on K to college.

But a lot of the heart of our ministry is towards junior hires and high schoolers as well. And yeah,

I'm also the executive producer of a new movie called the Ark in the Darkness that will be in theaters, about a thousand and two theaters.

We just learned today they picked it up a little bit on March 20th and 21st is called the Ark in the

Darkness and you can buy tickets and showtimes at Noah's flood .com. So without the apostrophe

S just plural Noah's flood .com. Yes. And we're going to, you know,

I want to play and I'm not sure which order you want to do it in, whether you want me to play the trailer of that now, or you, you wanted to, you have a, about 18, 20 minute presentation that we, you want to be able to do talk about Noah's flood.

Which one do you want to do first? You want me to play the trailer? Yeah. Let's go ahead and do the trailer first to, to, to, to show that and give a good idea what the movie's about.

Yeah. All right. So here's, here's the trailer. Let me bring that up. And this is, so this is if you guys go to Noah's flood .com

here, here it is. All right.

So that is for folks who are listening on audio, you'll have to go to Noah's flood .com

and see the, see if they're, but so, so yeah, so that is coming out soon.

You can get tickets as it was shown there at fathomevents .com or Noah's flood .com.

You can buy the tickets. Absolutely. Great. Did you want me to, to dive into the 20 minute flood overview talk now, or what do you, what do you think?

Okay. Let's do that. Perfect. All right, guys. Well, what I did is our movie really covers a lot of the, the evidence for Noah's flood in a very in -depth way.

It's an hour and 52 minute movie followed by a 20 minute post -show, but what I did is I just pulled out,

I think, what are some of the main key evidences for the flood and compress them into this 40 slide

PowerPoint deck that I'd like to cover it just in fact, I'm going to set my timer to make sure

I stay with it, but we'll do our best to stay within about 18 minutes or so. So let's go ahead and get started.

We'll look at some of the key evidences for Noah's flood. So one of the main things to consider when we consider the flood is

Genesis 7, 11 says that the, all of the fountains of the great deep broke open on the same day and creationists who have studied this exhaustively with many

PhDs in geophysics and other fields consider that to mean that the 40 ,000 mile long oceanic rift system, which is it encompasses a globe about 1 .6

times over broke open. So we're looking at the fountains of the great deep and on the right side there, you see the mid

Atlantic Ridge, which is highlighted in yellow because there's perpendicular mountains on each side of it.

And then you can also see it on the image on, on the left. But if you type in Google bathymetric map, you'll see a much better highlighted version where you can see this rift system all over the world.

And we believe that it was this rift system that burst open or the Hebrew talks about the idea of cleaving open.

That's what commenced the flood. And when it did, it pushed the continents apart catastrophically over the year long flood.

Here's what it would have looked like from a graphical standpoint. When the fountains of the great deep break open, you have molten magma coming up from the bottom and splitting apart the continents bursting out with critically superheated steam jets that come up linearly around the world.

There's the oceanic rich system breaking apart. And when that, the molten lava comes up, it creates new sea floor, which goes and hits the land masses, binds, then subducts and goes underneath.

So for example, on the West coast, we know the Farallon plate subducted, we can use underground x -rays and see that today.

We know that the Sierra mountains were pushed up when the Farallon plate subducted. And then when the fountains of the great deep shut off, it sunk the ocean floor by as much as a mile, withdrawing the water from the continents in sheet flow to begin with, and then channelized flow afterwards.

So that's an overview of the mechanics of the flood. It's a theory known as catastrophic plate tectonics, which the majority of creationists would adhere to that model.

So there's even more sophisticated models that have proved that out. Here's Dr. John Bumgarner's model called

Terra, and many secular scientists and organizations have even ordered this up or purchased it for thousands of dollars to model where you can find coal and oil discoveries based upon the geophysics that Dr.

Bumgarner came up with. He's a PhD from UCLA about 40 years ago, been studying the flood ever since.

So there's lots of math, lots of science behind this theory of how everything broke apart. The other main thing to think about is we just have to ask ourselves the question, how do you bury a 1 ,800 mile long dinosaur kill zone that's 1 ,800 miles long, a thousand miles wide, over a million square miles?

And each one of those dots that you see there is not one, not two, but it's a mega bone bed.

These are mega bone bed fossils all over the middle of America. So how do you bury millions of dinosaurs mixed with marine life in the middle of America, sometimes under 50 or 100 feet of mud if you don't have a worldwide flood?

And of course, we have even more clues from the Genesis account where Genesis 8 -3 says the waters receded from the earth, going forth and returning.

And at the end of the 150 days, the waters decreased. So we have the zenith of the flood about day 150, and then we have the waters beginning to decrease after that.

But this could indicate, even from the Bible, that we have tsunami -like systems going on that are systematically burying the dinosaurs.

Let's just take an example, look at one of these called the Tannus site in North Dakota. There are lots of situations like this.

This is just one example. This is a huge dinosaur burial kill zone that scientists believe was made by two different tsunamis.

So there's an exquisite preservation with respect to the fish that are there, the land creatures, the fish.

Excuse me, they're all buried and mixed up together and they're exquisitely preserved. You can see the fish fins have still got the veins intact.

A number of dinosaurs, they call them like beef jerky because there's a number of the tissues that have been preserved, very, very fresh kill zone at the

Tannus location. And they've attributed it to two different tsunamis. They didn't even determine the direction that the tsunamis came up, made the muddy deposits, sheet flowed back on, back off, came back up, and then sheet flowed back off.

Here's an example from Montana where they found the largest T -Rex ever discovered. I'm going to go ahead and play that again, but I believe that's where they found

B -Rex under hundreds of feet of mud that was definitely laid down by tsunamis.

But evolutionists say that they were killed by an asteroid that landed in the Yucatan Peninsula, 2000 miles south.

So if you can simulate that and just imagine what that would have looked like for the asteroid to hit there, it would have completely missed that 1800 mile kill zone that I just showed on your screen.

So the evolutionary explanation is very, very lacking for the extinction of the dinosaurs, because what we have in reality is a million square miles of dinosaurs buried in mud, under 50, 100, 150 feet of mud, and the

Chicxulub asteroid that landed a couple thousand miles south of this location, even under the most generous simulations, would not have produced mud that far north to bury these dinosaurs in 100 feet of mud, along with sharks, fish, clam, and other other marine life.

It was definitely the subduction that was causing from like on the West Coast, the Farallon Plate being created rapidly, subducting underneath the land like that, and then bringing the water up from the west to the east, pushing the water in sheet flow over the continents, burying dinosaurs en masse.

The other interesting indication that we have is we find these dinosaurs not only buried in mud, sand, and ash, it's not just one of those things that's a tip -off giveaway.

It's the fact that we're finding these dinosaurs buried in all three products, mud, sand, and ash, sometimes all three, sometimes just two.

But in many situations, we find these dinosaurs buried in a clue of this matrix that's those three different products put together.

So we have subduction that's happening rapidly, and then it's creating subduction related volcanism that's pushing ash up into the atmosphere.

Here's the Independence Dike Swarm. It's a 375 mile long linear fissure, and it's producing so much ash it covered and blanketed over half of America, producing 4000 cubic miles of ash.

So just amazing, amazing evidence. And here's this is the Brushy Basin member that will fly in here showing it's over 100 meters thick in Utah, buried with ash, so just huge amounts of ash that had to be produced quickly and catastrophically because the dinosaurs are buried in a snapshot of those three products, mud and sand being brought up from the ocean and ash being produced by the rapidly subducting volcanoes.

So here's just an idea comparison of how much ash was produced within a period of just that one year during the flood when you compare it to like Mount St.

Helens, which produces one quarter of a square mile of ash. But the

Independence Dike Swarm produced 4000 cubic miles of ash. So many people remember

Mount St. Helens when it blew up in the 80s, blanketed over three states with ash. It darkened the sun over three states for a couple of days.

That was just a very small eruption when you compare it to the Independence Dike Swarm that produced multiple times more ash.

And that's exactly what the dinosaurs were buried in. And that's what the product that was responsible for killing them also.

So it's quite interesting that we have all three of these products mixed up together, mud, sand and ash.

And we have catastrophic plate tectonics that would explain how you have these tsunamis because the spreading seafloor binds against the landmass, builds up tension, releases, causing a bidirectional tsunami going up, one going out to sea, the other side bringing it up onto land.

And then we have subduction creating the ash. So that's why dinosaurs are buried in all three products.

Here's another example called the Morrison Formation. This is a 13 state formation.

So it's hard to imagine that, but it covers 13 states right in the middle of America. We'll zoom in here to just take a look at how thick this mud pancake is that touches 13 states continuously.

So this is Morrison, Colorado. We fly in and we see what's called the Morrison Formation here.

It's a 300 foot thick mud pancake that's spread over 13 states that's filled with dead dinosaurs and marine life.

So 300 feet thick, we can fly in a plane just by comparison sake. We can drop in that 747, which is 230 feet.

We can even put in the Empire State Building again just for scale. But imagine this mud deposit over 300 feet thick, over 600 ,000 square miles, over 13 states.

How do you do that without a worldwide flood? How much higher did the water have to be to deposit 300 feet of mud like a pancake and bury 52 species of dinosaurs?

It had to be a worldwide flood. So here's a picture of all of the creatures that are found buried in the

Jurassic Morrison Formation. Basically, every creature known in North America is found sandwiched in this mud pancake over 13 states, and they all died at the same time.

They're all there buried. So, you know, there's lots of different fossil occurrences, 37 genre, 364 species of plants, 52 species of dinosaurs.

And that's just what we found so far. So it's not just the Morrison Formation. Here is the same dots from the fossil database showing that these deposits are all over the world.

Each one of these dots representing a major, major fossil find. But there's not just, you know,

California or the states, it's everywhere. But you'll notice something else interesting.

When we piece these continents together, rejoin Africa, it perfectly notch fits right back into South America like this.

So these dots, when you join them back together, show that there was an ecosystem there, a habitat with plants and animals that were all living in these regions.

Then you have the Mid -Atlantic Ridge breaking open. So the fountains of the Great Deep burst forth and they quickly buried this whole ecosystem in mud, sand and ash deposits right there.

So we have this whole system that is there and then it gets split apart so we can correlate these different insects and plants and ferns and everything.

Shane, look at that. They're matching on each side of the continents. And it's the same thing with the dinosaurs.

You can go ahead and take these two continents, move them apart. And you can find brother -sister dinosaurs on each side of these mass matching continents that are now spread apart by over 2 ,000 miles of ocean.

And the evidence just keeps being heaped up. This is a recent study of oil chemistry that's been investigated showing that when you push these continents back together, it was the same type of flora and fauna that was responsible for making that type of oil in those regions.

Because over 12 samples of oil here have been measured and because oil has chemical signatures to them.

And when you put the continents back together, they're perfectly matching, showing that whatever plant and animal life was there when the time happened where they split is still present there on either side of the continents.

So, again, just overwhelming proof that this flood happened and proof that it happened rapidly and recently.

The last thing we'll go over is dinosaur soft tissue. This is a discovery that really has happened over recent years, big time in the mid 2000s.

Here's an example of a triceratops horn that's being stretched. Mark Armitage did this.

When you take this triceratops horn, you demineralize the bone, put it under a microscope.

You can grab forceps and actually pull it and stretch it because the soft tissue is still present.

There's no way that bone that you're seeing there is 65 million years old. It should have all been gone, but they have soft tissue.

And there's over 120 peer reviewed scientific journal articles that are found in secular science magazines that have substantiated 16 different types of bioorganic tissues that are still found in dinosaur bones.

These are things like blood vessels, blood cells, feces, histones, proteins, collagen, keratin, all of these things that they're recently discovering that have no business being in these bones, that they really are millions of years old.

The last two that were discovered recently is dinosaur cartilage and dinosaur nerve cells.

That's bioorganic material 15 and 16. So who can imagine that we would have dinosaur cartilage and nerve stills still intact if these bones are really 65 million years old.

So here's a list of 122 peer reviewed journals. So this is just our idea.

It goes back about 50 years. But the most shift that's happened in this area has really come since the 70s on forward with the most predominant findings being happening recently in the mid 2000.

Here's a Dr. Mary Schweitzer found this here. We have red blood cells lined up in an artery from a dinosaur.

Just as you can see it plain as day there, she calls it says they're lined up like a train. Collagen, however, is the most iron clad evidence that substantiates the younger time frame and that these dinosaurs are very quickly because collagen is the soft fibular material that is added to the bone mineral.

It's like a matrix. That's what bones are made of, the hard part and the soft part. And collagen provides the soft, flexible part of the bone matrix.

And collagen has a known decay rate. Many scientists have studied collagen and its decay rate.

Scientists will put it at 10 ,000 years as a maximum shelf life or maybe 100 ,000 years.

Some scientists will go 300 ,000 years. But the most generous study will say maybe 900 ,000 years.

Collagen could last out of the most ideal conditions. But most scientists will say, I'll give it 100 ,000 years or so, which is still a very, very high upper limit.

But did you know that we find collagen in dinosaur bones? So there's no way from a scientific standpoint that these bones can be 65 million years old if they include collagen, which they do.

Study after study showed that they have collagen. So in the 1970s and this is a bold statement, but I would

I would challenge our more skeptical viewers to pressure test what I'm about to say and go ahead and do your own research because we've done it a lot.

I can emphatically state that in the 70s, the state of the literature and the state of paleontology was that 100 out of 100 paleontologists would have said all dinosaur fossils are just rocks.

I'm 55 now. When I went to high school, it was emphatically stated, college, same thing.

Everyone was saying dinosaur bones are just they're not even bones or just dinosaur fossils.

And the dinosaur fossils are fully per mineralized rocks that replace the original bone.

That was a perspective in the 1970s. Then in the mid 2000s, we start having articles like this come out.

Dinosaur shocker probing the 68 million year old T -Rex. Mary Schweitzer stumbled upon astonishing signs of life that may radically change our view of these ancient beasts.

So they're admitting this like no one was expecting to find these dinosaur soft tissue. Here's another one in Discover.

They have entitled this one Schweitzer's dangerous discovery. When this shy paleontologist found soft, fresh looking tissue inside of a

T -Rex femur, she erased a line between past and present. Then all hell broke loose because the field just kind of blew up when this happened because it spun it on its head.

She even said in this article that I had one reviewer when she was trying to publish her findings about these soft tissues that she was finding.

But this one reviewer told her that he didn't care what the data said, that he knew that what

I was finding wasn't possible. So she wrote back and said, well, what type of data would convince you?

And he said nothing because, again, the field was certain before the

Mary's findings that dinosaurs were petrified rocks. Here's another one from PhysOrg, March of 24, 2005.

Scientists discovered T -Rex soft tissues. And here we go. Conventional wisdom among paleontologists states that when dinosaurs died and became fossilized, soft tissues didn't preserve.

The bones were essentially transformed into rocks through the gradual replacement of all organic material by minerals.

New research by North Carolina State University paleontologists, however, could literally turn that theory inside out.

And that's exactly what has happened. So the shift that we have in the 1970s, maybe even the 1980s and 90s, but you're sure if you go back to the 70s, 100 percent of studied credentialed paleontologists would have said all dinosaur fossils are rocks.

That was a prevailing view. Now, in the 2020s, zero of 100 paleontologists can say all dinosaur fossils are rocks.

And in fact, 100 out of 100, because of the ironclad case we have now of 122 peer reviewed journal articles that substantiated this, they have to say at least, well, many dinosaur fossils are bones.

And they also have to say that many dinosaur fossils are bones that have soft tissue organic to the creature, not contamination, but organic to the creature.

So is this really science? Are we really certain, you know, if we could go through this much of a radical shift where we have 100 percent of paleontologists saying one thing in the 70s, but now zero percent of them saying that just decades later, how certain can we be about evolutionary theory because it just completely did a 180.

Here's even the founding director of the Royal Tyrrell Museum, the largest dinosaur museum in the world.

And he says, yep, usually most of the original bone is still present in a dinosaur fossil.

So that's what they're what they're saying now. So it really makes sense to me that these dinosaur bones are rapidly entombed in a flood that happened about four and a half thousand years ago.

And they're definitely not 65 million years old. So I think with that, we'll go ahead and and stop with my 20 minute talk and then you can take it away.

Yeah, no, this was I think they saw some some folks that were commenting. And I'm going to put some of the some of these up because it was, you know,

I know that see if it was this one. I think it was this one

I wanted to. So, brother, John is saying that this this information, this was information overload for me.

Sorry, it's a lot taken so fast. Yes, John, you can always go back because I know he was posting and saying, hey, can can you go back to some slides?

You can go back and rewatch the video and stop it. Take notes.

And I would add to that that what I just covered quickly because I wanted to make sure to sandwich a lot in that 15 to 20 minute period, there is just a rip through the tips of the trees.

I have an hour long talk where we slow down and unpack a lot of the same information.

In fact, if you go to the last one I did called Bayside Church Bible Conference, I cover soft tissues and the mechanics of Noah's flood over like an hour and 10 minutes.

So that would be a good one. I would recommend go to our YouTube channel and look at the Bible Conference 2024 talk that I gave.

Yeah, and that's you know, there was a lot of information. It's there's some information you gave that I've heard some that was really interesting because I never really thought about where all the fossils are and how they're laid out and then the arguments.

OK, well, let's let's examine this. So how are you getting all this water? Yeah, in the middle of the

United States, but it's a local flood. It's incredible. Yeah, it certainly wasn't wasn't a local flood.

You know, Earth is currently three fourths covered with water and in the ocean basins, it's miles deep in many places.

So the water that was involved in the flood is still present on Earth. You know, I remember watching on Discovery Channel.

They did a they were looking at the Grand Canyon and they were showing from the sediment and different rock layers that this had to have been a flood.

Because of where they end up seeing, then they can basically look and show where the rock far away from the, you know, from the

Grand Canyon. They're like, so it was a really big flood. But they go, but it wasn't a global flood. It could.

And actually, I think the way they worded it is it couldn't be a global flood. So yeah, the

Grand Canyon is interesting. In fact, most creationists do believe that it was actually a post flood formation that was related to the ice age,

I think. And that's because we have a lot of different layers that are exposed all the way down to the basement rocks.

But yeah, many creationists would believe that that was an ice age related flow formation when the

Hopi Lake broke and the ice dam broke and then it just crashed down and carved that whole canyon out.

So in that way, it would have been a local flood, but in many ways, it was tied to the global flood. So some comments that came in when we're playing the film, it's when

Kathy is saying, looks like a great movie. I do, the graphics that you had in that were very good in that film.

Yeah, you know, it's incredible. Ralph Stren is our producer, director of the movie, and he's the one that did the movie called

Genesis Paradise Lost. And that movie is the most cinemagraphic work on creation ever done in history, as far as I'm concerned.

He got several awards for it, and it was on the top bestseller list. And so Ralph is a great animator.

He's a visual effects artist by background. So the CGI in this movie, in fact, just by an insider secret here, when you go see the movie on the big screen, don't get out of your chair about minute 35.

Don't go get popcorn. Don't run to the restroom. You have to stay in your seat at minute 35, because there's a five -minute flood commencement scene coming that I've watched this movie 15 times, because I'm the

XP over the movie, and I get to watch it a lot. And every time I watch it, it is a goosebump situation.

The music that comes on, watching the flood and the water and the fountains of the great deep broke open. It's amazing.

So I love the graphics of the movie, too. Thanks for that comment. Melissa is asking whether the name of the talk,

Noah's Flood at Bayside Church. Yeah, I think it's Bayside Church Bible Conference 2024.

And then you can watch a lot of the evidence that I just downloaded, like a fire hose.

I put it to the garden hose speed during that talk. So Standing for Truth says that you're the man.

Thank you very much. Trying to stay in my lane. John has a question for you, and Drew's not here.

He kind of asked this of all the guests, but he wants to know if you're a pre -millennialist or a post -millennialist.

Yeah, you know, we do get into eschatology in this movie, and it's one of the slightly more controversial parts of the movie.

I think most of Christendom will be okay with the 85 % of the movie that covers the flood.

I think our timeline might be a little bit controversial, but we do talk about the parallel of end times judgment because Jesus himself drew that parallel to the flood.

He says in Matthew 24, just as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be in the coming of the

Son of Man. People will be out having parties and getting married and doing all this stuff, and suddenly destruction will be upon them.

So I believe in the end time judgment. Our movie doesn't take a particular position, but we do say things like, wake up, everyone, look around you.

The world is different, and things are changing, and they're changing more rapidly. You know, when

I was a teenager, if you got caught with marijuana in the high school, you'd go to juvenile hall, you know, jail for teenagers.

And if you walked into Macy's store for men and put on a shirt and tried to run out, you'd get tackled by a loss prevention officer, and again, hauled off to juvenile hall, you know.

But nowadays, you know, many stores have a no -chase policy. You can walk into Home Depot, grab what you want, book it out the front door, and they won't chase you.

And in California, you can drive down the interstate and dial 1 -800. Look at these big billboards that say 1 -800 -WEED to your front door, you know, and call the number, and they'll drive up a pack of marijuana for you to smoke.

So the Bible does say, with respect to end times, that lawlessness will increase in the end days, and there's a certain degree of numbing that people are going through right now, where they're just getting used to these things.

And COVID shifted a lot of things. We can look at Israel that's going on right now.

There's wars, there's rumors of wars, nation will rise against nation. So I think the markers are pretty clear that we're heading into some interesting times.

I don't know how much longer it's going to be around and everything, but we need to look up, because Jesus says, you know, your redemption draws nigh when these things start happening.

So the movie does cover a little bit of eschatology. So you didn't answer the question, though.

Oh, the question, yeah. I'm a classic pre -tribulation rapture guy, and I believe

I'm very much in alignment with John MacArthur and that camp on when it comes to end times, which

I would say is just very, very classic. Yeah, and John likes to ask that of everyone.

My co -host is Post Mill, and I'm pre -Mill. And so he, you know, but we got

Standing for Truth says, can't wait for the film. But another question that John is asking of you is, do you have any thoughts on a flat earth?

Yeah, our PR group just asked that we do a piece on how the flat earth is addressed with Noah's flood.

And wow, that was the first time that that had happened. I had to contact my flat earth expert,

Pat Roy. He's not a flat earther, but he's the one that produced a movie called Faith on the Edge, I believe, which is a really well done video that addresses the flat earth idea.

And so first, I would approach that topic with a lot of compassion, because I think a lot of the reasons that people adhere to ideas like the flat earth is from a genuine and in many cases deserved distrust of the mainstream narrative and distrust of the government.

I mean, when my kids go to when they were in public school and they were going to sixth and seventh grade earth history classes, they were getting filled with propaganda pertaining to evolution that I don't agree with.

And it's not true. So there's a good reason to mistrust a lot of the mainstream narrative.

But when you when you look at the flat earth and the flood, there is some interesting parallels there are there, because if the

Bible says that the water was was covering every high hill by 15 cubits, which is 22 feet.

Well, then wouldn't the water have just flowed right off the edges of the earth if it was if Earth is flat there?

And I think from a practical standpoint, I think if there really are edges, you should be able to go there and take a selfie.

You should be able to go there and get photo evidence of a disc or an edge or something like that. So, of course, we don't believe in the flat earth, but I do want to have empathy and sensitivity with people who believe that because you'd be surprised the number of people who do believe that I don't believe in the flat earth because observational science would would show that that's not the case.

We can show a spherical earth using observational science. So whereas evolution theory is based on historical science where you have to guess and make abstractions and everything, but but creationists use observational science or the scientific method as a tool in the tool bag.

And that should be relied upon for those things. Well, you definitely won over someone here because John John says that says,

Andrew, one of the best guests you've had with the slideshow. Awesome. Awesome stuff,

Dan. Oh, that's that's great. Thank you. Thank you very much. I agree with the first viewer, though.

It went pretty fast. I normally like like slowing down a lot, but I wanted you guys to just really see a very, you know, a tour right over the tops of the trees of some of the main fundamental evidences that are right there, because, you know, there's not a little rabbit trail for you.

Isn't it amazing? And second, Peter three, how Peter, who only wrote a small scrap of scripture, a little section of the

Bible is written by Peter. And he says, and he's closing out his book. It's in second. Peter chapter three says, look, above all else, just know this, that in the last days, scoffers are going to come and they're going to be denying and scoffing three things.

They're going to deny that Jesus is coming back. They're going to deny that, you know, creation out of nothing, ex nihilo, or that God created out of nothing.

And they're going to deny a worldwide flood. And that's exactly what we see in today's culture and in today's educational environment.

You can't get a college degree without being indoctrinated that those three things are definitely not true.

In fact, you have to take core curriculum classes like geology, anthropology, biology, and all of those classes are going to teach evolution over millions of years, and there's no worldwide flood.

So it's a very interesting time that we live in, in that way. So let me ask some questions that I know come up with this topic.

With the flood, we see in schools where they talk about, you know, there were these different ice ages millions of years ago.

Do you believe that there was an ice age? And second, if you do think so, do you think it was caused by the flood and how?

Yeah, so again, let me be really bold about this. I know there was an ice age.

I have no question that there was, and I can say emphatically that there was one large scale ice age, and I can even tell you the reason why it happened, which is interesting because evolutionists, even

PhD scientist evolutionists can't say any of the things that I just said.

They don't know if there was five ice ages, or some people say it was six. They can't tell you when they happened.

I can tell you that there was one, and I can tell you when it happened and why it happened. It happened because of three reasons.

So if the flood was this global catastrophic event, and CPT or catastrophic plate tectonics is true, where you have the molten lava coming up and turning into new seafloor, which is rapidly spreading, and you've got the linear steam jets creating all the critically superheated water, you have aerosols coming up from the volcanism, you have hot oceans, and you have evaporation.

So those three things are a perfect worldwide condition for causing the one single ice age that was in full effect about 100 years after the flood, and actually lasted for another 900.

So it was about a 1 ,000 -year process, and it definitely happened, and the flood was the mechanism for it.

It was a perfect storm, because you have the heated oceans that resulted in lots of evaporation, and then when you have all this subduction going on and massive volcanism, like the

Independence Lake swarm that I showed you, those aerosols spray into the atmosphere and block the sun.

So it was a perfect situation for the one major ice age to hit Earth.

So a question I like to ask when I get someone talking of creation, because there's been a shift regarding the ages of people.

So we have, in scripture, people living hundreds of years before the flood, after the flood, more of our lifetime, 60, 70 years.

So the prevailing argument that it used to be was that there was this canopy that broke with the flood, and there's now more radiation, things like that.

Would you hold to a canopy view? And if you don't hold to a canopy view, what would be your thinking of why the age is drastically reduced?

Yeah, so let me do the age thing first, and I'll address the canopy next, if that's okay. So recent scientific analyses have come out, and I'm going to attribute

Dr. John Sanford for this. I think he was really the first guy. He's a geneticist from Cornell University.

There may have been others, but I really think he championed the true theory about why people lived so far, so long before the flood.

So here's how it works. Before the flood, the average lifespan of the patriarchs, if you take out

Enoch, who was transmuted up to be with God, their average lifespan is about 912 years.

And suddenly at the flood, they go through, they don't fall off a cliff and go from 900 down to 70 or 100.

They systematically start at 912, and they hit the flood. Then they go down a slope, a predictable slope, a scientific slope, 600, 500, 400.

You get to Peleg. He's 239. Shem was 600, so that was Noah's son. So you got Shem at 600, then

Peleg's 239, Abraham's 175, all the way down to Moses is 120, and there are several in between.

So it's amazing because when you plot the data out, it's incredibly scientific. Look, I was a testifying expert in state and federal court cases dealing with research, statistics, regression, all of that stuff for about 20 years.

And I've never seen such a beautiful scientific argument from a historical ancient book.

Because the R -square of the data plot, when it goes down, which is a technical term for the percentage of the data points that are predicted by the line, is 0 .95.

And it's significant at the 0 .0000001 level, and it's because it falls down what's called an exponential decay curve, or it's called a power law curve.

So we really have two options going on because those lifespans, those declining lifespans, were recorded by the

Bible transcribers over about 2 ,900 years covering over 30 individuals.

So either those people who were writing, the sheep herders who were writing with feathered pens on animal parchment, were declining the lifespans in a way that was a cohesive lie that spanned multiple generations, and they would have been scorned for that.

And they knew polynomial math to slope it down systematically like they did.

Or those are real lifespans that show what's called a biological decay curve.

Because when you take all of humanity before the flood, might have been millions of people before the flood, and you bottleneck them down to just eight people who are on the arc, and you squeeze that population, those eight people get off the arc, begin interbreeding.

And when they do, their mutations in their gene pool begin exponentially increasing, which shortens lifespans exponentially.

And Dr. John Sanford has exhaustively vetted this out and proved it, scientifically showing that's exactly what would happen, and that's what did happen with respect to the lifespans.

Your next question was about the canopy theory. And that, again, is a controversial one.

The classical canopy theory that many creationists held to maybe a few decades ago is not predominantly held by the leading scientists that we work with, like Answers in Genesis and the

Institute for Creation Research. But I can say from scripture and from science that the

Earth climate is radically different when you compare the pre -flood world to the post -flood world.

Peter even says the world that then was was destroyed with water. We have a temperate condition because Adam and Eve are walking around without any clothes on, you know, so it was a great condition.

The water used to, the rain came from the Earth, from the bottom of the Earth, so something came up to water the plants.

So that's a different kind of thing going on. Now we have the rainbow after the flood, so maybe that was some atmospheric changes.

And then we have a lot of a harsher climate as well. And we have animals that lived in the pre -flood world that are now buried in the fossil record, like sauropod dinosaurs that have nasal passages that are only twice the size of a modern -day horse, but they weighed 100 ,000 pounds.

There's no way to get enough oxygen in a creature like that in today's Earth climate for them to still live.

So they had to live only before the flood. These huge flying pterodactyls with 50 -foot wingspans that weighed 600 pounds.

Well, it's really hard in today's Earth climate to get a 600 -pound bird to flap its wings and fly.

So there was something going on in the past. We don't know what it was. It could have been pressure.

It could have been oxygen layers or levels or different types of oxygen. But the world was different before the flood than what it is now.

Yeah, I mean, it's a thing where I think that oxygen levels might have been different.

Yeah, the whole thing is we don't know what was the world like before the flood, which is a key thing that when you hear someone that's arguing for evolution, they're trying to take what we can look at today, because that's all we have, and then try to make it fit something that they want it to say.

I always say if you want the scientific evidence for how the world began, there's only one place you can go.

It's called scripture, because you need someone that can create the experiment, observe it, and record it, and that's in the

Bible. You need an eyewitness. Yeah, Jodi says this.

She says, I was taught growing up that the Ice Age dinosaurs, etc., were falsehoods created by Satan to fool people and make them not believe the

Bible. She later said she doesn't believe that anymore. The thing, though, is that I find is that if you actually were to look at dinosaurs and all of this stuff, they actually support the

Bible. For one, dinosaurs are mentioned in the Bible. Yeah, that's a great point.

I really appreciate that, because I monitor a lot of our ministry's social media pages, and a lot of Christians do have that position.

There was no dinosaurs. They were an invention. They all died in Satan's flood. There's all kinds of different ideas there.

I can say very lovingly and with a lot of truth, look, they're real. I've seen them.

I've traveled to Canada, looked at the bone beds. Montana looked at the bone beds. They're real. They lived recently.

They died in the flood. And in Job chapter 40, we have one species of dinosaur that's exhaustively explained by God himself with 14 different characteristics that absolutely fit a sauropod dinosaur.

And in Job chapter 41, we have the description of Leviathan, which, in our opinion, was a

Deinosuchus, a super croc. And we have a lot of evidence to support that also on our website.

Or you can just type in Google, I think, Leviathan Genesis Apologetics.

You'll see our video there. But a lot of people have differing views on dinosaurs.

I'm hoping that our movie will try to set the record straight as much as possible. And we want to be sensitive with people.

Look, I wasn't a creationist either until about 12 years ago, and then God opened my eyes to allow me to see this truth.

So I didn't figure this stuff out because I'm a smart guy or I like evidence or I read a lot.

God allowed me to see the truth of creation for one reason alone. First of all, it was a gift.

And it was a gift that I received because I was willing to submit myself under Scripture. And it was only then when

I was willing to submit myself under Scripture like a humble three -year -old that God basically metaphorically said to me, come here, son.

Now that you went under the limbo bar and you've become humble, I have some things I want to show you.

And I took a journey out to Canada, Montana, and became exhaustively convinced that the dinosaurs lived and they were thriving and they died as a punishment for the fall of man.

Yeah, I think that what we end up with is the fact that the more we study science, the more it supports

Scripture. And I'm trying to remember who it was. I think it was,

I can't remember if it was R .C. Sproul or James Boyce. I want to say it was Boyce, but then it was on a chalkboard.

So that's usually R .C. Sproul that always used to have to have a chalkboard. But he made the argument. He just drew, like, had a line.

And he said the more that we look into, whether it's dinosaurs or, you know, archaeology, whatever, the arguments just keep filling in.

He'd had a line, but it had dashes, like some gaps in the line. And he just kept filling in.

And he said, the more we study, all it's doing is filling in. There's never a point that we're erasing something from the

Bible and going, oh, that's, you know, that is just wrong. You're always filling in the gap, that we're learning more.

We're getting more information. And there's not a time that we're saying, oh, the information in the

Bible is wrong. We're always getting to the point of, oh, well, there's no city, you know, there's different cities that are mentioned in the

Bible. And they say that city never existed. Or King David. I mean, there wasn't a record of King David for many years.

Well, now we have that, right? So that fills in that line. Yes, so, so true.

Now, unfortunately, I do have to hop in about two minutes for my next interview, but I would love to see if there's any other questions we could do from folks, if they have any questions or if you've got any questions.

This is something I could stay with you for the next two hours. This is fun. Yeah, well, we will be going for another hour.

So I'll probably get a lot more questions after you. We had one question from someone who,

I guess, missed the beginning and asked, he asked, what were your thoughts about a new film called

The Ark and the Darkness? Yes, well, that's the one we're really excited about that.

So we're putting that movie in the theaters on March 20th and 21st. And we just learned today from Fathom that our ticket sales are really strong.

They're all very pleased over there, over 20 ,000 tickets sold so far. And the line is just going up, which is great.

And they added some more theaters. So we'll be in 1 ,002 theaters. But if they just go to noahsflood .com,

you can find tickets and showtimes there. I want to thank you for coming on again.

For folks, I put up the links for your ministry is genesisapologetics .com.

And then if you want for the film to get your tickets, it's noahsflood .com.

So those are the two ones to check out. Looking forward to seeing this film.

So glad that you were able to come on. I knew we only had an hour with you. So I appreciate you coming on.

And that's great. You know, it's going to be, you know, it'll be neat to see. I really liked what

I saw as far as the graphics that you had is really, you know, there was a time when when

Christians did movies, they were just cheesy. And I think we've gotten past that.

That's true. Well, thanks for the people like Ralph Brennan. We are. He's done a great job. And we're really, really proud to stand behind this movie.

So thanks for having me again. And this is great. And we'll have to do it again. Maybe when the movie comes after the movie comes out.

Yeah, we could do a movie review. I like that. Oh, that's a great idea. I would love it.

Well, thanks a lot. Thanks, guys. Bye to all your listeners. I really enjoyed the program. It was fun. All right. Well, you're welcome.

Anytime. Every Thursday night, we do this and you can come in. You know, let's definitely do that.

And we'll save up some of the good questions you have on the flood and we'll come out again and do it. All right. That sounds good.

All right. Sounds good. Thanks, guys. God bless. All right. Okay. And so with that, folks, it'll be a good time to go to our to our support our sponsors.

And the sponsor we would like you to check out is Squirrelly Joe's Coffee.

Ta -da! This one I have here is Integrity Coffee. This is a

Brazilian coffee that is cashews, honey, molasses, and milk chocolate.

That is the one that I have for today. There's actually hold on. I should look there.

I have a list somewhere. Tell you how many different coffees they have. They got compassion, wisdom, honor, integrity, kindness, respect, responsibility, and honesty.

By the way, the last two, responsibility is a half caffeine, half decaf.

And honesty is the full decaf. Now, I don't get why would honesty be fully diluted of the good part of.

But if you guys get yourself a cup of coffee, this is a Christian based company.

Use on your first order. You can use the promo code SFE. Stands for Striving for Eternity.

That is gets you 20 % off on your first order. And if you go to get the coffee there, go to strivingforeternity .org

slash coffee. I'll get you to the landing page that we have with them. And that way, if you use that for reorders, that would be helpful.

Because that way, when you're ordering, they will know that it came in through us.

It's the only way they could do that. So really good coffee. I've enjoyed the different flavors that I have had so far.

So I know that there was someone that was driving and came in backstage and she's dropped off.

But if you're still listening, Amy, I think it was Amy. But you can come on back in.

So I had some stuff that I was going to go over with my co -host who's not here.

But I want to go through. I know that there's probably a lot of people not watching tonight.

There's lots of different activities tonight. I know that. Right now we have the

James White and Leighton Flowers debate. I was thinking of just streaming that had we not had

Dan here and just do live comments through the debate. But even though I haven't watched it yet, let me tell you how the debate went down.

Okay, this is how it's going to be. And you can go watch that debate and we'll see whether I'm right. James White is going to be providing some biblical arguments as they address,

I think it's John 6, I forget which verse, but they're addressing a specific verse.

So basically the way that debate is going to go down is James White is going to exegete through the passage. Leighton Flowers will ignore basically all of it.

And he'll probably go to some parable and exegete a parable in ways that was never meant to be exegeted.

He'll give you some illustrations, but he probably won't actually deal with the text just saying.

But we'll see. You know, I wanted to just like do a live stream, you know, basically do like, you know, the other thing going on tonight is you have the

State of the Union. And what I really think is classic, this is classic

Donald Trump. He's an excellent politician.

He really is. He knows how to play a game because I've never seen this before. I think it's what we're going to start seeing happen.

But there's a State of the Union speech, Donald Trump running against Joe Biden.

And I noticed that he is planning to live, to basically play it live and just basically,

I guess, do a live review of the State of the Union. That is just classic.

That's funny to do. One of the things that I did hear about that I wanted to bring up and talk about is the fact that there was some talk about in basically speaking of Christians, this is coming from the left, referring to Christians, making a distinction between Christians and Christian nationalists.

Now, I've said on this program before, Christian nationalists is a term that the left came up with, and it is a term, a derogatory term.

You know, we could get into a discussion of whether or not we should be Christian nationalists.

What does it mean to be a Christian nationalist? Basically, I think the thing is, is that if you really want to have that discussion, we could, but I don't use the term for a very simple reason.

The reason I don't want to use the term is because of the purpose of the term. And we're seeing this now playing out a lot more.

I've said this when we first started hearing that term, but Christian nationalist is the idea, it's a way for the left to differentiate.

They're going to start by claiming to differentiate basically Christians that actually live by their beliefs versus all other

Christians. But the goal is to find a way to argue that Christians are trying to operate against the government.

This is going to be how I predict they will start arresting Christians. And so there was an argument that someone made, and it kind of was going through all the circles of in the, you know, in the news about this

Christian nationalists, or they're defining it that the difference they were saying that between a

Christian and a Christian nationalist is that a Christian nationalist believes that all rights come from God.

So therefore, if that's the case, well, one thing, that's kind of like what we see in our constitution, that these inalienable rights are from who?

From God. So they're trying to say that this is something new, but this is the founding of the nation believe this.

However, if you're going to argue as they do that for natural laws, the question is where do these natural laws come from?

Because if it's not from God, then you end up with the fact that these laws are coming from what, government?

Because the argument for this, a law that is not coming from God, then you can't actually say that slavery was wrong because that was the law at one point.

So they'll argue that there's times when the natural law shows you something is wrong. The interesting, because they'll argue that natural law shows that slavery is wrong.

Why? Because they'll say you can't own another human being. And those very same people that would say that, and I would agree that you can't own another human being, but the same people that would say slavery is wrong also support abortion, which at its core argument is the same issue.

Ownership. It's the idea that one person can own another person. It's not just this is my property.

It's this is my body. The argument is still an ownership issue. It's an ownership issue to the fact that what someone is saying is

I have the right to do whatever I want with this person. Let me play this clip.

This is what the Dave Smalley, when Matt Slick was debating David Smalley, I asked this question and David knew exactly where I was going because David just spent two hours debating

Matt Slick saying that slavery was wrong. Slavery is in the Bible. Therefore, the Bible is wrong. So I asked him this question.

Mr. Smalley, do you believe that abortion is moral? Oh boy. I'm glad I'm debating him instead of you.

Yeah. He did not want to have to answer that question because he just was making an argument that slavery was immoral.

And the fact that the Bible supports slavery, he was saying that makes the Bible and God immoral.

Yet he knows that his argument that he has for abortion puts him in the same category.

So when people are going to argue for the fact that all laws are from God.

Well, the question should be, well, where else could they be? Where else are we going to have these supposed natural laws?

If they're going to be a universal law, it has to come from a universal source.

And governments are not a universal source. There's times where we would say that people must stand up against wrong laws, immoral laws.

Well, how are they going to know that it's immoral? Well, they get that because God has planted in every human being a conscience to know right from wrong.

So the other thing I wanted to bring up is the fact that we have,

I was asked to do a review. There was a TV show or it's a four -part series,

Pretty Shiny People. It is about the Duggars. And so some people asked me whether I would review this and provide basically my thoughts on this.

And I'm actually going to reach out to one of the people that was in it, basically trying to argue against fundamentalist

Christians, basically evangelical Christians. She has a whole YouTube channel devoted to making fun of Christians.

So I'll see if she'll come on. That'll be really interesting. Of course, if she watches what I say now, she probably won't.

But their whole argument in this film. So first off, they're taking the one family of Duggars.

If you don't know the Duggars, they had a TV series. I think it was called 19 and Counting. They were part of a movement with your,

I guess it's called the Quiver Full movement where Christians are encouraged to have as many children as possible.

The argument that they make is the fact that they're arguing that the

Duggars had their oldest son. I think he was the oldest, actually. I believe he's the first born.

Not sure. But his name was Josh. He got in trouble. He was looking at he had,

I guess, done something sexually. I don't know the details. I don't know if it was ever out.

But to an extent, but he did something sexually with, I think, two of his sisters. He got caught with child pornography.

So what the whole thing is to look at what Josh did, one son out of 20 kids and say the whole family is corrupt.

The whole movement, the homeschool movement and all this, it's all bad. Now, are there people who abuse or use religion to cover up their abuses and their sin?

Sure. But does that make Christianity wrong? No. That's a logical fallacy to make that case.

And so the thing that I found so interesting, though, is the arguments they made for against Christianity in that show.

They never apply it to their own views. Their argument is that somehow it's really bad that people are that Christians homeschool because they're not really getting an education.

They're learning things like character. Having good character. I mean, that's a wicked thing.

Wow. I would rather the kids learn good character than what they're learning in the public schools about learning how to be a cat.

They have litter boxes in schools. So people who think they're a cat could be. They're trying to indoctrinate kids to believe that they can't figure out if they're a boy or a girl.

This is clearly indoctrination because we haven't had, you look at the exponential growth of people that suddenly are gender fluid or gender confused or whatnot or transgender.

It is it's growing at an exponential rate. Why? Because it's being indoctrinated in school.

And so where they're sitting there and saying, teaching children to wait to have sex until they're married.

And that's really seems to be the key thing that they really didn't like that. You should wait until you're married before having sex and that wives should submit to their husbands.

Those are the two things that they clearly had an issue with. But their argument is to say that if you're homeschooling, you're not really getting an education, even though you end up seeing the people that I think that there was,

I forget which state, there was a spelling bee that they had to decide that homeschoolers were not allowed to enter anymore because they kept winning.

I was a judge for a science fair that was in New Jersey. And every year the winners became for several years, they were all homeschoolers.

And it was a thing where, as the judges, there was a meeting and it was discussed whether or not to allow homeschoolers because they kept winning.

And so are they really a school? So what ended up happening was they decided, and this was back, what, 20, 15, 20 years ago, but they decided that homeschoolers, that wasn't a school and they couldn't participate anymore.

And the reality is, is that what we end up seeing is homeschoolers are getting a better education more often than not than the public school system.

And where you sit there and say, well, homeschooling is indoctrination and you think public school is not, it absolutely is.

So I think that when you look at the film, really what it was trying to do was cast all of Christianity in a bad light based upon what one person did or a few people did.

Now, I'm not going to discount that there are still sinners in Christianity.

The difference with Christianity is we recognize that we're sinners saved by grace. And so that's the thing that we end up having to recognize is they are just as guilty of the things that they're trying to say,

Christianity, the Duggards, Bill Gothard. They're trying to say, well, this whole movement is wrong for that.

The other argument they made was that Bill Gothard was trying to build an army of people to make

America more religious, to make it more moral by having lots of children.

And by the sheer numbers of children, they would try to get these kids to get a good.

Now, this is the irony, because remember the argument that I just made in, I think it was episode two, they make the argument that homeschoolers aren't getting a real education.

They're not taught math and things like that. In episode four, they make the argument that what they were trying to do is to get these homeschool kids in every branch of government to change

America. And so they had a guy who had a Harvard Law degree.

Now, I don't know about you, but you look at those two arguments and I'm sitting there thinking like the person who put this together, the producer, probably didn't think this through too well, because a glaring hypocrisy is the fact that episode two is saying as homeschoolers, you don't get a good education.

And episode four is saying that they're getting high educated degrees and jobs that require a good education.

Which one is true? And so this is the thing when you look at films like this, you're going to evaluate them critically,

I guess not film, it's a series. We have to recognize that there is an agenda behind the people that are doing it.

They want to cast all of Christianity and homeschoolers in a bad light. And so the issue, though, is think about it.

What is it that the homosexual movement has been doing? In the 80s, and I've shared this with this audience, but in the 80s, there was an article that I read in a homosexual magazine.

I always have to explain why I read it because I don't want people thinking I read homosexual magazines. But I was in college and we had the resident assistant.

He and I were basically the only Americans in the dorm. It was a holiday. It was a Christmas break.

And I would stay on campus. And so would the foreign students. And so there always had to be one resident assistant for each building that would be there.

And so to this day, I think that the resident assistant was probably practicing homosexual.

He claimed that this magazine was in the janitor's closet. And I think he wanted to just see my reaction because he was very drunk.

I know that. But he gave me this article and the article to read was quite interesting.

It basically laid out, and this is in the 80s, a plan to make homosexuality mainstream.

What did they say to do? Well, play the victim, say that homosexuals are victims so that they could get that taught in the schools as it was taught in schools.

Then people would get into positions of power and using their positions of power, they could then try to change the perspective on homosexuality.

The very thing that many of these people that made this film or the series would be arguing against with Christianity, that somehow it's wrong if Christians want to get in positions to do things so we would have a more moral country.

That somehow for a Christian is bad. But if the homosexuals are doing it, then it's somehow perfectly good.

You see, they're just as guilty of the things that they claim. They just don't take their arguments and apply it to themselves.

The reality is, is that they're doing the very things they're saying that Christianity is wrong for doing.

And so I thought, I think, so my overall, my view of that series was it was basically nothing more than an excuse.

They started with the conclusion, Christianity bad. I mean, that's what it comes down to. And they wanted to prove that out.

And so, excuse me, and so what they did was to basically look for a way that they could find different Christians, lump all

Christians into that, and then say, see, Christianity is a bad thing.

So, some announcements I do have. Tomorrow night, I will be on the

Gospel Truth. If you look on Gospel Truth YouTube channel, Matt Slick and I are debating two guys on oneness

Pentecostalism. It's called Oneness and the Godhead. So, Matt and I are going to be teaming up.

It'll be a first time that instead of Matt Slick and I debating one another, we're actually going to be on the same side debating a couple of folks that don't believe in the

Trinity. So, Matt and I are working through how we're going to go about that. I think the plan right now is what

I suggested was that Matt do the opening, I'll do the closing, and then we'll figure out how we're going to do the cross examination.

So, John is asking what time. I believe it starts at eight o 'clock, eight o 'clock tomorrow.

So, I am looking forward to that. I've enjoyed being on the Gospel Truth. Marlon does some good debates and so sets up some good debates and so looking forward to that.

So, it's the Gospel Truth is the name of the YouTube channel.

Trying to see what other announcements I have. I was going to bust on Drew with this, but for folks,

I want to give a shout out and a thanks. We have this thing that tells you the charts on how you're doing as far as downloads in podcasts.

I know that my rap report podcast is consistently on the charts.

A lot of times we're in the top 100 in the religion section in the United States. But what

I was really surprised at was that the Christian podcast community, that's its own feed.

It is a completely separate feed, but I thought it interesting that that was ranked in the religion and spirituality number 17.

And in Christianity, it was number 11. I was like, wow, and that's in Slovakia.

I don't know what's happening in Slovakia, but everyone in Slovakia must be all of a sudden start following the

Christian podcast community that were all of a sudden number 11 in the

Christianity. So all of you folks in Slovakia, welcome.

Glad you're watching. I just mentioned the debate that we got tomorrow night, and so why don't

I bring in my debate partner who's sitting in an airport right now, Matt Slick. Hey, man, how are you doing, buddy?

Can you hear me okay? Yeah, we can hear you. All right, good. I won't talk too loud because I got this over my ear.

Yeah, see. There's Matt. Matt, are you still in Texas?

No, you're probably on a connecting flight back home. Yeah, I'm in Minneapolis, Minnesota right now.

Yeah, I flew out from Austin this morning, and I got to go back to Boise and get there in about four hours.

So then we'll do the debate tomorrow night. Yeah, so do you know anything about these two guys that we're debating?

Yeah, one of the guys, I found out that I debated him a couple months ago. Caleb guy, and he didn't know what he was doing.

I'm trying to be polite and gracious here, but I saw one clip where I put the

Trinity chart from CARM up on there and said, this is how we arrive at the Trinity. This is how it's done.

And it's not like one verse. It's a systematic approach. And I said, if the system is wrong, then the

Trinity is wrong. And so I said, and then I found myself saying to him, this is the third time

I've asked you how the Trinity's arrived at. And he said, and it's sitting up on the screen and you can't get it right.

So that's, you know, we'll see how it goes. James White referred to a debate that you had last week.

Yeah. And he basically said, I haven't seen that one. That was, I forgot what the debate topic was on.

That was also on Marlon's show, Open Theism. And he said that the guy was being excessively rude to you.

But then I guess he said that he watched their, or listened to their post -debate.

They had a post -debate show, after show, and they basically said their whole goal was to try to throw you off your game and try to get under your skin.

And James thought it was completely inappropriate, I guess, for them to do that. Yeah, it was.

A lot of people were, a lot of people during the debate just left. I got text messages saying,

I can't believe this guy's so bad. I can't watch it. And they left. And the guy did a drinking game.

During his opening statement, he actually put it in his opening statement. Every time Matt says whatever, blah, blah, blah, just put the sign to drink, you take a drink.

He actually did this. Yeah. During the debate, he called me a liar.

I said, what? He said, I'm not lying, but yes, you are. What?

I, we found out that they were planning on bringing up my daughter, Rachel. Oh, really?

Yeah. I mean, they admitted in the after show, several people, I haven't watched it,

I'm not gonna, but several people who did, said the same thing. They said that the goal was not to debate, but to make me look as bad as possible, to get me to storm out so that they can claim victory.

Well, you know, we've had it. Look, when we started this show, we, there were, there used to be that one, there was the one guy used to have a whole

YouTube channel devoted to mocking us. So. I thought that was your site.

Yeah. Yeah. No, no, no. They had, well, I had a, I had a guy that would take, when I would do our

Striving for Academy classes every week. And we would do that on a

Monday night. By Tuesday, he, he basically was sitting there mocking everything that we were teaching. And, and I think he thought he was going to get like a lot of people to, to follow it.

But he kept like trying to tag me and I'm like, yeah, I'm, I have no interest in watching it. I'm not going to give you.

Okay, so we got it. Okay, so we got a question. Brother John is asking a question, is open theism heresy?

What do you think about that? Yes, it is. Now there's different degrees of open theism, but the one I was talking to this guy said, if, and I'm not trying to misrepresent him, it was

Chris Fisher, I believe his name was. I'm not trying to misrepresent him. I'm trying to be as accurate as possible.

But during the debate, when I was asking him questions, I got to the point where I said, well, is God everywhere?

And I could not get a straight answer. And I said, you're supposed to admit that God knows everything in the present, right?

And it was like another vague answer. And so at one point, I concluded that this guy, he's just flat out teaching heresy.

I mean, not just the idea that God's limited in one sense, but he was actually saying God is limited to the physical universe and the realm of time in the physical universe.

And he can't, the impression I got was, he's not everywhere. And he's learning.

And I asked him, I said, okay. Can you make a false prophecy?

You prophesied something going to happen. It doesn't happen. Can you make a false prophecy? And that one, I believe stopped it.

Because if you say yes, you know what I'm going to do with that one. And if you say no, well, then how does that fit in your open theism where God makes mistakes?

So he was stuck. But that's an interesting question to ask them. Yeah. Because if he doesn't know everything, then it's really not prophecy.

It's just really good guessing, which is what we would say Satan would do. Right. And the other question

I asked him, I said, does God impute individual sins of people, the future to Christ?

And he knew what the point was, because if free will choices cannot be known, you can't know who's going to marry who, you can't know what children are going to be there, and you can't know what sins are going to do.

So how can you impute them? It's a serious question. And he couldn't answer that.

And he said, well, there's different theories on the atonement. I didn't ask if there's different theories. I said, well, in the paper, he says in 1

Peter 2, 24, he bore our sin in his body in the cross. I said, did he bear our sin in his body in the cross?

And I think he said, I remember, I'm not trying to misrepresent him at all. I think he said, that's just your interpretation.

Or you're just reading what you've seen. Dude, I just read it. I just read it.

What does it say? You know, so just a lot of stuff like that. It was bad.

And Marlon ended up taking it down. He says it was horrible. It was bad.

Oh, so that debate's not up? No, but it's up other places. People have copied it.

And I may put it up on my site someplace. I don't know if it's just an example of how not to debate.

Yeah, this is how not to do it. And Matt's pulling his ears, trying to make sure, see if his flight is boarding.

It'd be really bad if Matt's taking off. You saw all those people going through that door right behind Matt, folks. And that was all the people going on the plane.

And Matt's going to be left in there. Hey, hey, someone forgot about me. That's right. No, you got to make it back home because, you know, you're doing the opening for the debate.

I don't have that prepared. Okay. We talked about, right?

You're going to do the opening. I can use the same opening I did for last week. We can modify it. I can adapt it and stuff like that.

Yeah, that's not a problem. Yeah, you know, I said to the audience before you had come in that usually you and I are debating each other.

This is the first debate that you and I are on the same side debating together. So it'll be something new for us.

So because have you done a lot of two -on -two debates? Usually not because the person who works with me is usually an imbecile.

So we'll see how this goes. Yeah, I guess I have the same problem.

I had to come up with some insult here. I had to figure that out. Yeah, you know,

I did a podcast not all that long ago with Keith Foskey.

And you know Keith Foskey typically because he does all the funny videos about different denominations, you know, how different denominations would handle guns or go to buffalo wild wings, really funny videos.

I had him on my rap report podcast talking about Christian comedy. And so one of the things you came up because he did a he did a message called a theology of comedy and was really good.

Some very insightful, a lot of good things he brought up. But he talks about the fact that he, you know, there is a place for comedy where he had someone in his church where, you know, basically this difficult, you know, situation and comedy just relieves that he was glad that, you know, his faith, his pastor could come over and just be like things are normal, having making jokes and and laughing.

He said he actually was sad when the guy left because he's going to be all alone. And so, you know,

I shared the fact that when I'm usually upset, you know, I have things going on where I need to get cheered up.

I call you and all you do is insult me until I start laughing. And that's actually your plan.

Well, there's just so much material that, you know, it just starts coming out. I agree. I agree.

See, you're not going to get a disagreement there. Melissa says that she misses you,

Matt. Oh, from not being on the radio. Right. Yes. You don't come on here enough times.

Well, I don't do Bible Thursday night Bible studies anymore. So come on and get in there. Yeah, well, and we weren't thinking

I don't I don't have a date for what I'm probably going to do is I'm probably going to move this show to Sunday nights just because there's a lot of other live streams going on on Thursday night.

And so, you know, we've kind of had a lot of people going in different different directions. You know,

I know like we'd have people that would be an hour when you did your Bible study an hour with us and then drop off an hour for your

Bible study. So I'm thinking maybe we'll go back to Sunday nights. I'm going to try that.

I'll probably do a couple of Sunday night shows for folks. Melissa is also

Melissa says Andrew doesn't have a face for radio. But the voice for it, he does.

So I admit that I don't have a face even for radio. It's just that ugly.

I get it. Well, you know, I was with Ryan and we got talking to his wife and he said to her, he goes, man, he's got a great voice for radio and a great face for radio.

She she liked that. Yeah. Yeah. Well, you know,

I don't know. You know, you and I are going to talk tomorrow strategy for this debate. I think we have our word doc or our

Google document here. And so far, it has Matt Slick and slash

Andrew versus Daniel Evans and Caleb. I'm not sure how to pronounce his last name. And then that's that's all we got in there.

Yeah. I got stuff. I guess I can put in there tomorrow morning. Oh, I've got small things

I'm working on. I see that document on this. Yeah. Yeah. I got that document and I need to send you what

I have on on the deity of Christ, because originally that was the originally I was supposed to be debating someone on the deity of Christ.

And I was preparing for that. That's what I actually had is a good thing that, you know,

Marlon reached out to us and you know, we we still good for this debate. I was like, oh, oh,

OK. I thought for some reason I thought that was next month. I thought we I had two with him.

So but yes, I mean, your notes on. I have an apologetics, biblical apologetics file outlined.

I've been working on this section of the Christ. I'm always looking for new stuff. Yeah. I mean,

I know that you like to steal, you know, material like, you know, birds, you know, when asked, you know, why is the heretics all get together?

You know, you steal the line, you know, heretics. You know, is it heretics of a feather flock together?

Yeah. Well, that's right. You did say that. What was it? Heretics of a feather flock together, flock together.

The history behind that, folks, it was Matt and I were both keynoting on a politics cruise.

And I was the only one out of all the people there that paid for the Internet. You know, and so I had

Internet. Matt came up with that line. Someone asked Matt why some of these heretics all get together.

He goes, you know, heretics of a feather flock together. And so I quickly went online and typed it and said, watch

Matt Slick will steal my. I was I've always said very clearly,

Matt said it first. But I like to say he stole it from me. It's because you have been accused of that with Bill McKeever, at least.

I think that's why I saw a couple of you on the show. Yeah, Bill came up with the one.

We're in sales, not production. I like that one. So I'm going to send you my notes on the beauty of Christ.

It's actually a book that eventually I will get out, hopefully one day when

I have time to get back to writing. I'm going to do that.

So so what else? What's anything new going on with with CARM that we could update folks with?

Well, just working hard and trying to release articles and trying to do more videos and debates to finish editing a book.

What book are you working on now? The Influence and re -editing it. And then I need to write a second one.

People have been asking for years to write a follow up on it. So I'm going to do that.

But I've been studying AI, quantum physics. I've also been studying co -all oneness and some new issues in the

Trinity. I'm trying to deal with other paracritic relationship of the of the persons intersect as the one with the one in the many.

And then, you know, Romans 8, 27, it says the mind of the spirit in 1 Corinthians 2, 16 is the mind of Christ.

So the spirit and the son have their own minds. What does that mean?

How does that relate to inter -Trinitarian communion, the paracrisis and divine simplicity?

So I'm sorting through those. All right, so we got a question here from John. He's asking,

I'm going to pull up the scripture so I can read it, because I don't know if you have it memorized. He says, question for Andrew, but I'll see what you think of this as well.

He says Genesis 15, 13 prophecy is 400 years afflicted.

Exodus 12, 40 to 41 says 430 years.

So Genesis 15, 13 says, God said to Abram, know for certain that your descendants will be strangers in the land that is not theirs.

They will be enslaved and oppressed for 400 years. And so if we look at the

Exodus 12 passage, it's going to refer to a more specific number in verse 40.

Now, the time that the sons of Israel lived in the land was 430 years.

They lived in the land is different than being persecuted because they can live in the land for a while and then become persecuted.

So that's one of the dividing issues right there. How long were they there before they became persecuted?

Because Abraham and his descendants first went to Egypt and they weren't persecuted.

So persecuted is different than just dwelling in the land. Furthermore, the

Bible will often speak in generalities like the circumference of, I forgot where it is, of the bath in the temple.

And it says it's three, the diameter into the circumference is three. Well, it's 3 .1415629.

And so, okay. But they said three. Well, it just rounds off numbers. It's like when you say, how long ago was

Jesus crucified? Two thousand years ago. So we use generalities.

That's another possibility there. Yeah. And that's the one I would hold to is the fact that we have that elsewhere in Scripture where you have generalities.

There's nothing wrong with... You know, I think a lot of times what we have, John, who's asked the question, is the fact that some people want to try to look at that to say, see it's a contradiction.

But yet we speak in the same type of way, as Matt just pointed out, saying Christ was, you know,

Christianity has been around for 2000 years. Well, not exactly. It's a more exact number would be, you know, calculated out.

And the fact is, is that there's nothing wrong with doing that.

And it doesn't make it, you know, people want to try to use the Bible and say, well, it has to be exactly right all the time.

Another example people will use is that Jesus will refer to the mustard seeds as being the smallest of seeds.

Well, it is the smallest of seeds in that area. And yes, in other places, there is a smaller seed.

But to the people he was speaking to, they wouldn't have known of any other seed that isn't in their area.

So there's nothing wrong with the Bible doing that. We do that.

It's part of language. It's part of speech. We can recognize when that's done. And the way we can recognize it here is because there are passages that are going to be more specific.

And here we're, you know, in Genesis, he's just giving the purpose of it is not to be as exact as but to talk about the focus isn't on the number of years.

The focus is on the enslavement. Yeah, that's right.

Generalities, they occur and it's all right. And there's tons of specifics, like in Daniel 9, 24 to 27, where it talks about the decree of Nebuchadnezzar to rebuild the walls.

That decree, which happened on March 14th, 445 B .C. There'll be seven, six weeks and 69 weeks.

We convert those into years. How many days is 173 ,380 days? And that's the day that Jesus came into Jerusalem on a donkey.

So, you know, some of it's extremely specific and prophetic. Then we just look at the differences of oppression versus the differences in that.

Yeah. So, all right.

Well, I think we're going to do this. I don't see any more questions coming in tonight.

Someone is. Oh, so I see Melissa saying, is the debate over? I think

I'm guessing she's referring to the James White Leighton Flowers debate.

And I don't know because I'm going to see that. Yeah, I was thinking of I said at the beginning,

Matt, that earlier I wanted to like play that debate and just like actually respond to it because I kind of I gave

I gave my theory on the debate because they were supposed to be dealing with a verse of scripture. So my my the way the debate went down,

I don't I don't even have to watch it to know. James White exegeted the passage explaining through the

Greek and and how how the meaning of the passage comes about. And Leighton Flowers gave some illustrations that, you know, maybe grabs a parable from somewhere and exegetes that with things it was never meant to say and never actually gets to the passage that they're supposed to debate.

But but he's he's good at the opening. I saw that he came out with a book, you know, just in time for this debate.

I'm I'm wondering if there was a, you know, coincidence with that. Yeah, I made a comment on one of the

Facebook pages about it. I said, oh, great. People get us. I can study what it means to exegete scripture badly.

Yeah. Yeah. I mean, Leighton's a nice guy. You've met him.

I met him. You know, he's a very nice guy. He's wrong. So. So let me by the way,

John, Brother John is saying love the show. Looking forward to it every week. God bless you. So let me give you an update what we got coming up in the next few shows.

Next week, I will not be here. I'll talk with Drew to see. I will be traveling on my way out to Ohio.

But on the 21st, I will have Claude Ramsey. If you don't know who he is,

I was preaching with him at the Open Air Theology Conference last year and this year.

Very passionate, passionate preacher. I'm looking forward to that. So that's going to be on March 21st.

On April 4th, I'm going to have another creationist on Carl. Dr.

Carl Weiner. He's going to be on. And then on the 11th,

April 11th. And this is where I really wish Drew was here because I'd love his reaction on this.

But we have a debate that we're going to do on full preterism. A guy on Twitter that was arguing for full preterism.

So I said I could set up a debate. And he said, yes, he's yet to give me his email that I could give him the link.

But we're setting it up either way. So we're going to talk full preterism one way or another.

The guy said he has to stay anonymous because of his views on End Times.

Then why do you sit and talk about it? I don't know that people are coming after people and threatening their life or something over their

End Times view. So those are the shows that we got coming up. You know,

Matt, you have some pretty strong views in favor of full preterism. Yeah, you're going to actually want

Peter 1 verses 9 to 11 refutes full preterism. It just does. Yeah.

So we're going to have I'm hoping to have a guy on that I met at the Open Air Theology Conference who actually was in full preterism for many years, even wrote books on it and has come out of it.

So and we're going to have the guy who, you know, there's two people that did the pre -conference on full preterism.

So we will have them on. So I'm not sure what we're doing here.

Robert, I got to get going here. Are we going to use a restroom and then get ready to get to board here pretty soon?

So I'm going to get going. OK. Yep. Thanks, Matt. We're going to play in the show soon. Anyway, good seeing you.

And I'll see you tomorrow night. Travel safe. OK, man. We'll talk. OK. All right. So Robert says, good evening.

Are we going to see our show? Oh, I think

I know what you mean. I think he's talking about podcasts.

So, Robert, we did a podcast together. That aired. Let me go look. If we go to Wrap Report.

Let's see. Wrap Report dot org. Wrap Report dot org.

I think that dropped two weeks ago. Three weeks ago.

It dropped February 14th. Christian Collaboration is the title of that.

So if you want to check that out. So, yeah.

I'm assuming that's what you're referring to. If not, let me know. But I didn't put it on.

I didn't do the video. So that was just the podcast, even though we had the video.

I used the video just as a backup. All right. So with that, we'll end a little bit early tonight. I knew it would be without Drew here, but that's

OK. Jason Cave says, have a good evening,

Matt. I'll tell him that tomorrow. But, oh, I see

Melissa said Jason asked a question. Did I miss that? Sorry if I missed that.

Where is the question? This is where it's good to have a co -host that could catch us.

I don't see a question from Jason, Melissa. So maybe you could post it in and we could see.

So, yeah. So Robert was saying, fantastic. Just didn't know where to look. Yeah, go on any podcast app.

Just do a search for rap report that's wrapped with two Ps and you'll find it.

OK, so Melissa is saying here, this must be Jason's question. Is it

God's will that people will go to hell? And there Jason is posting his question.

So is it God's will that people will go to hell? So the answer is yes, because there's people in hell.

I mean, that's the simple answer. In fact, this is what we see in Romans chapter nine.

When discussing this very thing. And if we look just to get some context here, there's

Romans nine. I'm going to start in verse 14, though the meat of it is going to be a little bit further down.

It says, what shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there?

May it never be. For he says to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom

I have compassion. So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.

For the scripture says to Pharaoh, for this very purpose, I raised you up to demonstrate my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed through the whole earth.

So then he has mercy on who he desires and hardens who he desires. And so that ends up being really clear to argue that God is the one who shows mercy or hardens.

It's through God's will. And so the follow up question that people have is usually, well, then what role do we have?

If God is then, they'll say God is forcing everything. Well, it's God's will, but it doesn't mean he works apart from our will, because that question is the very question

Paul ends up asking, because the very next verse says, you will say to me then, why does he still find fault?

For who could resist his will? I mean, there's the question right there. Paul in a good

Jewish way of debating is asking that very question that people end up asking when you make this claim.

And Paul responds to his own question by saying, on the contrary, who are you, oh man, who asks back to God, the thing molded will not say to the molder, why did you make me like this?

Will it? Or does not the potter have the right over the clay to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?

What if God, although willing to demonstrate his wrath and to make his power known endured with much patience, vessels of wrath prepared for destruction.

And he does so to make known the riches of his own glory upon the vessels of mercy, which he prepared beforehand for glory.

So this has got nothing to do with the fact that, you know, the argument that people make is that somehow we're not involved if God has this will.

Keeping in mind that God knows everything, that God is outside of time, he's eternal.

When we think of that, we have to realize that we don't understand

God's thinking, Jason. We just, we're not thinking because God doesn't think, he knows and we think.

So we learn things, we process things. That's the thinking process.

But God doesn't do that, he just knows. And so what we end up seeing is he works through humans in the decisions that humans make.

I mean, it's not like that catches him off guard. And I'm thinking of the verse,

I'm trying to see if I could find it. I think it's in, I want to say it's in 1

Peter, but where Peter basically says that God worked through human beings in the writing of scripture, so that the very things that they're writing, this is the doctrine we know as superintending, the very things they're writing is what

God intended it to be. So God, the Holy Spirit works through human authors.

And that's the very same thing that we end up seeing here, is that we could, okay, so it's 2

Peter 1, verse 20, or 19 and 20.

So I'll read 19 to 21. He says, so we have a prophetic word made more sure to which you do well to pay attention as a lamp shining in a dark place until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.

But know this, first of all, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of the human will, but men moved by the

Holy Spirit spoke from God. So what we end up seeing is, yeah, you have people that have, would make prophecies or write scripture, but that is something that God works through them.

And so Jason is saying doctrine of superintending. So that's exactly how I would argue this. It's the doctrine of superintending,

God working through human authors to write scripture. That's where we see this doctrine used.

God works through human authors to write scripture. They chose, I mean, John's style is very different than Peter's, very different than Paul's.

You see these different styles of writings. You see people choosing the words, personal things.

Paul's going to say, hey, bring my cloak. It's going to be cold this winter. And yet, as we see here from Peter, that's coming from God.

God worked, it wasn't an act of the human will, but God moved by the

Holy Spirit, spoke from God. And so what we end up seeing there is that I would argue what we're looking at there is the case that the same thing with does people go to hell, is that God's will.

It is God's will, but it's not because God forced that. It's the fact that they're going to hell because they chose to sin, right?

If God did nothing, we would all go to hell. That would be the right thing. But God in his mercy has chosen to save some.

And we should rejoice that we're saved, but it's still our own choice to sin. God doesn't make us sin.

We're going to go to hell for those sins we have done. All right. So I hope that you guys enjoyed the show.

I hope that you got a lot out of it. I hope, I know the first hour was like drinking through a fire hose. Dan had told me he wanted to try to see if he could do that really quick and give with 20 minutes and just give that whole lecture.

So I encourage you to go back, re -watch, re -listen to that and check that out.

To let you guys know, we're still looking. If you guys could support us for the Philippines trip, we still need some money for that.

We are up to about $700. We have to pay our costs right now, at least our $2 ,500.

So if you could help out, just go to strivingforeturning .org Flash support. I was told that there in the

Philippines, the stadium, whatever, that we're doing the conference at, the

Strange Fire Conference Philippines, that is filled. I think that was 900 seats.

And I saw something today that they were able to fill to get more. I'm not sure.

I think they said that the max they could do is 1 ,100 seats. So in the Philippines, that one in Manila is filling up, if not filled up.

We still, I think there might be some seats still for the conference we're doing in Bajal. And I know there's some seats available for the pre -conference.

So there's going to be a lot to do. Pre -conference, we're going to deal with social justice and topics like that.

So I hope that this was helpful, educational, and something that you feel was worth sharing with others.

If you got a lot out of this, wouldn't you mind just maybe texting five friends? Hey, give a listen to this.

It was a great show. That would be a great help to us. We would appreciate it. And so with that, just want to remind you to strive to make today an eternal day for the glory of God.