Hyper-Preterism Debate Review w/ Dr. Sam Frost

The Apologetic Dog and Contending for the Faith

Well, hello and welcome to The Apologetic Dog, where it's our heart's desire to contend for the faith. And specifically, we're talking about the gospel of grace. And so my name is Jeremiah Nortier. I serve as a pastor and elder at 12 Five Church in Jonesboro, Arkansas.

So if you're in the Northeast Arkansas area, we'd love for you to come look up 12 Five Church and come fellowship with us. We'd love to meet you. You can look us up on our church website. That would be 12FiveChurch .com, the word 12, the number five, church .com.

And so here at The Apologetic Dog, we're about apologetics. And so we understand that nobody is neutral. We must, as Christians, stand on the truthfulness of God's word wherever we go. And so when Paul tells Timothy in 1 Timothy 6, verse 20, he says, oh, Timothy, guard the deposit entrusted to you and avoid the irreverent babble and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge.

And so those worldviews that rival Christianity, they will contain logical contradictions of what they espouse to be knowledge. And we refute that. We refute that by standing on the truth. Jesus said, Father, sanctify them in the truth.

Your word is truth. And so that's a little bit about The Apologetic Dog ministry. I actually have an announcement that I'd like to inform everybody of. Coming up in September, September 8th and 9th, I will be speaking at a conference in Topeka, Indiana.

And so this is an eschatology conference where the question that we will be talking about is how then shall we live? Because eschatology matters. Why are we here? What end are we living towards? What's history?

It's his story, it's Christ's story of redemption, and it's going somewhere. So the end, what we are promised in the gospel matters for us today and how we are going to live. And so what I will be talking about is the resurrection of the dead.

I'll be talking about our resurrection with Christ as we are so close to him. When he resurrected, that meant something for us. That actually pictured that we too, when we pass from death to life, from this world, we will be resurrected for eternity with bodies fit to rule and reign with Christ.

So if you're in the Indiana area, I would love to meet you and for you to come out to the conference. And so speaking of eschatology, this episode today is very special because I want to continue that conversation with eschatology with a dear friend of mine, Dr. Sam Frost.

Eschatology, the Resurrection of the Dead, and the Coming Conference

How are you, sir? Hello, and thank you for having me back on your show. And I'll be seeing you in Topeka, Indiana.

Here in a couple of weeks. Yes, I look forward to that. I may have to run my rough draft by you and get some of your thoughts because my central passage will come out of 1 Corinthians 15. I can't think of a better place to talk about our blessed hope, how since Jesus was resurrected and he was the first fruits, we get a picture of the kind of resurrection we can hope for looking to him when we pass from this life to the next.

So Dr. Frost, you have been so instrumental in my understanding of eschatology about what's that proper balance of the essential things that we hold with a closed fist in those things that are non-essential and are still important, but we can sharpen one another in those things.

So you were on The Apologetic Dog, I think for the first time last summer. So a lot has happened between now and then.

Yes, there has been a lot that's happened.

Where do you begin? But anyway, go ahead. Yes, so within that, you and I will be speaking at a conference in February. I believe we're gonna be going to Tennessee area with Jeffrey Rice. I just wanna tell everybody, please not only subscribe to The Apologetic Dog, that helps my ministry out a whole lot, but also go over and just look up Jeffrey Rice.

He has a YouTube page as well. That brother has been doing a lot of things wonderful in the ministry. That's why I encourage people to go check him out. He is hosting a conference in February, and the conference is Why Calvinism?

And so I believe that Jeffrey Rice is going to be hosting a debate with Dr. James White. And I'm not sure the gentleman that he is going to be debating, but it's gonna be a showdown for the ages. So people can look forward to that.

Go to the conference. It's going to sell out quick, but there's gonna be a pre-conference. And so that's where you and I come in. You and I are gonna be talking about the dangers of full preterism. What do you think about that, Dr. Frost?

I think it's needed. You actually were also instrumental in my thinking because I was getting ready to last year really leave discussing full preterism or any of that kind of stuff at all. And you stated, no, don't do that.

We want to expose it as much as possible, even among those that have never heard of it or anything else so that when they, if they do encounter it, they know what to do with it. And that hit me like square between, and I thought, no, never really looked at it that way and prayed about it and talked with some other folks.

And they said, yeah, your friend is right. Your brother's right. And I said, well, okay, I'll keep doing this then. Because I was really going to stop. My studies are concentrated, not on anti-full preterist stuff.

I'm involved in other things. And so these debates and things like this come up because I know full preterism. And no, it's not hundreds and hundreds of thousands of people are becoming, you know, full, you know, but they're there, they're out there and they're making their way in.

And you've encountered that even locally. I have not seen that locally where I'm at, but I've had several pastors come to me. And, you know, what do I do? I've got a couple of guys here that are really disrupting our church.

What should I do? And I warned them, rebuked them. If they don't change, excommunicate them.

Well, I do have some good news. There was two full preterist churches in my local area and one has already shut down. And so praise God that those doors have been closed. The lamp stand that wasn't there to begin with is removed.

And so to me, that is an answer prayer. And this does go back to last year when I called you up because full preterism was starting to spring up. And you know who we need to blame, Dr. Frost? We need to blame Eli Ayala because I'm a big fan of revealed apologetics.

And I remembered you. I remembered he had you on to discuss kind of the dangers of full preterism. And I was like, I need to call this man up. And so you let me ask all my weird questions and you were patient with me with my pre-millennial dispensationalism, which I'm no longer.

So you helped me work through some of those things. And hey, it's been awesome, right? It's been almost a whole year later, I think.

It's a good example of iron sharpening iron and contributing to each other's lives. So yes, it's been not just doing shows and things like this, but actually changing like my mind. I mean, that literally changed my mind.

So yeah, great. It's all in the Lord. God does whatever it is that he does. Amen. And we're not God, I'm not God.

Thank you for contending for the faith, especially in this area of eschatology because typically eschatology is a third tier issue where we can have coffee and disagree. But full preterism is a complete overhaul of eschatology into a completely different worldview that believes in a different Jesus, which we may talk about a little bit.

And it totally takes away our blessed hope with the gospel promises. And so people get mad at me, Dr. Frost. They're like, why are you being mean? Why are you disfellowshipping people to identify with this realized eschatology?

I'm like, well, that's what the apostle Paul did with Hymenaeus and Philetus. It's so crystal clear that our resurrection is central to the gospel. What Jesus accomplished is telling us that we too will be resurrected with a resurrection like his.

And so before we get into some of the things that you've done recently with your debates and things of that nature, I just wanna tell people once again, I'll be speaking in September in Topeka, Indiana, which I'll be seeing you in person for the first time.

And in this conference, we have, Jeffrey Rice that says, Jeremiah, whatever y 'all wanna talk about, that's up to y 'all. And so we may change our game plan between now and then, but I really wanna focus

Oh, we might get Michael Sullivan. Oh, goodness, Michael Sullivan. Yeah, I may have to read a little bit of House Divided in preparation for what I wanna do. So like in September, I'm gonna be speaking on the resurrection of the dead, but more in a positive presentation.

And so what I'm thinking for February is I'm gonna be talking about the apologetics side of the resurrection of the dead. So I really am going to talk about the danger of a covenantal resurrection that full preterism tries to teach, especially in relation to 1 Corinthians 15.

And so I'm really gonna highlight on that aspect of warning people about full preterism. And so maybe you will talk about the parrhesia. I know all of it's in your wheelhouse, but me and you, we gotta tag team this, don't we?

Yeah, yeah. And that's something where we have plenty of time to work on. No pressure. The angle is for Paul in 1 Corinthians 15, and again, this is commonplace if you read the top tier commentaries and things like that.

The resurrection of the dead based upon the resurrection of Jesus Christ. So that becomes fundamental. And this is not an issue that we are free to walk away from even with Hymenaeus and Fletus. So whatever they were saying, we just, we don't know, but most agree that they were spiritualizing, obviously.

And that Paul condemned in the most richest choices of words like gangrene and shipwrecked faith. So he's using images there of one of cancer, of a destructive disease, skin-eating disease, and the other one is a shipwreck.

Yeah. That's how important. So that's not an issue that we can just say, agree to disagree like on many, many, many other issues we can do that with, but this one, you can't.

Full Preterism, 70 AD, and the Meaning of Death

Right, and what I'd like to point out is it's not just the nature of the resurrection that's important, because it is. Go read 1 Corinthians 15, peoples. But also the timing, and so it's the time. If you get the resurrection wrong, if you were to put the resurrection of the dead in the past when it's still in the future, that's heresy.

You're gonna cause people to leave the faith, upset the faith of some, I mean, anathema language, essentially. So as we continue to talk, Dr. Frost, you recently had a debate at Standing for Truth, and so one of the things that I'd like to do this evening is to just review some of the talking points.

And so I'm a big fan of Standing for Truth with the host, Donnie. And so real quick, I was gonna pull up. Another debate is going to be happening in about a month, a little bit less than a month with one of your friends, Pastor Anthony.

He's taking on Dr. Don Preston. So they're gonna be talking about the great millennium debate is the thousand years future. So I just want to encourage people, go check out Dr. Frost's debate, which was last week, and be looking out for this debate coming up with Pastor Anthony.

So y 'all are friends, you were telling me?

Or at least associated with, he's doing his, finishing up his THM PhD at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. You like that Baptist part. And Donnie Budinsky did an absolutely wonderful job between me and William Bell.

Was totally just completely neutral. Just really didn't interrupt or say anything, actually. He just kind of kept it. I imagine he's gonna do that again with Don and Anthony there. I'm looking forward to that debate, actually.

Dr. Frost, did you know I've been on Donnie's channel a couple of times? Yeah, yeah.

Yeah. And I just actually have met him, so I didn't know what he was doing. And then I've asked you and you said, yeah, I've been on there several times.

Donnie's the man. Donnie's up north in Canada, eh? So we gotta get him over in the States and show him how we do.

Now, you mentioned First time I talked with him, and he just struck me as a, just outstanding. So we kept talking and then Young Earth Creation, I thought, oh, boy, I gotta talk with you. So just struck me like you, just as a next generation.

Go for it. You guys are doing great. Christ is building his church. I'm very optimistic meeting folks like that.

Praise God. Now, you were on Donnie's channel and you debated a gentleman, Dr. Bell? William Bell? Is that right? William Bell. I don't know if he has a doctorate, but I don't think he does. So Dr. Frost, tell us about the debate.

What were some of your big thoughts? What were some highlight moments? What were some big takeaways that you had from the debate?

Well, again, and it was Donnie that put them together. So I didn't know Donnie came to me because, and I accepted, I thought William Bell is actually agreeing to debate me. So I jumped at the chance. Now, William and I go way back.

William was an early writer with the newsletter, Living Presence Ministries, when Max King and Tim King and Doug King were in Warren, Ohio, Church of Christ, Warren, Ohio, Parkman Church of Christ, Warren, Ohio.

And that's where King wrote the magnum opus, The Cross and the Parousia. So it's 800 page full, which I still say is the Bible of full preterism. That one is it. So William, getting to know Max back in the early 90s, and I wish I still had these newsletters.

I had a button, every month they would send them out. So there, William Bell, who's mentioned in The Cross and the Parousia and Larry Siegel and Don Preston and Ed Stevens and Jack Scott. These guys and a few others, these guys were very early on in the early 90s doing the work that they're still doing today, corporate body view of the resurrection, which was Max King's baby.

That's Max King came up with that. And so I've known William. And then when the Kings published my book, 2003, Misplaced Hope, then like I've given my story several times. Now I'm speaking at all of these full preterist conferences, which they used to have a bunch of them.

They don't have as many as now, but back then, 2003, 2004, they were having somewhere sometimes four or five a year. And I was going to all of them speaking. And so I met William personally. So William and I go way back and he's always a nice guy.

I don't want to take anything away from any of that.

The debate was super respectful, I thought.

You know, William is William. He's very easy to talk to, but he is, this is the truth for him that there's no other way to think. There are no alternatives. There are no possibilities of other ways of eschatology.

So when, and that's how I was, that's how I used to be. We had struck plutonium with eschatology and we had solved all of the problems, the thorny issues of theology. And we had solved all, you know, this solves all sorts of theological issues that for 2000 years, the church has wrestled with.

So we wrote, that's how we thought. That's how I thought that we really got an answer here. And yes, it goes against the creeds, but you know, not so what, but, you know, okay. But that shouldn't alarm Protestants, you know?

So that's, and William just, and he still just locked on that. So he very much, and I think that came out in the debate because I knew who I was going up against. And I thought, you know, if I could just show where, if I could get him wherever I go with scripture or whatever scripture I use, he's going to interpret it through 70 AD.

That's going to be his. And I'm going to take a chance here. I'm not going to go into my usual 1 Corinthians 15, because I know what they do there. Let me go some other passages. And that's where I hammered a little bit on Psalm 90, Isaiah 25.

And it came out very clear that every single passage is 70 AD. And I thought that's what you have to get into in order to be in their world of thinking. I was in that world of thinking, but fortunately I already had a bachelor of theology laid.

That foundation was already laid before I became a full Preterist. And I had several good mentors in my life. One of them being Dr. Kenneth Talbot, who at the time and during those years, but nonetheless, he was a personal, direct face-to-face challenge, because we would meet often.

And so I, yeah, I was locked in that world, but my academic side was saying, oh, but yeah, you got to challenge your own, you know, keep room over here. You're not infallible. And it worked. That was my strategy going into it was, let me see if this works and if Bill falls for it.

And any passage I bring up, John 6, Isaiah 54, it doesn't make any difference. 70 AD is going to be read. And he did, he did exactly that, I thought. That's my point.

I remember, yeah, when you brought up John 6, it was interesting because you got him to admit that doesn't apply to you. This is only the first century, only the apostles. Am I right? So there's no relevance for us today because this is all kind of talking to a, you know, I build up to 70 AD.

So I don't know if you want to speak anymore. Like, so why do they do that? Like, I understand they have to interpret the last day, right, to 70 AD. So that's what commits them of saying, when Jesus says all the Father gives to me will come to me, they're talking about just in a first century context.

Yeah, you have to. And I said that over and over again because I wasn't speaking to William. I wasn't speaking, I know what William believes in. I wasn't speaking to full preterists that are going to say William, you know, just made Sam look like a complete idiot.

I was speaking to those, because that to me is pointless. You know, that's been done. Yeah. So, you know, I just didn't want that to be my strategy. So I thought, who's going to listen to this? It's Donny Budinsky's show.

So who's listening to this? And I thought he's, the majority of his listeners are not full preterists. Are not full preterists. And I thought, let me, let me emphasize that this is a system you have to buy into the system.

It has a beginning and it has an end and you can't get outside of that circle. Good point. Once you're in it, you're in it. And so every passage gets read in that light. So anything that you see has to be fulfilled by 70 AD because that's their, that's, they can't go beyond 70 AD.

They try to. And that's really where the whole movement as it is right now really implodes because the what now question. They accuse us of 2000 years. You know, soon doesn't mean 2000 years. Well, you have to deal with 2000 years too.

What's God been doing? What are we supposed to do as a church? And here's where many abandoned the church. They don't go to church anymore. There's no point in it. All of that applied only to 70 AD. Everything ends there.

So we're in the perfect one new man being built and fitted together, jointly, joint to joint and bone to bone. Ephesians chapter four. There's so no more ministers or, why would you have them? We're perfected.

So, and all of this is covenantal. It has nothing to do with biology. It has nothing to do with physicality or matter or creation. It's covenantal, purely covenantal, which is purely intellectual. So that's the gnosis part of it.

Esoteric, it's, we would say at our conferences, it's not our substance is changed. It's our stance is changed. So you think of the Greek terms, substance and stance or stasis standing. So sub standing and standing.

So it's not our substance that's changed. It's our standing that's changed. So that's completely esoteric and intellectual. That's not, it doesn't have nothing to do.

With biology. When the full predator says, you know, something is covenantal. Is there an implicit assumption that there's a hard break between the people of Israel and the church? Like, would this be a dispensational assumption in their own theology?

Yeah, they operate very much like dispensationalists. They're very compartmentalized and they have very nice and neat charts. I've noticed. Yeah. God at 7 .45 p .m. on the month of Abb stopped doing what he was doing and went in another direction.

And we know that history is just, the manifestations of the marching of God's kingdom are just messy when they manifest in history.

Biological Death, Adam, and the Curse of Genesis 3

Dr. Frost, when I hear full predators talk, they claim to like be the antithesis of dispensational futurist theology, you know, and yet they will bring up the caricature of replacement theology and despair.

And to me, well, they're doing the same thing that dispensationalists do. Just say, no, there's two people of God. You had Israel in the Old Testament and then you have the church essentially in the New Testament.

And so I'm like, you gotta argue for that. You can't just let that be an assumption. And I just, I think it's very ironic that they are very much close to dispensational theology, the very thing that they claim to be the antithesis to.

And so I really enjoyed the debate, Dr. Frost. I think you highlighted well that William has to redefine literally everything in order to make the system work, but that's exactly what it is. It's a system.

And so when you read clear passages about death, it has to be reinterpreted into a type of Adamic death. Did I understand William's whole point is when he sees death, he reads into that, this idea that since Adam was alienated from God, that this is somehow purely spiritual.

And that's kind of the interpreting mechanism of how he reads 1 Corinthians 15 and other places.

That's the only mechanism. So when you ask Don Preston or Larry Siegel or Max King or Mike Sullivan or David Green or Ed Hassert or any of these guys, John Noe, Ed Stevens, I mean, go down the list, it doesn't make any difference.

They're all the same. Some of them say they're not full preterists. They all are. It is what it is. They're trans-millennial. You heard that one? Yeah, I was there when Tim King actually launched that and copyrighted it.

He actually copyrighted that phrase. Because he didn't want the full preterist, that word was leaving a sour, it could mean anything, everyone's preterist. Everyone uses Jesus' birth in Bethlehem. Okay, that's fulfilled.

Does that make you a preterist? Well, see, that's the kind of language.

That's why Gary DeMar says we're all preterists.

Yeah, we're all preterists. I'm like, no, we're, can't. Yes, so they all believe that biological death had nothing to do with Genesis one through three. So Adam, had he not eaten of the tree, he eventually would have naturally died.

Physically died. And would have been accepted into heavenly glory without sin, without any of that. So his transition or transitioning from his physical biological body on earth would have transitioned into a heavenly glory life without any breaks whatsoever.

However, because of his sin, and now we die, you have this Hadean separation. So even when you die, you're still separated from God and you go to this gloomy netherworld place of coming back to Homer.

So one of my biggest takeaways from the debate, though, that I thought you hammered, William, on, and to me, I was like, of course, this is so important, but you're talking about the death, right? What is death?

I mean, it's so intuitive for us that we understand that when somebody isn't living anymore, they're dead, they've experienced death. And I mean, it's almost weird how we have to qualify of saying, yes, that was a biological death.

It's almost like, well, what else would it be? You know what I mean? And so something you brought out was you went to Psalm chapter 90. And I remember listening to you talk about it, I was like, oh, this is so good.

This Psalm highlights how the years of our lifespan, of our life, are 70, or even by reason of strength, 80, yet their span is not without toil and without trouble, okay? And so this is a Psalm talking about, generally, how long people live physical lives, right?

And there's toil, there's trouble. Sounds like maybe that's the effect of the fall or something, which I do want us to look at this phrase, because earlier back, and I believe it's verse three here, talking about man, you return man to dust and say return children of man.

And so the Hebrew there, I believe, is Adam, right? So is this a Psalm of Moses? So, I mean, there's a strong consistency with Moses writing the Pentateuch, and he articulates here what death looks like, returning back to dust, right?

And so I remember you just, in very plain terms, this is death, what else could this be talking about? It's talking about physical life, and then one day we're going to return to dust. And I thought, you know, that is probably one of the best explanations, biblically, of what the kind of death Scripture gives us.

And nobody can argue with it, Dr. Frost. I mean, that's literally what we experience life now, the death of loved ones, right? Because death is not normal, it's an enemy, it's an intrusion into this world.

When we go look at Genesis one and two, God made everything good and very good, and death wasn't anywhere around. I'm with you, Eileen, young earth creation, have a lot of love for my old earth creationist pals, but I believe death was a result of Adam's sin.

I'm talking about death across the board. It's an intrusion. So, anyway, that's a conversation for another time. But I loved how you brought up Psalm 90 here, and so remind me what William did when you brought up Psalm 90.

How did he understand this?

Well, being a Psalm of Moses, and I remember my Hebrew, I did two years of Hebrews, and it was either Richard Pratt or Mark Furtado or Waltke or one of them that said that the headings in the Hebrew scriptures, the headings of the Psalms are regarded as scripture too.

That's, they didn't, you know, that's a part of the deal. And so this being a Psalm of Moses, I take it, you know, that's what it is, unless you can show me different. So, the return to the dust, Moses wrote Genesis, and so it's an interesting thing, and that's its association with Moses, this idea of returning to the dust, and it's God that says, vayta mev shuvu bene adam, sons of Adam.

So, that's Genesis 3, and it's plural. So, it's not just Adam that received this return to dust, even though in Genesis 3, he's speaking singularly, because Adam was the only human male that was alive at the time.

So, in the singular, he's speaking to Adam, you will return to dust, you will, dust you are, dust you shall be, and you will return to dust. But here in Psalm 90, it's sons, plural. So, whatever happened to Adam, Paul reasoned also happened to all that are children of Adam.

So, Paul in Romans 5, 12, he's not inventing this stuff, he's getting it from the Tanakh, he's getting it from the scriptures that teach it. So, whatever happened to Adam returned to dust singular, that's also to the sons of Adam, to the plural.

So, that's clearly, here's a great Genesis 3 applying to an individual Adam at the time that is now application that's universal, and there's no getting around that. And it's clearly returning to the dust, it's defined as that in Genesis 3.

That's what it is, he's taken from the dust and he's going to return to the dust. And we, that imagery is used all throughout, we all know what that dust you are. That's the general. You know what this dust you are, dust we shall return.

I've had, unfortunately, to preside over funerals and we quote this passage, we quote, because we know what it means as Jews, as Christians, as believers, as readers of the Bible. But not so for Mr. Bell, because, you know, if the curse is biological death, what is the redemption from that curse?

1 Corinthians 15, Adam, and the Bodily Resurrection of Christ

Right, so this is, you know, I've been talking with you for well over a year, learning from you, thinking through these concepts, and so where the rubber really hits the road, 1 Corinthians 15. And so, you know, I encourage everyone, just go read the whole chapter and just see the beauty and magnificence of Christ and his resurrection, and how that promises that we too will be resurrected like Christ.

And so here's a verse that's in dispute. 1 Corinthians 15, 22, for as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. Dr. Frost, when I talk to full preterists, they immediately say, Adam did not die physically.

When God told him, the day that you eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, you will surely die. And so their argument is, he didn't die physically, therefore he must have died spiritually. And so I say timeout, because if we go back to Genesis chapter one, we see that God made man in his image, and when he made man, it was very good.

Day six, right? Genesis chapter two, this is so important to talking about who man is, what the whole of man looks like, and it's going to relate to death. In Genesis chapter two, God takes the dust of the ground and then breathes into that the breath of life and creates Adam, Adam essentially, and then makes Eve from his side.

And so I push to people, there's what man looks like, the dust of the ground, this physical reality, and yes, we are able to relate to God because he breathed into us the breath of life. And so when he says, the day that you disobey me and sin, there's gonna be justice, there's going to be death, which Romans three tells us that all men earn, and so I press the point that death has to touch all of who man is.

And so don't mistake this, you know, to our audience. That would include the physical reality of death itself. And so what's so interesting about Genesis three, you know, the fall happens, Adam and Eve sin against God, and so there's a bunch of curses that happen as a result of Adam's sin, and so this is the part that you are bringing up.

By the sweat of your brow, or your face, you shall eat bread, right? No longer is it gonna be this bliss and Eden that everything's done for you to just kind of look after. But by the sweat of your face, that's how you're gonna eat bread, till you return to the ground, right?

For out of it you were taken, and for you are dust, and to dust you shall return. And so this is telling us physical, biological death is a result of sin. Now something you and I have talked about in the past, Dr. Frost, is that biological death should have happened to Adam and Eve that day, but we start learning more about the character of God, right?

We get the Proto-Evangelium in Genesis 3 .15. I'm gonna pull it up here real quick. So God, the sovereign I will. I will put enmity between you and the woman. God is saying this to the serpent. Between your offspring and her offspring, and he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.

So this is a promise of the gospel that this coming offspring is going to crush the head of the serpent. And so we see not only an effect of the fall is a physical, biological death, to dust you shall return, that's physical, but we start to see more about the character of God.

In verse 21 here, I don't know if you can see it on my screen. And the Lord God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skin and clothed them. And so there was a substitute that was made on behalf of Adam and Eve, and it was animal skins.

An animal had to die as a substitute to picture the perfect lamb of God who would ultimately take away the sins of the world. And here's the point, physical death, a reckoning for sin did happen that day in the garden, but God is merciful and he provided a substitute.

And so my whole point, Dr. Frost, is there's no way around 1 Corinthians 15 about when it says in Adam all die, because of Adam's sin, the effects of that was physical death and everything that ensues and comes after that.

If we go back to Genesis 3, it's all there. To the dust, man shall return. And you know, you may can speak to this too. I believe that day Adam and Eve began to die. I believe Adam lived, you know, 950 years around there until he experienced death's end.

But it's all right there in Genesis 3.

I think, you know, everything you said there is, you know, it's, I mean, it's I was taking notes during your debate. That's why I like just reading what, you know, that's the tense about, you know, yes, the actuality that you find there in Genesis 3 becomes later on many, many rich metaphors.

It becomes used, you know, there's all kinds of metaphors that that's used, but you have to have a reality or a basis meaning to have a metaphor or it's not a metaphor. So William tried to bring up passages about dust and all this public, a bunch of other stuff.