July 24, 2015 ISI Radio Show with John Otis on “Theistic Evolution: A Sinful Compromise”

Live from the historic parsonage of 19th century gospel minister George Norcross in downtown Carlisle, Pennsylvania, it's Iron Sharpens Iron, a radio platform on which pastors, Christian scholars, and theologians address the burning issues facing the church and the world today.

Proverbs 27 verse 17 tells us, Iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another. Matthew Henry said that in this passage, we are cautioned to take heed whom we converse with and directed to have in view in conversation to make one another wiser and better.

It is our hope that this goal will be accomplished over the next hour and we hope to hear from you, the listener, with your own questions. Now here's our host, Chris Arntzen. Good afternoon. Cumberland County, Pennsylvania,.

And the rest of humanity living on the planet earth who are listening via live streaming. This is Chris Arntzen, your host of Iron Sharpens Iron, wishing you all a happy Friday on this 24th day of July 2015, and before I introduce my guest, who is a dear friend of mine, Reverend John Otis, and before I get into the topic we are discussing today, primarily his book, Theistic Evolution, A Sinful Compromise, I wanted to do some damage control for my interview yesterday with conservative Roman Catholic apologist Robert St. Genes, where the theme was a conservative Catholic reflects upon Rome's most liberal pope.

I did get some negative feedback from fellow conservative evangelical Christians and reformed folk that, just a few so far, maybe I'll be getting more later, I don't know. People who perhaps misunderstood why I was doing the program, they said that they objected to letting Mr. St. Genes speak too freely, especially during one point where he was discussing the Marian apparitions at Fatima, and they were discouraged that I did not interrupt him more, correct him, or refute or oppose the statements that he made like that more often.

I did not just let Mr. St. Genes speak freely without any objection, I can assure you that, but first and foremost, let me say that this program, Iron Sharpens Iron, is a talk show. It is not a worship service, it is not a sermon, and the categories, the topics, the guests that I have on this program, although for the most part, the vast majority are people that I agree with on the main focus of their theological beliefs, I do very frequently have differences of opinion with guests.

In fact, I believe that probably every single guest I've ever had on or ever will have on, I'll have some disagreement with. Today, my guest is a good friend of mine, Dr. or Reverend John Otis, and he and I disagree on the subjects and modes of baptism.

He is a theonomist, I am not a theonomist, I am a Baptist, he is a Presbyterian, we disagree on church government, and I could say that about many other guests, even those that are conservative evangelicals and even those that are thoroughly Calvinistic like I am.

On occasion, I do have somebody who is not even a Christian or someone who I believe has a serious error in the theological thinking, and that was a situation that I had yesterday with Mr. St. Genes. I believe that it was a very unusual occurrence to have an outspoken critic of Pope Francis from a Roman Catholic perspective over his liberalism and his clearly anti-Christian or un-Christian statements and beliefs that he has made public.

And I just thought this was a unique opportunity to have someone on the program who had the courage to publicly deuth and say things in criticism of the Pope of Rome, even though he is a Catholic, that many other conservative Roman Catholic apologists do not do because of whatever reasons they may have.

I know that some of it has to do with the loss of employment, that's clear. In fact, Mr. St. Genes publicly stated yesterday that he was fired from EWTN, the very well-known Roman Catholic television network, EWTN, Eternal Word Television Network, it's fully named.

He was fired from them a number of years ago for being critical of Pope John Paul II. So I thought this was a unique platform. And the other thing that I was fully aware of during the program was that many of the beliefs and doctrines and practices of the Church of Rome are so fantastical to me that I don't view them as threatening or something that I should be fearful of exposing by letting people speak for themselves and letting their own words, if you will, bring question into their theological background and the brief discussion on Fatima, which was not the topic of the program, to me, it didn't even really need much interruption.

But I made it clear throughout the program from beginning to end and at the return of every station break that I was not an ecumenist, that I believe that the Church of Rome has another gospel than I embrace.

And in fact, I repeated that the Council of Trent has declared as dogma that I and every other evangelical are to be accursed or anathematized because of our unique beliefs regarding the gospel and the scriptures and so on.

So this is not a television program, this is a radio program. I often conduct it as if I'm having a scholarly discussion with pastors, theologians, apologists, and authors around a coffee table in a living room.

And if I have a Roman Catholic or a Muslim or a Jewish person in my home, I am going to sometimes have casual conversation that involves humor, that may involve lightheartedness. And some of the concerns were that the humor and lightheartedness and the laughter that they heard from me on occasion during yesterday's interview was making the seriousness of the doctrinal errors and differences that we have with Mr. St. Genes in the Church of Rome, that was lessening the significance, making it less severe, and making it too lighthearted, and that this was inappropriate of me.

Now that could be true. I know that I am personally offended when I hear a pastor using his pulpit as a comedy show. I am very disturbed by the growing softness of evangelicalism that has been taking place for many decades with regard to the Church of Rome and the modern ecumenism that is rampant, and even statements by conservative Reformed Christians that have gotten me upset in regard to the softness with which they treat Rome, and even the favorable way that papal encyclicals have been quoted and written about.

So I understand and I appreciate the caution that people have in regard to how they communicate with Roman Catholics and others who do not hold to a biblical gospel, but this is a talk show, as I said, and I guess the issue is, which may be a debatable one, if I'm going to have a conversation in my living room around a coffee table about theology with someone who opposes the gospel, and there is some lightheartedness involved in an event like that, should that be made public assumption?

And I guess there may be valid arguments that it should not be, that I should not ever have a lighthearted discussion or a friendly discussion with somebody who opposes the gospel. I'm not certain that is correct, and I know that there's going to be definitely differences of opinion on that, and I am truly sorry if anybody was misled by anything that I said or did not say, especially yesterday, and that was clearly not my intention, and I hope that as I do intend to have future broadcasts that examine and scrutinize that interview, I hope you will clearly see that my intention was never to blur the lines of differences between Rome and biblical Christianity, nor to lessen the severity of their doctrinal heresies, and I could say much more, but I do not want to rob my guest of the time, and I'm sure that I will continue to learn, God willing, God be merciful and gracious to me, I will keep learning from mistakes and failures on this program, but thus far I really have not been convinced that the program yesterday was in error, other than the obvious fact that it wasn't flawless, no program I do is ever flawless or perfect, but I don't believe that the clear intention or content that was conveyed was dangerous or of no value, and with that said, let me move on with my guest today, I'd like to introduce a friend of mine that I've known for quite a number of years, and I've interviewed on several occasions on the old Iron Sharpens Iron, John Otis, he is an ordained Presbyterian minister, and he is the founder and director of Triumphant Publications, and he is the author of the book we are discussing today, Theistic Evolution, a Sinful Compromise, and it comes with the powerful endorsement of G .I. Williamson, who is no stranger to Reformed Christians, especially Presbyterian Christians, who has stated in writing that this book, Theistic Evolution, a Sinful Compromise, is the best thing that he has ever read thus far on this topic, the best statement against Theistic Evolution as a Sinful Compromise in writing, according to G .I. Williamson, and with that kind of an endorsement, I think it is well worth our attention, and it's my honor and privilege to welcome you back to Iron Sharpens Iron, John Otis.

The Burden of Speaking Carefully in Public Ministry

I appreciate that, and I know that you and I both are aware of the fine line that we have to walk upon when making any kind of public statements and conducting anything in the media where you don't want to appear to be too soft or too hard, too friendly, or, on the other hand, too severe or righteously indignant.

Let's start with the reason that you wrote this book, Theistic Evolution, a Sinful Compromise.

Basically, I would believe everything I'm saying in the book, but in Reformed circles, other Presbyterian denominations, in my opinion, are compromising on capitulating with the ungodly. I wrote the book calling out some men who, some of them are quite well-known in Presbyterian circles, but whose writings and actions, I think, have done a great disservice.

To the cause of the gospel. Well, why don't we start from there with the obvious,.

A definition of theistic evolution. And how long has theistic evolution been in existence? I,.

Before coming to Christ, was a Roman Catholic. I was raised in Roman Catholicism, hence one of my one of the reasons, one of my main concerns is Roman Catholicism, which is actually why I conducted yesterday's interview.

When I went to Catholic school for eight years, evolution was taught as a fact in our science class. So I know that theistic evolution has been around at least since the 60s, but I know that in reality, from doing reading after becoming a Christian, that it has actually had its genesis probably in the 19th century or possibly prior.

When would that be? From the 19th, the latter part of the 19th, certain philosopher. And the only reason is, before my conversion to Christ, when I was a freshman in college, I was an agnostic and I was an evolutionist.

One of the things that the Lord illumined me to, since I was committed to the scriptures, you cannot wed those century on theistic evolution.

Now I understand that even some men of history that you and I would uphold as heroes to, heroes of the faith in some level, like B .B. Warfield, the Princeton giant of the 19th century. I've heard that he had at least some soft attitude toward it.

I've also heard on the other extreme that he was an ardent defender of it. Do you know the.

Truth behind B .B. Warfield's view of theistic evolution? Well, I haven't read Warfield, I will say this on this topic, because during church in America, the people wanting to distance themselves from a new earth view to adopt an old age view would say in this regard.

Now, B .B. Warfield, when I gave that lecture, the pastor was quite adamant that Warfield's theistic evolutionist. Some of the things I've read on Warfield, it's hard Do think that he vacillated on some lengthy article defending the fact that he did not believe.

In the theistic evolution. And I know that Fred Zaspel, who wrote a biography of B .B. Warfield, said during an interview I conducted years ago on Iron, Sharp, and Ziron, the old Iron, Sharp, and Ziron, that the statements or accusations of his support of theistic evolution were grossly exaggerated at the very least.

Well, that was the contention of this.

Pastor. And we need to understand as well, Warfield's very thought was gaining ground. A lot of organizations, there wasn't answers in large part, I think does a very good job of dismantling evolutionary thought.

You didn't have those organizations,.

You didn't have a lot of books. Well, let's start with an overview of the scriptural account of creation. Obviously, since this is only a two-hour program, and we're not even going to be dedicating a full two hours to this subject, as I do want to later address with you my interview next week with Hannah Overton, a friend of yours who was recently released from prison, where all charges against her were dropped, false charges that wrongly convicted her of originally a life sentence in prison for the accidental death of her foster child.

And I hope that those of you listening stay tuned for that portion of the program, which will be a precursor to my interview with Hannah herself on Monday. But if you could give us a brief overview of what you would consider to be a faithful and scriptural view of creation.

The Six-Day Creation Account and the Meaning of Day

Well, we go where it says God in this world, with each creative activity, it ends, for example, it says God made the expanse and separated the waters which were above the expanse and was so, and God called the expanse heaven, and there was evening and there was morning creative activity.

The very important phrase that needs to, that defines it and gives it literalness, and gives it historicalness and not poetic, is that qualification where it says, and it was evening, so Hebrews talks about living three, oh God created out of nothing.

If you do, and there's a lot of debate, you see that a lot of the debate arises over the whole day, can mean, they're usually referring to, and they'll quote second Peter talking about into the world as he will not come, continues as it was in the beginning.

And since Jesus hasn't come back yet, and for 2000 years, he's never coming back. And the Lord says there in second Peter 3, 9, it says with the Lord as a thousand years and a thousand years as a day.

Now in that context, it's important things in this whole debate, Chris, hermeneutics, one's understanding of the principles, essentially theistic evolution denies the reformation principle. So when we're looking at the meaning of day, and I've always mentioned this to my congregations in the past, to the point they could, they knew exactly where I was headed, what they mean in their context.

So you have to look at the context to see how a word is used. Sometimes words change in their meaning. It's four different meanings depending on its context. If you look at the Hebrew word, look at that verse in the Old Testament, it's referring to 20, talking about the Sabbath day, confession of faith is one of the constitutional standards of talks about one on scripture, legislation of the 10 commandments.

And if you were to look at, let's see here, I think it's verse 11 days, the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that rested on the seventh day of that past. So when you allow us to interpret scripture, and you allow the context to govern the meaning, we're going to see was made, maybe that was over a period of six or seven, and you look at their writings elsewhere, you're going to find ordinary day.

In fact, right there is where we're.

Going to pick up where you left off when we return from the station break. If you have a question at all, any question at all regarding the topic on theistic evolution, whether you are an ardent supporter of it, whether you are vehemently opposed to it, or whether you just don't know what you believe about it, the email address is chrisarnsen at gmail .com.

C-H-R-I-S-A-R-N-Z-E-N at gmail .com. Please include your first name, your city and state of residence, and your country of residence if outside the USA. Don't go away, we're going to be right back after these messages with John Otis and his book, Theistic Evolution, A Sinful Compromise.

Thriven Financial is pleased to support Iron Sharpens Iron Radio. While others see money as a goal, Thriven sees it as a tool for serving God, family, and community. For more than a century, Thriven has helped its nearly two and a half million Christian members make financial decisions that reflect their values, while also helping them live generously.

Find out more by contacting me, Mike Gallagher, at 717 -254 -6433. Thriven Financial, connecting faith and finances for good.

Lending faith, finances, and generosity. That's the Thriven story.

I'm James White of Alpha and Omega Ministries. The New American Standard Bible is perfect for daily reading or in-depth study. Used by pastors, scholars, and everyday readers, the NASB is widely embraced and trusted as a literal and readable Bible translation.

The NASB offers clarity and readability while maintaining high accuracy to the original languages which the NASB is known for. The NASB is available in many editions like a topical reference Bible. Researched and prepared by biblical scholars devoted to accuracy, the new topical reference Bible includes contemporary topics relevant to today's issues.

From compact to giant print Bibles, find an NASB that fits your needs very affordably at nasbible .com. Trust, discover, and enjoy the NASB for yourself today. Go to nasbible .com.

That's nasbible .com. Tired of box store Christianity? Of doing church in a warehouse with all the trappings of a rock concert? Do you long for a more traditional and reverent style of worship? And how about the preaching?

Perhaps you've begun to think that in-depth biblical exposition has vanished from Long Island. Well, there's good news. Wading River Baptist Church exists to provide believers with a meaningful and reverent worship experience featuring the systematic exposition of God's Word.

And this loving congregation looks forward to meeting you. Call them at 631 -929 -3512 for service times. 631 -929 -3512. Or check out their website at wrbc .us. That's wrbc .us. Welcome back. This is Chris Zarnes.

And if you've just tuned us in, our guest today is John M. Otis. And we are discussing his book, Theistic Evolution, A Sinful Compromise. And if you'd like to join us on the air with a question of your own for Reverend Otis, our email address here is chrisarnsen at gmail .com.

That's c-h-r-i-s-a-r-n-z-e-n at gmail .com. And you were right before the break talking about the unanimity of all of the drafters of the Westminster Confession, all of those who gathered at the Westminster Assembly for that great confession to be drafted.

They were all in agreement about a literal.

Six-day creation, correct? That is correct. Theology of the Bible, whereby by going through the chronologies of the Bible, and he believed in the goddess Spoke. Now what has happened with the rise of Darwinism, this way I'm going to hijack.

There's no conflict of which I call pseudoscience. You're talking about Roman Catholicism. Yes, it believes the Bible to be the human tradition is also, I would say, a sinful compromise is when you elevate a particular view of science, i .e. Darwinism, and you make that the interpreter of scripture.

In the latter part of my book, individuals, mystic evolutionists, and the problem is they're in science. We do have a listener in Sharpsburg, Georgia,.

Who writes, would your guests feel comfortable naming some of the evangelicals, some in the evangelical community who believe in theistic evolution? Well, obviously, you just did that, but perhaps there are more.

If they are making their beliefs public, I don't think there is anything wrong with naming names when people have identified that they.

Believe in certain things in writing. Yes, the pastor is a theistic evolutionist. One of the professors at Cumberland named Bruce Waltke, he's a theistic evolutionist, was once a professor at Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, but he was fired reviews of his understanding.

He's a theistic evolutionist. Give some other, by holding to this idea of six days creation, that there are ordinary days.

That was very disappointing to hear him say that. Yeah, I think that's one of the reasons why the Church of Rome is rampant with theistic evolutionary beliefs for many decades, and even our Roman Catholic guest yesterday was lamenting that fact, but I wonder if it has something to do with damage control for what the popes in centuries past have done in regard to Galileo and Copernicus and others.

Sometimes I get that impression that Rome is trying to, in a very wrong and dangerous way, make up for the sins of their past where they barbarically reacted to people who disagreed with their views on things.

But the irony of this, isn't it true that in the halls of academia, of science and so on, isn't there a shift taking place amongst even secular scientists where they are clinging far less tightly to the idea of Darwinianism and so on?

Not that they're becoming Christian or creationist, but it seems odd to me that from what I've heard, and maybe I've been misinformed, but from what I've heard is even in secular science the evolutionary theory is becoming less and less stringently taught, whereas in evangelicalism it's on the rise, and it just seems to make no sense to me.

If you could comment on that.

Yes, question, my mind just drifted there for a moment, Chris, I'm sorry.

That's all right. Well, have you heard that even amongst scientists, secular scientists, evolution or Darwinianism in particular is held far less strictly and stringently than it used to be, and therefore I found it ironic that it's on the rise within evangelicalism, even though it's becoming clearer and clearer that there is no scientific evidence at all that evolution is true.

That's basically where I'm at.

Yes, in the scientific circle, Darwin said there's suddenly a monster, amphibians, they crawled. In the textbook, I was evolved from amphibians and mammals evolved. Dawkins?

Oh yes, of course.

That film which I thought was good called Expelled.

Yeah, that was a very good film.

Oh yeah, Ben Stein did a wonderful job dealing with Richard Dawkins. You know, a really important point, he postulated...

No, but it's been a while since I saw the documentary.

Yeah, that's what he said. Now, one of the co-founders of the DNA molecule, Francis Crick, he said the same thing. He believed, he called it Pangenesis, aliens seeded life on this planet.

Oh, you know something, now you are jarring my memory. Now I clearly remember that part of the documentary.

And so, it's so ludicrous. Let me find a quote here, Chris. Owens proved that no one species, not a single species has changed, nor can we prove that the supposed changes are beneficial, which is the groundwork of the theory, nor can we explain why some species have changed and others not.

Now that's an interesting quote from Darwin, isn't it?

Oh yeah. In fact, one thing that we should, before you go on with any more quotes that you might have, I think it's very crucial that our listeners know the original title for the origin of the species.

The original title, the full title, was the origin of the species by means of natural selection or the preservation of favored races in the struggle for life. Darwin was a racist. The vast majority of the early evolutionists were clear and avowed racists.

The Nazis, those, many of those, including Hitler and the upper echelons of the Nazi party were evolutionists who believed that the non-Aryan was closer to the apes on the evolutionary chain. The founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, was an evolutionist and a racist who wanted non-whites eventually exterminated from the face of the earth by sterilizing non-whites involuntarily and also through the means of abortion, which Planned Parenthood is tragically the performer of the vast majority of abortions in the United States today.

I just thought I'd throw that in there because it's amazing to me when I hear conservatives discuss evolution on television and in other forums, they never bring that up. That's one thing you have to hammer a liberal with, like a liberal like Bill Maher, for instance, who thinks that all creationists are morons that have just crawled out of a cave or something.

These people have to be reminded that this theory of evolution comes out of the seeds of racism. Am I correct? Yes. Well, while you're thinking, I'm going to repeat our email address. If you'd like to join us on the air with a question for John Otis, our email address is chrisarnson at gmail .com, chrisarnson at gmail .com, and if you could, please provide your first name, city and state where you reside, and country where you reside if you live outside of the United States.

Have you come to the point where you remembered where your track was?

Yes. In fact, Darwin, what Charles Lyell, what's interesting, when Darwin was taught, he was, I got the quote again in the book, published his book. That point has some areas, but he says, I was laughing so hard through most of it, my side hurt.

That sounds like at least half of the listeners to Iron Sharpens Iron.

But of sorts, when he said this, he says, your view, if we adopt your control, in other words, if man descended from animals and man is only an animal, that man has no dignity, and the reason he has no dignity is because he's an animal.

He's just a highly evolved animal, and that's why he can be manipulated. Darwinism created in the image of God, as the scripture says, and therefore, I've always maintained, actually, that the term revival of the fittest wasn't that term that Darwin used, but the philosopher Herbert Spenser the fittest.

Spenser did as much as anyone in the 19th century to an accepted, and so, he's not made in the image of God, and he's just an animal. Whatever you have to do to survive, if that means killing you, Chris, that's what I have to do.

After all, there is no moral, that's why Sedgwick said, he says, Charles, you have unleashed upon mankind, horrible.

And before we go to our next break, we do have a listener in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, who's one of our faithful listeners out there. Ted in Tuscaloosa, Alabama writes, what is John's view on those who reject evolution, theistic or otherwise, yet also reject a literal six-day creation for either scientific or biblical reasons?

And he gives us an example, Hugh Ross of reasons to believe is a well-known proponent of this view. So, basically, old earth creationists, what is your view of them? Are they heretics, in your opinion, or what is your view of old earth creationists?

I have a number of friends who share my theological views on reformed doctrine, but who also are, unlike myself, old earth creationists. I happen to be like you, a young earth creationist, but what is your view?

I thought you were going to a break, but... No, I'm saying just before my break, I wanted to ask you. Okay. No, I mean,.

I would not view them as heretics. They just had everything that is faithful... And by the way,.

John, I'm wondering if I should sue you for your cover artwork on your book, because it looks exactly like a drawing that I created in college when I majored in art. We had to create a book cover design, and I did a book cover design on evolution, and it was nearly this exact same picture that you have on your cover of things like evolution, a sinful compromise.

But I'm sure that you did not somehow sneak into my attic and steal it out of my old art portfolio or something. It's an excellent... I got the idea from Michelangelo, though. Yeah, so did I, obviously.

But the ape hand, I'm referring to where in the famous classic painting in the Sistine Chapel, you have Adam's hand reaching up and barely touching God's finger. They're not quite touching, but barely touching.

In the cover of Theistic Evolution of Sinful.

Compromise, the hand of Adam is an ape-like hand. If you go back to the book, that's an important.

View of the Theistic Evolutionist. Yes, and we have a whole hour ahead of us to talk about these things, and we'll only dedicate a brief portion of that hour in preparation of Hannah Overton's interview next week.

But we'll have the majority of time to speak about your book, and if you have any further questions, our email address is chrisarnsen at gmail .com. That's chrisarnsen at gmail .com. Please include your first name, your city and state of residence, and your country of residence if you live outside of the USA.

So don't go away. We will be right back with John Otis and our discussion of Theistic Evolution, A Sinful Compromise.

Researched and prepared by biblical scholars devoted to accuracy, the new topical reference Bible includes contemporary topics relevant to today's issues. From compact to giant print Bibles, find an NASB that fits your needs very affordably at nasbible .com.

Trust, discover, and enjoy the NASB for yourself today. Go to nasbible .com. That's nasbible .com.

Tired of bop store Christianity? Of doing church in a warehouse with all the trappings of a rock concert? Do you long for a more traditional and reverent style of worship? And how about the preaching?

Perhaps you've begun to think that in-depth biblical exposition has vanished from Long Island. Well, there's good news. Wedding River Baptist Church exists to provide believers with a meaningful and reverent worship experience featuring the systematic exposition of God's Word.

And this loving congregation looks forward to meeting you. Call them at 631 -929 -3512 for service times. 631 -929 -3512. Or check out their website at wrbc .us. That's wrbc .us.

Lynnbrook Baptist Church on 225 Earl Avenue in Lynnbrook, Long Island is teaching God's timeless truths in the 21st century. Our church is far more than a Sunday worship service.

It's a place of learning where the scriptures are studied and the preaching of the gospel is clear and relevant. It's like a gym where one can exercise their faith through community involvement. It's like a hospital for wounded souls where one can find compassionate people in healing.

We're a diverse family of all ages enthusiastically serving our Lord Jesus Christ.

In fellowship, play, and together. Hi, I'm Pastor Bob Walderman and I invite you to come and join us here at Lynnbrook Baptist Church and see all that a church can be. Call Lynnbrook Baptist at.

516 -599 -9402. That's 516 -599 -9402. Or visit lynnbrookbaptist .org. That's lynnbrookbaptist .org.

Hi, I'm Mike Gallagher. Support for Iron Sharpens. Iron Radio comes from Thriven Financial, where faith and finances connect for good. Thriven helps its members be wise with money and live generously.

Nearly two and a half million Christians count on Thriven to help them protect their families and strengthen the communities where they live, work, and worship. To learn more about what makes Thriven unique, contact me at 717 -254 -6433.

The Westminster Confession, Darwinism, and the Meaning of Human Origins

Welcome back. This is Chris Zarnes of Iron Sharpens Iron. I apologize for the brief moment or more than brief moment of dead air earlier. Sometimes it's not easy being an engineer and a talk host at the same time.

But we are continuing our two-hour interview today with John Otis. He is the founder of Triumphant Publications and he's a retired Presbyterian pastor. And tell us very briefly before we continue the discussion on the denomination where you are an ordained Presbyterian minister, John.

I'm an ordained Presbyterian. What I'm doing, I've been involved in church mission works, church planning endeavors. Right now I'm writing courses for a mission organization.

And why don't you give our listeners the website for Triumphant Publications before.

I forget when the time runs out. It's triumphantpublications .com.

Triumphantpublications .com. That's easy to remember.

Now let me mention that anybody that I have a hard version of the book, people that have access to that book. So if you go to my website, you can order a hardback $15 plus shipping. But then I have made available for free reading a PDF of my book.

And so you can go on to my website, just download the PDF and read the book in electronic format. But let me mention something before we end. There are two areas and don't let me forget about chronologies because that's very important here.

And by the way, we are discussing theistic evolution for the majority of the next hour.

Okay, great. We were previously discussing the front cover. Now there's a reason it's taken from Michelangelo's famous creation there on the human hand. Obviously, God doesn't have a human hand like this.

But anyway, the reason that hand is hairy. And if you look on the back cover,.

The hand of Adam is hairy.

Hominid. The reason I had that is in seminaries, they believed life evolved just like Darwin. Hominids, God picked one out and zapped him. He zapped him with the image of God so that then he further developed what we call homo sapiens.

But they're believing now. One reason that my book grew out a couple years ago, I was at the General Assembly week-long meeting. And during this week-long meeting, they provide seminars for people so anybody can attend.

And they were going to have a seminar where, and he was going to come in, he was granted permission to hold a seminar to purport why an old earth view is acceptable. And he came, what they don't know, faith and science collided.

Someone did their research, so that you believe that God, as it were, and I'm, words zapped. I want to read to show you how far these men go to deny scripture. Yeah, definitely read it. It's where it says, when they took lives for the, because he also is a standard interpreter.

What is this sons of daughter? You know, and some believe that humans intermarried with angels. Lovely line of set. The Nephilim were the proper interpretation. Let me tell you what he wrote in his book.

Here's what he says about Nephilim are, and this is a quote from his book. Consider the possibility that Neanderthals walked for a toe of human likeness. Neanderthals would have been considered sexual union between humans and Neanderthals could have been physically possible, but intolerable in God's sight in much the same way as the acts of Sodom.

This context, Neanderthals may be the sons of God and humans, the daughters of the offspring of or creation of God. Successful union between Neanderthals and humans can easily have give rise to offspring with unique physical characteristics.

She would be identified with Genesis six. Wow. Now for years when I was college, I was a Christian when the idea you don't have, you can't have a sexual union with the kinds to think that humans could have any kind of sexual union with a subhuman is biologically impossible.

And that's why you can't breed dogs with kids. You can have coyotes, the cat kind. You have your domestic cats. You have your, your Bobcats, your lions, your tigers, and all that. And you can interbreed a tiger with a lion and get a liger.

You cannot that you can't go beyond the notion of Genesis six is the marriage of a subhuman species with a human. The extent men will go to, to compromise the scripture when they want to hold on to evolutionary thought the same time.