Podcast appearances and mentions of jason lisle

May 6, 2025 Guest #1: ASTRONAUT BARRY “BUTCH” WILMORE,who is also an elder @ ProvidenceBaptist Church (Reformed) inPasadena, TX, who will address: “TRUSTING in GOD's SOVEREIGNTYWHILE STRANDED in OUTER SPACE” Guest #2:Dr. JASON LISLE, world-renownedChristian astrophysicist, YoungEarth Creationist, author,conference speaker & founder &president ofBiblicalScienceInstitute.org,who will address: “HOW DO MOST SECULAR SCIENTISTSDISAGREE with the BIBLICALLYMINDED SCIENTISTS […]

May the 4th be with you! In honor of Star Wars day, we dug into the vault and re-released our discussion with astrophysicist Dr. Jason Lisle about Rogue One: A Star Wars Story. This surprisingly fresh entry to the Star Wars universe led to some deep discussion on a range of topics: Is there ever a time when ‘lying' is justified in the eyes of God? Is it possible to deceptively work from within an evil group in order to dismantle it? Why is it so hard to create replicas of the human face that are convincing, when animals seem much less difficult? Will storytelling – and dare we say filmmaking – continue in the eternal state? What sort of Star Wars character would Dr. Lisle be? ...and much more! Watch the episode here. Don't forget to SUBSCRIBE and click the notification bell. Follow & connect: https://linktr.ee/popcorntheology  Support: https://www.patreon.com/popcorntheology  Rate and review to get 2 FREE Popcorn Theology Stickers! Write a 5-star review and send your screenshot and mailing address to feedback@popcorntheology.com and receive 2 FREE stickers! #StarWars #RogueOne #MayThe4th #FelicityJones #DiegoLuna #ForrestWhitaker #ChristianPodcasts #MoviePodcasts #MovieExplanation #MovieAnalysis #MovieReaction #MovieReview #MovieDiscussion #FilmCriticism  #FilmReview #FilmDiscussion  #FilmAnalysis #TVDiscussion #TVReview #CharacterAnalysis  #MediaLiteracy #MediaLiteracyMatters #ReformedTheology #YouAreNotAMindlessConsumer Intro Music by Ross Bugden: https://youtu.be/Bln0BEv5AJ0?si=vZx_YiHK3hNxaETA

Segment 1 • The death of the Pope signals the likely election of a liberal leader. • The papacy's doctrinal errors, based on tradition and magisterium, mislead millions about salvation. • Softened evangelical perspectives, like Russell Moore's, fail to address the papacy's eternal consequences. Segment 2 • Melito of Sardis' 2nd-century sermon contrasts with today's shallow Easter preaching. • Modern sermons are moralistic, neglecting the true gospel of Christ's sacrifice. • A return to gospel-centered, Christ-focused preaching is essential to understand Easter's real significance. Segment 3 • 90% of pastors affirm climate change, but many Christians are unsure about the issue. • Dr. Jason Lisle tackles climate change from a biblical and scientific perspective in a Fortis webinar. • The narrative of human-caused climate change is shaky, with natural cycles and past periods of warming showing no human influence. Segment 4 • Al Gore's climate predictions failed, and the sun's cycles are a bigger factor in climate changes. • Water vapor and clouds, not CO2, account for 75% of the greenhouse effect. • The human contribution to CO2 is small, and the panic surrounding it is built on weak claims. – Preorder the new book, Lies My Therapist Told Me, by Fortis Institute Fellow Dr. Greg Gifford now! https://www.harpercollins.com/pages/liesmytherapisttoldme – Thanks for listening! Wretched Radio would not be possible without the financial support of our Gospel Partners. If you would like to support Wretched Radio we would be extremely grateful. VISIT https://fortisinstitute.org/donate/ If you are already a Gospel Partner we couldn't be more thankful for you if we tried!

Session 2: Logic & Q&A

Session 1: Apologetics

Segment 1 • Todd discusses Dr. Jason Lisle's emphasis on the Bible as the undeniable proof of creation. • Logic can't exist without the God of the Bible; uniformity in nature points to a Creator. • God's mystery is transcendent, and His word provides clarity on the universe. Segment 2 • Evolution is not science; it's a theory. Christians bring the Bible to battle. • Evangelism is about sharing the good news, not winning theological debates. • There's a time to use presuppositional apologetics and a time to step back. Segment 3 • AI isn't infallible. Real-time translation AI raises questions about implications. • Worship is not just vertical but also horizontal; are we missing its full potential? • America ranks 24th in a 13-year happiness study, raising concerns about our priorities. Segment 4 • Todd shares how he's dealing with challenges and finding normalcy again. • What comes out of your mouth reflects your heart. • 1 in 5 people in the U.S. feel they have no one to count on for support. ___ Preorder the new book, Lies My Therapist Told Me, by Fortis Institute Fellow Dr. Greg Gifford now! https://www.harpercollins.com/pages/liesmytherapisttoldme ___ Thanks for listening! Wretched Radio would not be possible without the financial support of our Gospel Partners. If you would like to support Wretched Radio we would be extremely grateful. VISIT https://fortisinstitute.org/donate/ If you are already a Gospel Partner we couldn't be more thankful for you if we tried!

Segment 1 • Church news: PCUSA and UMC are cutting staff, while SBC is also in decline. • Growing churches focus on biblical truth, not entertainment or worldly influences. • The Bible permits us to draw distinctions—don't settle for a worldly religion. Segment 2 • Bethel Church's influence is part of a broader intellectual regression. • Martin Luther's The Bondage of the Will offers timeless wisdom on salvation. • Franklin Graham's work in Ethiopia shows that real ministry still matters. Segment 3 • Bethel Church promotes the prosperity gospel, but true wealth is in Christ alone. • Money isn't the best thing God offers; Jesus offers something far better. • Sin may look enticing, but choosing it is settling for the lessor thing. Segment 4 • Dr. Jason Lisle in studio—don't miss this opportunity to learn from him. • We need a serious reevaluation of the death penalty in America. • The crime rate is worse than we realize—look to Ireland for the latest concern. ___ Preorder the new book, Lies My Therapist Told Me, by Fortis Institute Fellow Dr. Greg Gifford now! https://www.harpercollins.com/pages/liesmytherapisttoldme ___ Thanks for listening! Wretched Radio would not be possible without the financial support of our Gospel Partners. If you would like to support Wretched Radio we would be extremely grateful. VISIT https://fortisinstitute.org/donate/ If you are already a Gospel Partner we couldn't be more thankful for you if we tried!

Segment 1: • Dr. John MacArthur may not have attended the Shepherd's Conference, but his legacy and commitment to serving the Lord remain paramount. • Are you sprinting toward eternity with the same intensity as Dr. MacArthur? It's about doing all things with purpose, regardless of whether they seem "religious." • Time is running out—how will you finish the race? Living for Christ in everything we do matters for eternity. Segment 2: • Tim Challies' webinar on comforting those who mourn is coming up this Thursday. Don't miss this crucial opportunity to learn about biblical grief. • Exciting events ahead: Jason Lisle's upcoming event and a 30% off coupon for G3! Plus, get your hands on Greg Gifford's new book, Lies My Therapist Told Me. • ADHD in kids—what if it's more about personality than a disorder? Dive into this crucial conversation. Segment 3: • The narrative blaming Christians for the high suicide rates in the transgender community is misguided. The truth: rates of depression and suicide are significantly higher among those who undergo gender surgeries. • The numbers speak for themselves—gender transition surgery doesn't solve underlying issues; it exacerbates them. • UK's “first man” pregnant naturally—how much longer will society deny reality? We're blurring the lines on truth. Segment 4: • America is back—but at what cost? Melania Trump announces the return of the White House Easter Egg Roll; what does this mean for cultural values today? • Evangelical churches on Easter: Could there be a divine groan over how we're celebrating and engaging with the world's distractions? • College students are speaking out—are we truly listening to their struggles, or just focusing on the wrong things? ___ Preorder the new book, Lies My Therapist Told Me, by Fortis Institute Fellow Dr. Greg Gifford now! https://www.harpercollins.com/pages/liesmytherapisttoldme ___ Thanks for listening! Wretched Radio would not be possible without the financial support of our Gospel Partners. If you would like to support Wretched Radio we would be extremely grateful. VISIT https://fortisinstitute.org/donate/ If you are already a Gospel Partner we couldn't be more thankful for you if we tried!

Segment 1: • The President's speech to Congress was more theater than substance. • What does it mean for a country to be great? It's about more than economics. • Biblical imprecatory psalms give permission to pray against evil deeds, similar to Jesus' rebukes of the Pharisees. Segment 2: • Todd, under the weather, provides updates on upcoming events like Dr. Jason Lisle's talk and Tim Challies' webinar. • Interesting article reveals the share of U.S. Christians is stabilizing after years of decline • Methodist denomination, once dominant, now sees waning influence. People are craving more depth in faith. Segment 3: • John Crotts' podcast is in the top 5% worldwide, with listeners tuning into the “Integrated” show. • The need to integrate truth and life is critical—especially in light of movements like John Mark Comer's. • Preaching love has become overcorrected—balance is key in teaching true Christianity. Segment 4: • Thousands of churches are using Jon Mark Comer's teachings, but are they truly biblical? • Comer's system can't heal wounds; it stops performing when people need it most. • The idea that God can change His mind at any moment is a misleading and dangerous theological stance. ___ Preorder the new book, Lies My Therapist Told Me, by Fortis Institute Fellow Dr. Greg Gifford now! https://www.harpercollins.com/pages/liesmytherapisttoldme  ___ Thanks for listening! Wretched Radio would not be possible without the financial support of our Gospel Partners. If you would like to support Wretched Radio we would be extremely grateful. VISIT https://fortisinstitute.org/donate/ If you are already a Gospel Partner we couldn't be more thankful for you if we tried!

March 4, 2025 Eli Ayala,Presuppositionalist apologist &founder of RevealedApologetics.comwho will address: “The TRANSCENDENTAL ARGUMENTfor the EXISTENCE of GOD (TAG)” & announcing the fall conference inFranklin, TN featuring Eli Ayala,Dr. James R. White & Dr. Jason Lisle!!! Subscribe: Listen:

Are you ready for a BIRTHDAY PARTY? Quantum Physics has now reached the ripe old age of 100, but what does quantum science mean? The implications will leave you shaken. All the evidence we have from Quantum Mechanics points to the Trinity! Modern physics echoes the very words of Genesis. And what about Sir Isaac Newton? Some call Newton, the Father of Modern Science, but they also brand him a heretic. Others call him a defender of the Trinity. I argue his own writings reveal the shocking truth. This is not just another debate. This is history, science, and faith colliding in ways that will change how you see reality itself. Don't miss a second. Watch now!

In this episode, Eli is joined by Dr. Jason Lisle to discuss bird evolution and the importance of presuppositions in science.

Dr. Lisle discusses the evolutionary distant starlight problem that the new James Webb telescope has revealed. He was also the first to apply Einstein's theory of relativity to answer the distant starlight objection to young earth creationism. Consider subscribing on YouTube to watch more interviews like this: https://www.youtube.com/@theeocrat

Audio from Youtube: https://youtu.be/t60N3piHO28?si=EQvLDYmuNb0TFRkp   

Deception is simply taking a piece of the truth, and twisting it. That's what makes it so convincing. It sounds right... sort of. Almost. I believe I first read in one of C.S. Lewis's books, probably in several of them, that evil defines itself by the absence of God, just as darkness defines itself as the absence of light. Satan cannot create anything; all he can do is pervert something that God made, and intended for good.   The introduction of Jonathan Cahn's most recent book, "The Dragon Prophecy," puts this extremely well, so I'm going to just quote him. He writes, "If God is good, then how could there be evil? And if God is evil, then how could God be good? But if God did not create evil, then how could evil exist? Or how could God be God?... If evil was created, it would not be a problem, nor would it be evil. Evil is a problem for the very reason that it was not created. It should not exist, because it was not created, and yet it does. The existence of evil defies the created order. It is not of the creation and thus exists in opposition to the created order. Evil exists in defiance of existence... evil is not simply a force, like that of an earthquake, a hurricane, or a fire. All these bring calamity and destruction. But none would constitute true evil. Serial killers are. Why? The hurricane is an impersonal force. It acts without consciousness, will, choice, volition, or intent. But the serial killer commits his acts with conscious intent, will, an volition--and so is evil. And so evil is not an impersonal force--but a personal one, requiring consciousness, volition, will, and intent. Thus in our search for an answer to evil, we are led to personhood... Evil is an inversion--an inversion of truth, of reality, of existence. Evil is, by nature, inverted and, by nature, inverts. It twists, bends, and turns existence in upon itself. It exists as anti-existence. Its being is anti-being, and its nature, anti-nature. It is a negation and therefore seeks to negate, a nullification that exists to nullify. It has no true, ultimate, or absolute existence and therefore acts to bring that which exists into non-existence... Possessing no absolute or true existence of its own, evil is, as well, by nature, parasitic... Evil must use the good. And so though good can exist without evil, evil cannot exist without good. Truth can exist without falsehood, but falsehood cannot exist without truth. Laws can exist without crimes, marriage without adultery, and life without murder. But crimes cannot exist without laws, adultery without marriage, nor murder exist without life. Destruction requires structure, immorality requires morality, and sin requires the holy. The good is primary. Evil is the parasitic inversion of the good. And so the existence of evil inadvertently testifies not against the existence of the good--but for it. It bears witness, unwillingly, to the existence of the good--the existence of God" (9-10). So if evil itself is an inversion of something created to be good, then nearly everything God created for our pleasure and enjoyment can also become evil... but because it contains the seeds of something that was originally good, Satan can also use that kernel of goodness, or truth, to convince us that the twisted version is actually good and true, too... and if we don't know the truth well enough to tell the difference, we'll fall for it.  The Syncretism Trend According to Dr George Barna's research with the Cultural Research Center at Arizona Christian University, the dominant worldview of Americans (92%) now is syncretism (https://www.arizonachristian.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/CRC-Release-AWVI-2-April-23-2024.pdf): that is, an amalgamation of disparate and contradictory beliefs, pulled from multiple religious or philosophical ideologies, according to an individual's personal inclinations and emotions. Syncretism is therefore not a single worldview, but a mishmash of beliefs--hence the common phrase, "your truth" and "my truth." The implication is that these can be mutually exclusive, without any logical contradiction. This strategy of Satan's is nothing new. He is a liar and the father of lies by nature (John 8:44). He sticks with this approach because it works.  Syncretism in the Old Testament Syncretism has  been around since the days of the Old Testament, and was the main reason why the Israelites couldn't seem to stay on the "blessing" side of God's covenant (Deuteronomy 28). Literally the first of the Ten Commandments was "You shall have no other gods before Me" (Ex 20:3)--and al, the Hebrew word translated "before", also means "by" or "beside." So God wasn't saying they simply had to worship Him the most, but it was okay if they occasionally sacrificed to Baal or Molech or Asherah--so long as He was the most important. No; they were to have no other gods besides Him. Period. The entire Old Testament history is a cycle of the Israelites' disobedience of this one commandment. The first example after the Ten Commandments were given is the golden calf that Aaron made with the spoils from Egypt while Moses was up on the mountain receiving God's law (Ex 32). These Israelites had spent their entire lives in Egypt, where a pantheon of gods were worshipped (many of whom God specifically humiliated by the plagues chosen to eventually force Pharaoh to let them go). When they made the golden calf, the Israelites declared that this was God--the One who had delivered them from Egypt (Ex 32:4). So they weren't exactly abandoning Yahweh for some other god; rather, they were mixing Him with the gods they had grown up with. Then, the Israelites tended to mix worship of Yahweh with worship of the gods of neighboring nations, even before they ever got to the Promised Land. Israel's enemies feared God, and one of them (King Balak of Moab) sent for Balaam, a local seer, to curse Israel (Numbers 22-24). God wouldn't allow Balaam to curse Israel, but Balaam wanted Balak's money... so instead, he told Balak how to get the Israelites to curse themselves, by placing themselves on the "cursing" side of God's covenant (Deuteronomy 28). Numbers 25 shows the result: the Moabite harlots used sex to entice the men of Israel into idolatry. The issue in this case wasn't so much the sex, as it was that sex was used in worship of false gods.  The cycle repeats throughout the Old Testament: Israel falls into idolatry, they fall under the 'cursing' side of God's covenant as a result (bringing themselves out from under His protection, and subject to Satan's machinations), they get oppressed by their enemies, they cry out to God, and God delivers them. They renew their vows to and worship of the One True God in varying degrees, but then they forget again, fall into idolatry, and the cycle repeats. God had laid out very clearly that they would be blessed if they followed His laws, and cursed if they didn't (Deut 28), and the very first commandment was no gods before Him. It was the first for a reason: God knows that we were made to worship something, and we treasure what we worship. "Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also" (Matt 6:21), and our hearts guide the course of our lives (Prov 4:23).  Eventually Israel split into two kingdoms (Northern and Southern, or Israel and Judah) over this very issue. Most of the subsequent kings of both nations perpetuated idolatry, though a few tried to purge the nation of idolatry to varying degrees, and enjoyed the 'blessing' side of the covenant for a time as a result (Deut 28). But God sent prophet after prophet to the Northern and Southern nations (writers of most of the major and minor prophetic books of the Old Testament), warning them of impending destruction if they did not repent of their idolatry. They ignored the warning, and eventually both nations were taken into captivity because of their idolatry: Israel to Assyria and Judah to Babylon. (Though of course, God was not done with Israel, and His promises to them still stand--Ezekiel 37 prophesied their restoration to their own land as a resurrection of dry bones, which miraculously took place on May 14, 1948. And the nation of Israel takes center stage throughout most of the book of Revelation, from chapter 5 on.)  Syncretism in the New Testament  Syncretism was around during the time of the early church, too, particularly in Paul's ministry. God sent him as the apostle to the Gentiles, who practiced varying forms of pagan beliefs already. They attempted to mix Jesus with these beliefs, until Paul's preaching convicted them to follow Jesus only, burning their books of magic arts and getting rid of their idols of Greek and Roman gods (Acts 19:11-20--which turned into a big riot in the city, v 21-41). Paul described the end times as being a time of "unrighteous deception among those who perish" (2 Thess 2:10), so we can expect that as we approach that day, this will only increase. Jesus told us that in the last days, "if possible, even the elect" would be deceived (Matt 24:24). The Greek work for deception in these verses is planao, and it means "to lead away from the truth, to lead into error." This inherently means that there is such a thing as truth. If you believe something contradictory to that truth, that is deception. We're living in an age that largely borrows from postmodernism as part of the syncretic worldview. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, "Postmodernists deny that there are aspects of reality that are objective; that there are statements about reality that are objectively true or false; that it is possible to have knowledge of such statements (objective knowledge); that it is possible for human beings to know some things with certainty; and that there are objective, or absolute, moral values." Holders of this worldview are therefore confused about even observable or mathematical truths, let alone those that are not observable (such as whether or not there is a God, and if there is, how many, and which one, how do we get to Him, etc). So before we even approach the topic of how to avoid being deceived, we have to establish that there is such a thing as objective truth. If there isn't, then there is no such thing as deception, either, since deception derives its definition from truth (just as darkness derives its definition from light, by the absence of it). What Is Truth (i.e. Is There Such A Thing As Objective Reality?) The best argument I've heard on the topic of whether or not there is an objective reality comes from Dr Jason Lisle's "The Ultimate Proof of Creation" (which is a book, but here is his lecture on the argument https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQ_UxcV-xcM). While there is an abundance of apologetic evidence for the scientific and historical accuracy of scripture (here's the first in an apologetics series I did on the subject, https://www.drlaurendeville.com/anthropic-fine-tuning/), Lisle points out that none of these arguments can be definitive, because someone who holds a different worldview can simply invoke a "rescuing device" to explain away any evidence that seems to contradict his own position. We all do this, and it's not necessarily a bad thing--for example, if someone points out an apparent contradiction in scripture, my first reaction isn't, "Oh, I guess the Bible is wrong!" Rather, I assume there's additional information I don't happen to know about yet, which resolves the apparent contradiction, and then I go look for it. Even if I can't find it at the time, I am still certain it exists, and someone will find it eventually. That's a rescuing device, to preserve an otherwise deeply held worldview without logical contradiction. The real key to establishing which worldview is correct lies in that last statement: "without logical contradiction." There are laws that govern the way the world and the universe works--laws that we all have to believe in and abide by in order to know anything at all. C.S. Lewis expounded on this concept in "Mere Christianity" (https://www.authorcagray.com/posts/mere-christianity/) with respect to morality, in particular--the idea that we all know that there are universal laws of decency and conduct, and we further know that we don't live up to them. But, that being the case, who made those laws? Where did they come from? He argues that their very existence necessitates a lawgiver. Lisle takes this argument further--the existence of non-moral rules that govern how the material world works, such as the laws of logic, and principles of math and science, are the presuppositions upon which all knowledge is based. Everyone has to abide by these, no matter what their worldview is, or it would be impossible to know anything at all. But who made those rules? Where did they come from? Why does math work? Why do we all assume the laws of logic in order to have a coherent conversation? This, too, necessitates a creator. Many who abide by laws of math, science, and logic (and morality, for that matter) don't happen to have a theistic worldview, but that in and of itself is a logical inconsistency; they can't account for those rules in their worldviews at all. They have to borrow from the theistic worldview in order to make any of their other arguments.  This is the very place where postmodernism diverges, though. If there is no objective reality, then knowledge of any kind doesn't exist. Most of those who hold this worldview at least believe in morality of some kind. Lewis's argument might be most relevant here--you'll never get someone persuaded by postmodernism and religious syncretism to argue that murder, or genocide, or racism are fine, for example. They know these are wrong because they "feel" them to be wrong--and they're not just wrong for them, they're wrong for everyone. Now we have at least one absolute... which necessitates a lawgiver not only for morality, but also for at least one logical law: that of non-contradiction. This already establishes the existence of an objective reality. If there is an objective reality, then necessarily, some statements about it must be true while others must be false. The world is round and not flat, for example. If a world exists at all, both things cannot be true about it at the same time and in the same way, simultaneously--that would be a logical contradiction. Which Objective Reality Is It? (Can Anybody Know?) If some objective reality does in fact exist, how do we know which one it is? How do we know that our senses are reliable, first of all, and that we're not living in a simulation a la "The Matrix," for instance--one in which the laws of morality, logic, math, and science are simply foundational to the code? This argument goes back to Descartes, who concluded that at the very least, he must exist after some fashion, because his consciousness told him he must. C.S. Lewis in "Mere Christianity" used a similar line of reasoning, arguing that if there were a deeper reality, one that created this reality, we couldn't possibly find out anything about it through our five senses. Of course we couldn't; those senses are of the physical world, and can thus only give us information about the physical world. Our consciousness, however, has no identifiable physical reality. (To this day, science cannot explain what consciousness actually is - https://www.drlaurendeville.com/electromagnetism-vital-force/.) So Lewis argues that, if there were anything knowable about the world beyond our own, the only place where we might possibly expect to find clues about it would be in our own consciousness. And there, in fact, we do find such clues: specifically, we all have a sense of right and wrong. While we might quibble about the details therein--someone might say that under such and such a condition, killing someone is not murder, for example--no one will seriously argue that murder is morally fine. One might have different rules surrounding the morals of sex, but nobody is going to say you can just have any person you like anytime you like. This establishes several things, according to his argument: the existence of a moral law outside of our reality, of how we ought to behave (even though we know we don't, or at least not always, and certainly not perfectly), which necessitates the implied existence of a law-giver. The very fact that we do not keep the law (even though we know we should) is the whole point of the law of the Old Testament, too (Romans 7)--but even those who didn't know the Old Testament were aware of the moral law to this extent, so that no one is without excuse (Romans 1:18-2:16). Once we know that there is a moral law, and that we're incapable of keeping it on our own, that narrows down the possible religions considerably. We must choose one that hinges on the concept of grace, not works. There is literally only one of those. (More on that in this podcast: https://www.drlaurendeville.com/relational-apologetics/). That's why we call Christianity the gospel, which means good news: the good news is that, while you can't make yourself righteous no matter how hard you try, you don't have to make yourself righteous because Jesus did it for you. All you have to do is accept what He did on your behalf. Once you've gotten to this place, now all the scientific apologetics (start here: https://www.drlaurendeville.com/anthropic-fine-tuning/) can fall into their proper place: as corroborating evidence for the Bible. But the Bible has to be philosophically established as authoritative first. Once we've established that the Bible is truth (John 17:17, Psa 25:5, Psa 91:4, Psa 96:13, 100:5, 117:2, 119:142, 151, 160; 138:2, Prov 3:3, Col 1:5), we've got to learn what it says--well enough that Satan can't take it out of context and feed it back to us, or add a tiny bit to it to change the meaning. That's exactly how he works, though. He even tried that with Jesus (Luke 4:1-13). Fortunately Jesus was the Word made flesh (John 1:14), so He didn't fall for it... but the less we actually know the scripture, the more vulnerable we'll be to this strategy. Knowing the Truth Well Jesus warned us that as the last days approach, Satan will double down on this strategy: that false prophets will rise up and deceive many (Matt 24:11), claiming to be Jesus returned (Mark 13:6), some with signs and wonders. At the same time, Revelation suggests that in the last days, the church will become apathetic, so prosperous materially that we will be unaware of our spiritual emptiness (Rev 3:14-22). (This sounds a lot like the seeds choked by thorns in Jesus' parable of the sower: the seed is choked by "the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches, and he becomes unfruitful", Matt 13:22). Peter tells us that "scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, and saying, 'Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation.'" (2 Peter 3:3-4). Paul tells us that the last days will be accompanied by a great "falling away" (2 Thess 2:3). Deception comes in many forms, but one thing they all have in common is that they act almost like a vaccine against the truth. There's just enough truth to them, mixed with a lot of untruth, that it's hard to tease apart the good from the bad. In that way, they can deceive "even the elect, if possible" (Matt 24:24, Mark 13:22). We protect against this, in a nutshell, by knowing the truth really, really well. This is the way bankers are trained to recognize counterfeit money: they don't study every possible counterfeit (there will always be a new one). Rather, they learn what the real thing looks like so well that they'll know when something seems off, even if they can't articulate what it is. In the same way, we're to renew our minds with the Word (Romans 12:2); that's how we will recognize truth from lies. Otherwise, it's all too easy for Satan to take a sliver of truth, mix it with a lie, and so deceive us. An Old Testament example of this is found in 2 Kings 18. The back story: in Numbers 21:6-9, the people had sinned, had come out from under the protection of God's covenant, and were dying from bites from poisonous snakes. God commanded Moses to make a bronze serpent on a pole, and told the people that if they would only look at the serpent, they would be healed. We know with hindsight that this was a type and shadow of Jesus, who was made sin for us, and became our substitutionary sacrifice ("by His stripes, we are healed," Isaiah 53:5). But the Jews didn't realize that; all they knew was that God ordained healing through looking at the pole, so the pole became a symbol of deliverance. But over the centuries, they made looking at the pole into a formula: the shadow without the substance of Jesus behind it. It became an idol, which they called Nehushtan. Back to 2 Kings 18, centuries later: verse 4 tells us that King Hezekiah had torn down the high places and broke Nehushtan in pieces. Later in the chapter, Judah is threatened with destruction by a messenger from the King of Assyria, Rabshakeh. This would have been especially terrifying, since Israel (by this point they has become two nations, Israel and Judah) had already been carried into captivity by Assyria, in punishment for the fact that the people kept falling into idolatry and had forsaken God. So when Rabshakeh threatened the people with destruction, he said, "You broke down God's symbols of worship! Why would He come through for you?" (2 Kings 18:22). The people of Judah had to know God and His word well enough to know that what Hezekiah did was actually right in God's eyes (2 Kings 18:5-7). God had originally ordained the serpent on the pole, yes, but the people had made it into an idol, which broke the first of the Ten Commandments. Hezekiah's actions had placed the Jews on the right side of God's covenant (Deut 28), so they, unlike their sister nation of Israel, could trust that God would come through for them. But if the people had not understood all the back story, they might easily have believed Rabshakeh's taunts. They could have lost faith that God would come through for them, convinced that they would go the way of Israel before them, and turned against Hezekiah, thinking he'd brought them out from under God's protection. This is how the enemy works. The serpent is subtle and cunning (Gen 3:1, 2 Cor 11:3-4). Satan tried to deceive Jesus not even by misquoting scripture, just by quoting it out of context (Matt 4:6). This happens to us today all the time. One common example is the teaching that God causes or (directly) allows sickness in order to discipline us, or to teach us something, or for the "greater good". This sounds so spiritual, and a host of out of context scriptures even seem to back it up--yet Deut 28 makes it clear that sickness is always considered a curse. Jesus became a curse for us and redeemed us from the curse (Gal 3:13-14), and even before that, He healed all who came to Him (Matt 15:30, Matt 4:23-24, Matt 8:16, Matt 9:35, Matt 10:1, Matt 12:15, Matt 15:30, Luke 4:40, Luke 10:9). Jesus He was a perfect representation of the Father (John 5:19, 5:30, 8:28, 12:49). So this cannot be right. He may take what the enemy meant for evil and turn it for good (Gen 50:20), but that doesn't mean He caused the evil in the first place. Not even close. (For more on this, see https://www.drlaurendeville.com/why-bad-things-happen-from-a-biblical-perspective/). Truth is the foundation of the spiritual armor (Eph 6:14)--it must go on first, before anything else. The Bible can testify to us that not only is the Word truth, but God is the God of truth (Isa 65:16), that Jesus is the truth (John 14:6). Only knowing the truth will make us free (John 8:32). If we focus on knowing the truth, we will recognize deception. It's important to also rely upon the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of truth (John 14:17, 15:26, 16:13, 1 John 5:6), to guide us, rather than on our own understanding (Prov 3:5-6), or the wisdom of the world (1 Cor 1:20-2:7), or any other spirit besides the Holy Spirit. The world is confused about what truth is (John 18:37-38) because they don't hear His voice--but we do. This shouldn't be a problem for us.  Cross-Reference What You Hear Along those lines, just because we hear a doctrine preached from the pulpit doesn't mean it's so. It's our responsibility to be like the Bereans in Acts 17--when Paul and Silas preached the word to them there, Luke writes of them, "These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so. Therefore many of them believed" (Acts 17:11). They didn't just take Paul and Silas's word for it; they went straight to the source text to confirm it. Paul later wrote to the Galatians, "even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed" (Gal 1:8-9). He repeats himself, because this is so important. Forget him--even if an angel preaches it, let him be accursed! We are not to blindly follow any person simply because of his or her authority. (We're to respect authority of all kinds, Romans 13:1-7--that's a different issue. But when what someone in authority says comes in conflict with God's word, we obviously go with God's word, Acts 4:19). There are plenty of warnings about false teachers in scripture (though one important note here--there's a difference between a false teacher, and a good person doing his or her best who is simply flawed. None of us is going to get everything right. This is the reason why James says that not many should become teachers, as they will "receive a stricter judgment. For we all stumble in many things," James 3:1-2.)  A false teacher, though, is one who will distort the truth (Acts 20:29-30, 2 Peter 3:16), by mixing it with myths/fables (Titus 1:14) or "merely human commands" (Matthew 16:1-12) or the traditions of men (such as forbidding to marry, abstaining from certain foods, 1 Tim 4:3), according to the principles of the world (Col 2:4-8). They will pretend to be godly or moral, though (2 Cor 11:13-15, 2 Tim 6:5)--so we must use discernment. There are a few criteria we're given to distinguish a false teacher from just a flawed human being, in process like the rest of us: Anyone who denies that Jesus is the Christ is a false teacher (1 John 2:22-23, 4:2-3) Some may lie intentionally for their own gain (Deut 18:20, Ezekiel 13:9, Jer 14:14, Jer 23:16, Titus 1:10-11) or in hypocrisy (1 Tim 4:2-5), using "godliness" as a means of their own selfish gain. Others may be so blind that they truly believe they are doing God a favor in persecuting His true followers (John 16:2). Romans 16:18: Paul said in this verse that these individuals use good words and fair speeches and deceive the hearts of the simple. This means that they flatter people (2 Timothy 4:3) and appeal to the same selfish desires that they themselves have, to draw people after themselves (Acts 20:30). We can't judge another person's motives (Matthew 7:1-3), but we can, and should, judge the fruit of their lives and ministries (Matthew 7:15-20, 1 John 3:7-9). There are many who claim to be believers but aren't (Matthew 7:21-23) and they'll be among us until the end of the age, when God will finally separate them out (Matthew 13:24-30). Truth, "Signs," and Our Emotions We are the gatekeepers of our hearts (Prov 4:23), and have to guard its boundaries, careful of what we allow in. I always thought the parable of wheat and tares (Matthew 13:24-30) only referred to evil people sown amongst the good people of the church. But what if it also means good and bad ideas from good and bad spirits within a given individual-- in other words, we can bear good fruit and bad fruit from different 'trees' even within our own hearts? This might be why Jesus could tell Peter "get behind me Satan" (Matt 16:23) and James and John, "you don't know what spirit you are of" (Luke 9:55), but the men themselves were still His. This also probably goes along with the Parable of the Sower (Matt 13:3-15)... the 'tares' we allow into our own hearts are part of what can choke the word and render it unfruitful. Truth of course must correspond to an accurate description of reality (Gen 42:16)--which should negate any postmodernist philosophy, or syncretism, blending contradictory descriptions of reality. Once we know the truth, we are to continue in what we were taught (Col 2:6-7, 1 John 2:24), not mix a little Christianity with a little of some other contrary message. Paul rails against this practice in many of his letters. In 2 Cor 11:3-4, Paul is angry that the Corinthians' minds may be corrupted so that they receive the one preaching a different Jesus or gospel from the one he preached. In Galatians 1:6-9, as mentioned earlier, the Galatians are falling prey to a perverted gospel, and Paul curses those who preach such a gospel. In Eph 4:14, he writes that only "children" in Christ are tossed about by every wind and wave of doctrine, taken in by trickery and craftiness and deceit. We're supposed to guard against not just what we hear from other humans, but to test what the spirits say too--hence Paul's angel comment (Gal 1:8-9). John also tells us, "do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God" (1 John 4:1). In a lot of denominational churches that don't believe in the supernatural gifts of the spirit (1 Cor 12), this may not come up much. But in those that do, or for individuals who might ascribe to varieties of syncretism (believing in "signs from the universe" if they seem especially coincidental, perhaps), this will become important. Just because a prophet seems to be speaking from a supernatural source doesn't mean what they're saying is from God. It might be, but we have to test it. Just because an idea out of left field pops into our minds doesn't mean it was the Holy Spirit who put it there. Just because a black crow perches on a tree doesn't mean it's an omen foreshadowing our future. Just because we see the same state license plate on every car doesn't mean God is telling us to move there, etc. Solomon writes, “A simple man believes anything, but a prudent man gives thought to his steps” (Prov 14:15). Elsewhere "simple" is used as a synonym for "fool" (Prov 7:7, 8:5, 9:13). We have to remember that the physical world is a battleground. Until the earth lease is up, Satan is still technically the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4). So God can send us signs in the physical realm, yes--but so can Satan. God can whisper thoughts to our minds--but so can Satan (in fact, this is his primary tactic, 2 Cor 10:3-6). Peter writes that the scriptures are a "more sure word of prophecy" even than hearing an audible voice from heaven (2 Peter 1:19-21), probably for this exact reason: anything using the physical realm has the potential to be counterfeited. That doesn't mean God can't use physical means to communicate with us, but it's clear that the primary means He uses for His own are the scriptures, and the Holy Spirit (John 14:17, 26), who also often speaks to us by bringing the scriptures we know to our remembrance. He also will speak through the prophets (1 Cor 12:1-11), dreams and visions (Acts 2:17-18), but we have to check all of this against the Word. Scripture will divide between soul and spirit (what originates with us vs Him, Hebrews 4:12), as well as what might originate with a malevolent spirit sent to lead us astray. David tells us it's the scriptures that make the simple wise: "The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple" (Psalm 19:7). What if an idea comes to us as an idea, a dream, a vision, a prophecy, or a "synchronicity" moment that seems supernatural, and it's something that isn't addressed in scripture at all, though? How do we know if it's from God, from us, or from the enemy then? The first thing to check there is whether or not the message is consistent with God's character. Jesus said we can ask anything in His name and He will give it to us (John 14:14). What's in God's name (https://www.drlaurendeville.com/names-of-lord-psalm-9-9-10-meditation/)? He is Jehovah Nissi (the Lord my Banner), Jehovah-Raah (the Lord my Shepherd), Jehovah Rapha (the Lord that Heals), Jehovah Shammah (the Lord is There), Jehovah Tsidkenu (the Lord our Righteousness), Jehovah Mekoddishkem (the Lord who Sanctifies You), Jehovah Jireh (the Lord who Provides), Jehovah Shalom (the Lord is Peace), Jehovah Sabaoth (the Lord of Hosts).  The next thing to check is the fruit that message produces (Gal 5:19-23, Romans 8:6-8). God won't lead us into anything producing negative fruit--if the fruit is bad, it's from the flesh or the enemy, and not the Spirit. If it passes those tests, though, then as we continue to pray about the message (dream, vision, prophecy, idea, etc) then it's also biblical for us to ask for additional confirmations of the message--Paul says in 2 Cor 13:1 that every word should be established by two or three witnesses. If the message is from God, He'll make sure you know it. His Spirit guides us into all truth (John 16:13). And as you continue to seek Him and pray about it, peace (a fruit of the Spirit) should grow, confirming that the message comes from God (Col 3:15). Discover more Christian podcasts at lifeaudio.com and inquire about advertising opportunities at lifeaudio.com/contact-us.

I am in western Oklahoma, just shy of the Texas panhandle, and I am truly in the middle of nowhere. But, we set up Starlink and got the job done! Pretty much went through a Twitter thread from a fellow named BG Apustaja and replied to his assertions about how I have become "unhinged," which led to a discussion of a lot of different topics. Rich said he enjoyed the show, so, there's that! Oh, and I mentioned this book and how you should get it from Jason Lisle's ministry!

November 15, 2024 Dr. Jason Lisle,Christian astrophysicist, author,conference speaker & founderof Biblical Science Institute, whowill address: “The IMPORTANCE of GENESIS” with special co-host COREYGELBAUGH, School Board President@ Archē Classical Academy of Carlisle,PA & pastor @ Ruler of Kings Churchof Carlisle, PA Subscribe: Listen:

Segment 1: • God's Design in Our Brains: Dr. Jason Lisle discusses the intricate, purposeful design of human brain cells as a reflection of God's creation. • Concerning Trends in Reproductive Rights: Recent laws, like Colorado's "reproductive freedom," raise questions about society's direction and impact on women and children. • 3D Ultrasounds' Dual Effect: These ultrasounds bring a realistic view of life but can also bring emotional pain, emphasizing the reality of life in the womb. Segment 2: • Life's Beginning and End: From suicide pods to end-of-life care, Dr. Andrew Walker discusses God's sovereignty over life's start and finish. • Worldview's Real Impact: Alarming statistics on rising violence show how worldviews shape society's respect for life. • Taking Life Seriously: Christians must engage with the culture on these issues, recognizing that “the author of life” is also its defender. Segment 3: • Biblical Depth in Matthew: The gospel of Matthew, deeply connected to the Old Testament, reminds us to engage fully with every word of Scripture. • Fighting Discontent and Grumbling: Grumbling, driven by social media-fueled discontent, goes against biblical hospitality and true gratitude. • Scripture's Connectivity: Encouragement to meditate deeply on Scripture, seeing how every passage connects with the bigger story. Segment 4: • Is the Exodus a Myth? Dr. Titus Kennedy highlights substantial evidence for the historical Exodus, challenging modern skepticism. • Unexpected Paths to Faith: Celebrities like Rob Schneider turning to Catholicism show a continuing search for spiritual truth. • Cultural and Biblical Connections: Dr. Mitch Chase explores ancient Egyptian customs that shed light on biblical commands, adding depth to our understanding of Scripture. ___ Thanks for listening! Wretched Radio would not be possible without the financial support of our Gospel Partners. If you would like to support Wretched Radio we would be extremely grateful. VISIT https://fortisinstitute.org/donate/ If you are already a Gospel Partner we couldn't be more thankful for you if we tried!

Hosts Pastor Robert Baltodano and Guest Dr. Jason Lisle Question Timestamps: Introduction to Guest: Dr. Jason Lisle (0:43)  Question (2:28) - Does the creation and evolution debate really matter? Howard, NJ (3:53) - What is the flaming sword in Genesis? Question (5:57) - What questions should we be asking evolutionists? Question (7:16) - What about the afterlife? Question (8:18) - Were we created from stardust? Email (10:02) - Why wouldn't God use part of the Big Bang to start creation? Linda, NJ (12:20) - Do the constellations relate to the Bible? Susan, Facebook (15:39) - What are your thoughts on flat Earth vs round Earth? Does the Bible say what shape the Earth is? Email (17:43) - Does the age of the Earth really matter? Deya, NY (19:14) - What can I tell my friend who goes to a psychic? Robert, NY (22:47) - Why does the Earth counterclockwise and at the rate of one thousand miles per hour? Luis, ID (24:05) - What do you think about Dr. Henry Morris's study Bible? Chris, MA (26:05) - Is it possible to have faith in the Bible without science? Are faith and science antithetical? How did modern science become opposed to Christianity? Eugene, NJ (33:59) - How do you account for all of the ancient civilizations that supposedly existed that aren't in the Bible? Are the Sumarians in the Bible? What do you think about the ESV study Bible? Bryan, NY (37:05) - Is the flood responsible for places like the Grand Canyon and Pangea? Norene, NY (39:27) - Could the Earth be flat?  Mike, email (43:30) - Can you explain the amount of pressure we are under in Earth's atmosphere? How are we not crushed by atmospheric pressure? Email (46:16) - Would aliens be irreconcilable with scripture and the Christian worldview? Jimmy, email (47:31) - What do astronauts see when they look at the Earth? Is it flat or round? Bobby, Facebook (48:42) - Is there a scientific explanation for the reversal of Ahaz's sundial? Question (49:28) - How do dinosaurs fit into the Christian worldview? Question (52:05) - Do fossils prove the Earth is millions of years old? Question (54:26) - What is the ultimate proof of creation? Ask Your Questions: 888-712-7434 Answers@bbtlive.org More from Dr. Lisle: https://biblicalscienceinstitute.com/

This past Sunday, we were privileged to hear from Dr. Jason Lisle, an esteemed author and national speaker, who delivered a powerful sermon titled "The Importance of Genesis." He challenged us to reflect on the foundational truths of our faith, emphasizing that biblical authority starts with Genesis. Dr. Lisle explored how straying from these truths contributes to many of society's challenges today. He also delved into how our views on creation versus evolution shape our beliefs, underscoring that key doctrines like sin and salvation are deeply rooted in Genesis, enriching our understanding of the Gospel.

Segment 1: The Big Announcement • Gospel Partners Media is now Fortis Institute • 8 new voices join the team: Dr. John Crotts, Dr. Adam Tyson, Dr. Jason Lisle, Dr. Andrew Walker, and more. • Fortis+ is 100% free, delivering original content daily Segment 2 • ADHD is on the rise, but is medication the answer? • "Don't rely on child psychiatrists for parenting advice" • Free webinar coming Thursday on a pressing topic. Segment 3 • Dr. Jason Lisle's take global panic over climate change. • God controls the weather—not climate alarmists. Remember His promise to sustain the earth. Segment 4 • Are we living in a computer simulation? One scientist thinks so, but John 1 proves otherwise. • Eisegesis at its worst: twisting Scripture to sell books about AI.

Are the details of creation important, or are we free to believe in evolution so long as God did it? Far from being merely an academic issue, the creation-evolution debate is a matter of biblical authority. Friday on Mornings with Eric and Brigitte, Tom DeRosa, Director and Founder of Creation Studies Institute joins us to talk about their upcoming family night event and next day conference, "Evidence For Our Faith: Discover the Science Behind Our Beliefs." The conference will feature Christian creationist and astrophysicist, Dr. Jason Lisle who will give an enlightening exploration of the profound connections between creation and biblical science. Astronomy Reveals Creation - Creation Studies Institute - September 27, 2024 Evidence For Our Faith - Creation Studies Institute - September 28, 2024See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A new MP3 sermon from Alpha and Omega Ministries is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Jason Lisle for 45 Minutes, About All that Crusading Stuff Subtitle: The Dividing Line 2024 Speaker: Dr. James White Broadcaster: Alpha and Omega Ministries Event: Podcast Date: 8/29/2024 Length: 105 min.

Started off with our dear brother Jason Lisle discussing his new paper on cosmology and its very, very important implications (both Rich and I struggled to keep up, but, that's just the nature of the information!). Here is the article at Jason's website https://biblicalscienceinstitute.com/astronomy/new-james-webb-space-telescope-observations-challenge-the-big-bang/ . Then I just calmly went back over the key issues that have arisen over the past week or so on social media regarding the promotion and lionization of the Crusades amongst ostensibly Reformed men. I can only express myself as clearly as possible, and trust the Lord to do the rest.

Started off with our dear brother Jason Lisle discussing his new paper on cosmology and its very, very important implications -both Rich and I struggled to keep up, but, that's just the nature of the information--. Here is the article at Jason's website https---biblicalscienceinstitute.com-astronomy-new-james-webb-space-telescope-observations-challenge-the-big-bang- . Then I just calmly went back over the key issues that have arisen over the past week or so on social media regarding the promotion and lionization of the Crusades amongst ostensibly Reformed men. I can only express myself as clearly as possible, and trust the Lord to do the rest.

Started off with our dear brother Jason Lisle discussing his new paper on cosmology and its very, very important implications -both Rich and I struggled to keep up, but, that's just the nature of the information--. Here is the article at Jason's website https---biblicalscienceinstitute.com-astronomy-new-james-webb-space-telescope-observations-challenge-the-big-bang- . Then I just calmly went back over the key issues that have arisen over the past week or so on social media regarding the promotion and lionization of the Crusades amongst ostensibly Reformed men. I can only express myself as clearly as possible, and trust the Lord to do the rest.

Two topics today. First forty minutes on my thoughts on the upcoming election and how, if the Marxists are victorious (and that may be a foregone conclusion), it could be the last even pretend election in our lifetimes, and how this should, in my opinion, impact those who have decided that not voting is their best choice. Then, in the last twenty minutes, I expressed my astonishment at how so many ostensibly Reformed brothers are lionizing the Crusades without even trying to touch the reality of their religious nature. Don't forget, on Thursday we will be joined by Dr. Jason Lisle to talk about a paper he has written challenging the standard cosmology of the day.

Two topics today. First forty minutes on my thoughts on the upcoming election and how, if the Marxists are victorious -and that may be a foregone conclusion-, it could be the last even pretend election in our lifetimes, and how this should, in my opinion, impact those who have decided that not voting is their best choice. Then, in the last twenty minutes, I expressed my astonishment at how so many ostensibly Reformed brothers are lionizing the Crusades without even trying to touch the reality of their religious nature. Don't forget, on Thursday we will be joined by Dr. Jason Lisle to talk about a paper he has written challenging the standard cosmology of the day.

Two topics today. First forty minutes on my thoughts on the upcoming election and how, if the Marxists are victorious -and that may be a foregone conclusion-, it could be the last even pretend election in our lifetimes, and how this should, in my opinion, impact those who have decided that not voting is their best choice. Then, in the last twenty minutes, I expressed my astonishment at how so many ostensibly Reformed brothers are lionizing the Crusades without even trying to touch the reality of their religious nature. Don't forget, on Thursday we will be joined by Dr. Jason Lisle to talk about a paper he has written challenging the standard cosmology of the day.

Dive deep into the mysterious world of Quantum Physics to explore how God's incredible and intelligent design is evident even at the smallest levels of the universe. From wave-particle duality to quantum entanglement, we'll uncover the divine fingerprints in the fabric of reality. Join Eric Hovind and Dr. Jason Lisle as they break down complex quantum phenomena and reveal how these intricate details point to an intelligent Creator.  Watch this Podcast on Video at: https://creationtoday.org/on-demand-classes/quantum-physics-creation-today-show-383/  Join Eric LIVE each Wednesday at 12 Noon CT for conversations with Experts. You can support this podcast by becoming a Creation Today Partner at CreationToday.org/Partner

A new MP3 sermon from Alpha and Omega Ministries is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Star Gazing with Jason Lisle, Kamala the Marxist, Responding to Al Garza on Augustine Subtitle: The Dividing Line 2024 Speaker: Dr. James White Broadcaster: Alpha and Omega Ministries Event: Podcast Date: 7/25/2024 Length: 74 min.

Be sure to visit cultureproof.net Please consider supporting the Culture Proof Podcast. We aim to bring engaging content that will challenge and equip Christians to live according to the Straight Edge of Scripture. All gifts are tax deductible. Our Address is: S.E. Ministries PO Box 1269 Saltillo MS, 38866   Episode sponsors: BJUPress Homeschool Culture Proof Listeners, THANKS! Culture Proof Conference happening July 18 - 20, 2024 at Faith Baptist Church in Bartlett, TN. Visit cultureproof.net   Culture Proof Podcast Theme "Believers" courtesy of Path of Revelation    

Road trip DL from Colorado Springs prior to the debate on Saturday. Covered a wide variety of topics, but spent most of our time reading from Augustine and dealing with his use of the LXX, early translations, etc.

Road trip DL from Colorado Springs prior to the debate on Saturday. Covered a wide variety of topics, but spent most of our time reading from Augustine and dealing with his use of the LXX, early translations, etc.

Road trip DL from Colorado Springs prior to the debate on Saturday. Covered a wide variety of topics, but spent most of our time reading from Augustine and dealing with his use of the LXX, early translations, etc.

For years now, even as headlines about the development of AI have become more frequent and more dire, I really never worried about it much, because I couldn't think of anything in scripture that sounded a great deal like a superintelligent machine. I'd read the end of the book (Revelation), I knew how it ended, and it wasn't in a robot apocalypse... so all the fears surrounding that possibility must therefore be much ado about nothing. (I did write a fictional trilogy for young adults back in 2017 about how I imagined a near-miss robot apocalypse might look, though, because I found the topic fascinating enough to research at the time. It's called the "Uncanny Valley" trilogy, where the "uncanny valley" refers to the "creepy" factor, as a synthetic humanoid creature approaches human likeness.) When I finished the trilogy, I more or less forgot about advancing AI, until some of the later iterations of Chat GPT and similar Large Language Models (LLMs). Full disclosure: I've never used any LLMs myself, mostly because (last I checked) you had to create an account with your email address before you started asking it questions. (In the third book of my series, the superintelligent bot Jaguar kept track of everyone via facial recognition cameras, recording literally everything they did in enormous data processing centers across the globe that synced with one another many times per day. Though at that point I doubt it would make any difference, I'd rather not voluntarily give Jaguar's real-life analog any data on me if I can help it!) Particularly the recent release of Chat GPT Omni (which apparently stands for "omniscient" --!!) gave me pause, though, and I had to stop and ask myself why the idea that it could be approaching actual Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. I recently read a book called "Deep Medicine" by Eric Topol on the integration of AI into the medical field, which helped allay some potential concerns--that book contended that AGI would likely never be realized, largely because AGI inherently requires experience in the real world, and a robot can never have lived experiences in the way that humans can. It painted a mostly rosy picture of narrow (specialized) AI engaging in pattern recognition (reading radiology images or recognizing pathology samples or dermatological lesions, for instance), and thus vastly improving diagnostic capabilities of physicians. Other uses might include parsing a given individual's years of medical records and offering a synopsis and recommendations, or consolidating PubMed studies, and offering relevant suggestions. Topol did not seem to think that the AI would ever replace the doctor, though. Rather, the author contended, at the rate that data is currently exploding, doctors are drowning in the attempt to document and to keep up with it all, and empathic patient care suffers as a result. AI, he argues, will actually give the doctor time to spend with the patient again, to make judgment calls with a summary of all the data at his fingertips, and to put it together in an integrated whole with his uniquely human common sense. Synthetic Empathy and Emotions? But, "Deep Medicine" was written in 2019, which (in the world of AI) is already potentially obsolete. I'm told that Chat GPT Omni is better than most humans at anything involving either logic or creativity, and it does a terrific approximation of empathy, too. Even "Deep Medicine" cited statistics to suggest that most humans would prefer a machine for a therapist than a person (!!), largely due to the fear that the human might judge them for some of their most secret or shameful thoughts or feelings. And if the machine makes you feel like it understands you, does it really matter whether its empathy is "real" or not? What does "real" empathy mean, anyway? In "Uncanny Valley," my main character, as a teenager, inherited a "companion bot" who was programmed with mirror neurons (the seat of empathy in the human brain.) In the wake of her father's death, she came to regard her companion bot as her best friend. It was only as she got older that she started to ask questions like whether its 'love' for her was genuine, if it was programmed. This is essentially the theological argument for free will, too. Could God have made a world without sin? Sure, but in order to do it, we'd all have to be automatons--programmed to do His will, programmed to love Him and to love one another. Would there be any value in the love of a creature who could not do anything else? (The Calvinists might say that's the way the world actually is, for those who are predestined, but everyone else would vehemently disagree.) It certainly seems that God thought it was worth all the misery He endured since creation, for the chance that some of us might freely choose Him. I daresay that same logic is self-evident to all of us. Freedom is an inherent good--possibly the highest good. So, back to AI: real empathy requires not just real emotion, but memories of one's own real emotions, so that we can truly imagine that we are in another person's shoes. How can a robot, without its own lived memories, experience real empathy? Can it even experience real emotion? It might have goals or motives that can be programmed, but emotion at minimum requires biochemistry and a nervous system, at least in the way we understand it. We know from psychology research on brain lesions as well as from psychiatric and recreational medications and experiences with those suffering from neurodegenerative conditions that mood, affect, and personality can drastically change from physiologic tampering, as well. Does it follow that emotions are 'mere' biochemistry, though? This is at least part of the age-old question of materialism versus vitalism, or (to put it another way), reductionism versus holism. Modern medicine is inherently materialistic, believing that the entirety of a living entity can be explained by its physical makeup, and reductionistic, believing that one can reduce the 'whole' of the living system to a sum of its parts. Vitalism, on the other hand, argues that there is something else, something outside the physical body of the creature, that animates it and gives it life. At the moment just before death and just after, all the same biochemical machinery exists... but anyone who has seen the death of a loved one can attest that the body doesn't look the same. It becomes almost like clay. Some key essence is missing. I recently read "The Rainbow and the Worm" by Mae-Wan Ho, which described fascinating experiments on living worms viewed under electron microscopes. The structured water in the living tissue of the worm exhibited coherence, refracting visible light in a beautiful rainbow pattern. At the moment of death, though, the coherence vanished, and the rainbow was gone--even though all of the same physical components remained. The change is immaterial; the shift between death and life is inherently energetic. There was an animus, a vital force--qi, as Chinese Medicine would call it, or prana, as Ayurvedic medicine would describe it, or (as we're now discovering in alternative Western medicine), voltage carried through this structured water via our collagen. That hydrated collagen appears to function in our bodies very much like a semiconductor, animating our tissues with electrons, the literal energy of life. At the moment of death, it's there, and then it's not--like someone pulled the plug. What's left is only the shell of the machine, the hardware. But where is that plug, such that it can be connected and then, abruptly, not? The materialist, who believes that everything should be explainable on the physical level, can have no answer. The Bible tells us, though, that we are body, soul, and spirit (1 Thess 5:23)--which inherently makes a distinction between body and soul (implying that the soul is not a mere product of the chemistry of the body). The spirit is what was dead without Jesus, and what gets born again when we are saved, and it's perfect, identical with Jesus' spirit (2 Cor. 5:17, Eph 4:24). It's God's "seal" on us, vacuum-packed as it were, so that no sin can contaminate it. It's the down-payment, a promise that complete and total restoration is coming (Eph 1:13-14). But there's no physical outlet connecting the spirit and the body; the connection between them is the soul. With our souls, we can see what's ours in the Spirit through scripture, and scripture can train our souls to conform more and more to the spirit (Romans 12:2, Phil 2:12-13). No one would ever argue that a machine would have a spirit, obviously, but the materialists wouldn't believe there is such a thing, anyway. What about the soul, though? What is a soul, anyway? Can it be explained entirely through materialistic means?Before God made Adam, He explicitly stated that He intended to make man after His own image (Gen 1:26-27). God is spirit (John 4:24), though, so the resemblance can't be physical, per se, at least not exclusively or even primarily. After forming his body, God breathed into him the breath of life (Genesis 2:7)--the same thing Jesus did to the disciples after His resurrection when he said "Receive the Holy Spirit" (John 20:22). So it must therefore be in our spirits that we resemble God. Adam and Eve died spiritually when they sinned (Genesis 3:3), but something continued to animate their bodies for another 930 years. This is the non-corporeal part of us that gets "unplugged" at physical death. Since it can be neither body nor spirit, it must be the soul. Andrew Wommack defines the soul as the mind, will, and emotions. I can't think of a single scripture that defines the soul this way; I think it's just an extrapolation, based on what's otherwise unaccounted for. But in our mind, will, and emotions, even before redemption, mankind continued to reflect God's image, in that he continued to possess the ability to reason, to choose, to create, to love, and to discern right from wrong. The materialists would argue that emotion, like everything else, must have its root purely in the physical realm. Yet they do acknowledge that because there are so many possible emotional states, and relatively few physiologic expressions of them, many emotions necessarily share a physiologic expression. It's up to our minds to translate the meaning of a physiologic state, based on the context. In "How Emotions are Made," author Lisa Barrett gave a memorable example of this: once, a colleague to whom she didn't think she was particularly attracted asked her for a date. She went, felt various strange things in her gut that felt a little like “butterflies”, and assumed during the date that perhaps she was attracted to him after all… only to later learn that she was actually in the early stages of gastroenteritis! This example illustrates how the biochemistry and physiologic expressions of emotion are merely the blunt downstream instruments that translate an emotion from the non-corporeal soul into physical perception--and in some cases, as in that one, the emotional perception might originate from the body entirely. This also might be why some people (children especially) can mistake hunger or fatigue for irritability, or why erratic blood sugar in uncontrolled diabetics can manifest as rage, etc. In those cases, the emotional response really does correspond to the materialist's worldview, originating far downstream in the "circuit," as it were. But people who experience these things as adults will say things like, "That's not me." I think they're right--when we think of our true selves, none of us think of our bodies--those are just our "tents" (2 Cor 5:1), to be put off eventually when we die. When we refer to our true selves, we mean our souls: our mind, will, and emotions. It's certainly possible for many of us to feel "hijacked" by our emotions, as if they're in control and not "us," though (Romans 7:15-20). Most of us recognize a certain distinction there, too, between the real "us" and our emotions. The examples of physiologic states influencing emotions are what scripture would call "carnal" responses. If we're "carnal," ruled by our flesh, then physiologic states will have a great deal of influence over our emotions-- a kind of small scale anarchy. The "government" is supposed to be our born-again spirits, governing our souls, which in turn controls our bodies, rather than allowing our flesh to control our souls (Romans 8:1-17) - though this is of course possible if we don't enforce order. With respect to AI, my point is, where does "true" emotion originate? There is a version of it produced downstream, in our flesh, yes. It can either originate from the flesh itself, or it can originate upstream, from the non-corporeal soul, what we think of us "the real us." That's inherently a philosophical and not a scientific argument, though, as science by definition is "the observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena." Any question pertaining to something outside the physical world cannot fall under the purview of science. But even for those who do not accept scripture as authority, our own inner experience testifies to the truth of the argument. We all know that we have free will; we all know we can reason, and feel emotions. We can also tell the difference between an emotion that is "us" and an emotion that feels like it originates from outside of "our real selves". As C.S. Lewis said in "Mere Christianity," if there is a world outside of the one we can experimentally observe, the only place in which we could possibly expect to have any evidence of it is in our own internal experience. And there, we find it's true. Without a soul, then, a robot (such as an LLM) would of course exist entirely on the physical plane, unlike us. It therefore might have physical experiences that it might translate as emotion, the same way that we sometimes interpret physical experiences as emotion--but it cannot have true emotions. Empathy, therefore, can likewise be nothing more than programmed pattern recognition: this facial expression or these words or phrases tend to mean that the person is experiencing these feelings, and here is the appropriate way to respond. Many interactions with many different humans over a long period of time will refine the LLM's learning such that its pattern recognition and responses get closer and closer to the mark... but that's not empathy, not really. It's fake. Does that matter, though, if the person "feels" heard and understood? Well, does truth matter? If a man who is locked up in an insane asylum believes himself to be a great king, and believes that all the doctors and nurses around him are really his servants and subjects, would you trade places with him? I suspect that all of us would say no. With at least the protagonists in "The Matrix," we all agree that it's better to be awakened to a desperate truth than to be deceived by a happy lie. The Emotional Uncanny Valley Even aside from that issue, is it likely that mere pattern recognition could simulate empathy well enough to satisfy us--or is it likely that this, too, would fall into the "uncanny valley"? Most of us have had the experience of meeting a person who seems pleasant enough on the surface, and yet something about them just seemed ‘off'. (The Bible calls this discernment, 1 Corinthians 12:10.) When I was in a psychology course in college, the professor flashed images of several clean-cut, smiling men in the powerpoint, out of context, and asked us to raise our hands if we would trust each of them. I don't remember who most of them were - probably red herrings to disguise the point - but one of them was Ted Bundy, the serial killer of the 1970s. I didn't recognize him, but I did feel a prickling sense of unease as I gazed at his smiling face. Something just wasn't right. Granted, a violent psychopath is not quite the same, but isn't the idea of creating a robot possessed of emotional intelligence (in the sense that it can read others well) but without real empathy essentially like creating an artificial sociopath? Isn't the lack of true empathy the very definition? (Knowing this, would we really want jobs like social workers, nurses, or even elementary school teachers to be assumed by robots--no matter how good the empathic pattern recognition became?) An analogy of this is the 1958 Harlow experiment on infant monkeys (https://www.simplypsychology.org/harlow-monkey.html), in which the monkeys were given a choice between two simulated mothers: one made of wire, but that provided milk, and one made of cloth, but without milk. The study showed that the monkeys would only go to the wire mother when hungry; the rest of the day they would spend in the company of the cloth mother. My point is that emotional support matters to all living creatures, far more than objective physical needs (provided those needs are also met). If we just want a logical problem solved, we may well go to the robot. But most of our problems are not just questions of logic; they involve emotions, too. As Leonard Mlodinow, author of "Emotional" writes, emotions are not mere extraneous data that colors an experience, but can otherwise be ignored at will. In many cases, the emotions actually serve to motivate a course of action. Every major decision I've ever made in my life involved not just logic, but also emotion, or in some cases intuition (which I assume is a conscious prompting when the unconscious reasoning is present but unknown to me), or a else leading of the Holy Spirit (which "feels" like intuition, only without the presumed unconscious underpinning. He knows the reason, but I don't, even subconsciously.) Obviously, AI, with synthetic emotion or not, would have no way to advise us on matters of intuition, or especially promptings from the Holy Spirit. Those won't usually *seem* logical, based on the available information, but He has a perspective that we don't have. Neither will a machine, even if it could simultaneously process all known data available on earth. There was a time when Newtonian physicists believed that, with access to that level of data in the present, the entire future would become deterministic, making true omniscience in this world  theoretically possible. Then we discovered quantum physics, and all of that went out the window. Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle eliminates the possibility that any creature or machine, no matter how powerful, can in our own dimension ever truly achieve omniscience. In other words, even a perfectly logical machine with access to all available knowledge will fail to guide us into appropriate decisions much of the time -- precisely because they must lack true emotion, intuition, and especially the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Knowledge vs Wisdom None of us will be able to compete with the level of knowledge an AI can process in a split second. But does that mean the application of that knowledge will always be appropriate? I think there's several levels to this question. The first has to do with the data sets on which AI has been trained. It can only learn from the patterns it's seen, and it will (like a teenager who draws sweeping conclusions based on very limited life experience) assume that it has the whole picture. In this way, AI may be part of the great deception mentioned by both Jesus (Matt 24:24) and the Apostle Paul (2 Thess 2:11) in the last days. How many of us already abdicate our own reasoning to those in positions of authority, blindly following them because we assume they must know more than we do on their subject? How much more will many of us fail to question the edicts of a purportedly "omniscient" machine, which must know more than we do on every subject? That machine may have only superficial knowledge of a subject, based on the data set it's been given, and may thus draw an inappropriate conclusion. (Also, my understanding is that current LLMs continue learning only until they are released into the world; from that point, they can no longer learn anything new, because of the risk that in storing new information, they could accidentally overwrite an older memory.) A human may draw an inappropriate conclusion too, of course, and if that person has enough credentials behind his name, it may be just as deceptive to many. But at least one individual will not command such blind obedience on absolutely every subject. AGI might. So who controls the data from which that machine learns? That's a tremendous responsibility... and, potentially, a tremendous amount of power, to deceive, if possible, "even the elect." For the sake of argument, let's say that the AGI is exposed only to real and complete data, though--not cherry-picked, and not "misinformation." In this scenario, some believe that (if appropriate safeguards are in place, to keep the AGI from deciding to save the planet by killing all the humans, for example, akin to science fiction author Isaac Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics), utopia will result. The only way this is possible, though, is if not only does the machine learn on a full, accurate, and complete set of collective human knowledge, but it also has a depth of understanding of how to apply that knowledge, as well. This is the difference between knowledge and wisdom. The dictionary definition of wisdom is "the ability to discern or judge what is true, right, or lasting," versus knowledge, defined as "information gained through experience, reasoning, or acquaintance." Wisdom has to do with one's worldview, in other words, or the lens through which he sees and interprets a set of facts. It is inextricably tied to morality. (So, who is programming these LLMs again? Even without AI, since postmodernism and beyond, there's been a crisis among many intellectuals as to whether or not there's such a thing as "truth," even going so far as to question objective physical reality. That's certainly a major potential hazard right there.) Both words of wisdom and discernment are listed as explicit supernatural gifts of the Spirit (1 Cor 12:8, 10). God says that He is the source of wisdom, as well as of knowledge and understanding (Prov 2:6), and that if we lack wisdom, we should ask Him for it (James 1:5). Wisdom is personified in the book of Proverbs as a person, with God at creation (Prov 8:29-30)--which means, unless it's simply a poetic construct, that wisdom and the Holy Spirit must be synonymous (Gen 1:2). Jesus did say that it was the Holy Spirit who would guide us into all truth, as He is the Spirit of truth (John 16:13). The Apostle Paul contrasts the wisdom of this world as foolishness compared to the wisdom of God (1 Cor 1:18-30)--because if God is truth (John 14:6), then no one can get to true wisdom without Him. That's not to say that no human (or robot) can make a true statement without an understanding of God, of course--but when he does so, he's borrowing from a worldview  not his own. The statement may be true, but almost by accident--on some level, if you go down deep enough to bedrock beliefs, there is an inherent inconsistency between the statement of truth and the person's general worldview, if that worldview does not recognize a Creator. (Jason Lisle explains this well and in great detail in "The Ultimate Proof of Creation.") Can you see the danger of trusting a machine to discern what is right, then, simply because in terms of sheer facts and computing power, it's vastly "smarter" than we are? Anyone who does so is almost guaranteed to be deceived, unless he also filters the machine's response through his own discernment afterwards. (We should all be doing this with statements from any human authority on any subject, too, by the way. Never subjugate your own reasoning to anyone else's, even if they do know the Lord, but especially if they don't. You have the mind of Christ! 1 Cor 2:16).  Would Eliminating Emotion from the Workplace Actually Be a Good Thing? I can see how one might think that replacing a human being with a machine that optimizes logic, but strips away everything else might seem a good trade, on the surface. After all, we humans (especially these days) aren't very logical, on the whole. Our emotions and desires are usually corrupted by sin. We're motivated by selfishness, greed, pride, and petty jealousies, when we're not actively being renewed by the Holy Spirit (and most of us aren't; even most believers are more carnal than not, most of the time. I don't know if that's always been the case, but it seems to be now). We also are subject to the normal human frailties: we get sick, or tired, or cranky, or hungry, or overwhelmed. We need vacations. We might be distracted by our own problems, or apathetic about the task we've been paid to accomplish. Machines would have none of these drawbacks. But do we really understand the trade-off we're making? We humans have a tendency to take a sliver of information, assume it's the whole picture, and run with it--eliminating everything we think is extraneous, simply because we don't understand it. In our hubris, we don't stop to consider that all the elements we've discarded might actually be critical to function. This seems to me sort of like processed food. We've taken the real thing the way God made it, and tweaked it in a laboratory to make it sweeter, crunchier, more savory, and with better "mouth feel.” It's even still got the same number of macronutrients and calories that it had before. But we didn't understand not only how processing stripped away necessary micronutrients, but also added synthetic fats that contaminated our cell membranes, and chemicals that can overwhelm our livers, making us overweight and simultaneously nutrient depleted. We just didn't know what we didn't know. We've done the same thing with genetically engineered foods. God's instructions in scripture were to let the land lie fallow, and to rotate crops, because the soil itself is the source of micronutrition for the plant. If you plant the same crop in the same soil repeatedly and without a break, you will deplete the soil, and the plants will no longer be as nutritious, or as healthy... and an unhealthy plant is easy prey for pests. But the agriculture industry ignored this; it didn't seem efficient or profitable enough, presumably. Synthetic fertilizer is the equivalent of macronutrients only for plants, so they grow bigger than ever before (much like humans do if they subsist on nothing but fast food), but they're still nutrient depleted and unhealthy, and thus, easy prey for pests. So we added the gene to the plants to make them produce their own glyphosate, the active ingredient in RoundUp. Only glyphosate itself turns out to be incredibly toxic to humans, lo and behold... There are many, many more examples I can think of just in the realm of science, health, and nutrition, to say nothing of our approach to economics, or climate, or many other complex systems. We tend to isolate the “active ingredient,” and eliminate everything we consider to be extraneous… only to learn of the side effects decades later. So what will the consequences be to society if most workers in most professions eventually lack true emotion, empathy, wisdom, and intuition? Finding Purpose in Work There's also a growing concern that AI will take over nearly all jobs, putting almost everyone out of work. At this point, it seems that information-based positions are most at risk, and especially anything involving repetitive, computer-based tasks. I also understand that AI is better than most humans at writing essays, poetry, and producing art. Current robotics is far behind AI technology, though... Elon Musk has been promising self-driving cars in the eminent future for some time, yet they don't seem any closer to ubiquitous adoption now than they were five years ago. "A Brief History of Intelligence" by Max Bennett, published in fall 2023, said that as of the time of writing, robots can diagnose tumors from radiographic imaging better than most radiologists, yet they are still incapable of simple physical tasks such as loading a dishwasher without breaking things. (I suspect this is because the former involves intellectual pattern recognition, which seems to be their forte, while the latter involves movements that are subconscious for most of us, requiring integration of spatial recognition, balance, distal fine motor skills, etc. We're still a very long way from understanding the intricacies of the human brain... but then again, the pace at which knowledge is doubling is anywhere from every three to thirteen months, depending on the source. Either way, that's fast). On the assumption that we'll soon be able to automate nearly everything a human can do physically or intellectually, then, the world's elite have postulated a Universal Basic Income--essentially welfare for all, since we would in theory be incapable of supporting ourselves. Leaving aside the many catastrophically failed historical examples of socialism and communism, it's pretty clear that God made us for good work (Eph 2:10, 2 Cor 9:8), and He expects us to work (2 Thess 3:10). Idleness while machines run the world is certainly not a biblical solution. That said, technology in and of itself is morally neutral. It's a tool, like money, time, or influence, and can be used for good or for evil. Both the Industrial Revolution and in the Information Revolution led to plenty of unforeseen consequences and social upheaval. Many jobs became obsolete, while new jobs were created that had never existed before. Work creates wealth, and due to increased efficiency, the world as a whole became wealthier than ever before, particularly in nations where these revolutions took hold. In the US, after the Industrial Revolution, the previously stagnant average standard of living suddenly doubled every 36 years. At the same time, though, the vast majority of the wealth created was in the hands of the few owners of the technology, and there was a greater disparity between the rich and the poor than ever before. This disparity has only grown more pronounced since the Information Revolution--and we have a clue in Revelation 6:5-6 that in the end times, it will be worse than ever. Will another AI-driven economic revolution have anything to do with this? It's certainly possible.  Whether or not another economic revolution should happen has little bearing on whether or not it will, though. But one thing for those of us who follow the Lord to remember is that we don't have to participate in the world's economy, if we trust Him to meet our needs. He is able to make us abound for every good work (2 Cor 9:8)--which I believe means we will also have some form of work, no matter what is going on in the world around us. He will bless the work of our hands, whatever we find for them to do (Deut 12:7). He will give us the ability to produce wealth (Deut 8:18), even if it seems impossible. He will meet all our needs as we seek His kingdom first (Luke 12:31-32)-and one of our deepest needs is undoubtedly a sense of purpose (Phil 4:19).  We are designed to fulfill a purpose. What about the AI Apocalyptic Fears? The world's elite seem to fall into two camps on how an AI revolution might affect our world--those who think it will usher in utopia (Isaac Asimov's “The Last Question” essentially depicts this), and those who think AI will decide that humans are the problem, and destroy us all. I feel pretty confident the latter won't occur, at least not completely, since neither Revelation nor any of the rest of the prophetic books seem to imply domination of humanity by machine overlords. Most, if not all of the actors involved certainly appear to be human (and angelic, and demonic). That said, there are several biblical references that the end times will be "as in the days of Noah" (Matt 24:27, Luke 17:26). What could that mean? Genesis 6 states that the thoughts in the minds of men were only evil all the time, so it may simply mean that in the end times, mankind will have achieved the same level of corruption as in the antediluvian world. But that might not be all. In Gen 6:1-4, we're told that the "sons of God" came down to the "daughters of men," and had children by them--the Nephilim. This mingling of human and non-human corrupted the genetic line, compromising God's ability to bring the promised seed of Eve to redeem mankind. Daniel 2:43 also reads, "As you saw iron mixed with ceramic clay, they (in the end times) will mingle with the seed of men; but they will not adhere to one another, just as iron does not mix with clay." What is "they," if not the seed of men? It appears to be humanity, plus something else. Chuck Missler and many others have speculated that this could refer to transhumanism, the merging of human and machine. Revelation 13:14-15 is probably the most likely description I can think of in scripture of AI, describing the image of the beast that speaks, knows whether or not people worship the beast (AI facial recognition, possibly embedded into the "internet of things"?), and turns in anyone who refuses to do so. The mark of the beast sure sounds like a computer chip of some kind, with an internet connection (Bluetooth or something like it - Rev 13:17). Joel 2:4-9 describes evil beings "like mighty men" that can "climb upon a wall" and "when they fall upon the sword, they shall not be wounded," and they "enter in at the windows like a thief." These could be demonic and thus extra-dimensional, but don't they also sound like “The Terminator,” if robotics ever manages to advance that far? Jeremiah 50:9 says, "their arrows shall be like those of an expert warrior; none shall return in vain." This sounds like it could be AI-guided missiles. But the main evil actors of Revelation--the antichrist, the false prophet, the kings of the east, etc, all certainly appear to refer to humans. And from the time that the "earth lease" to humanity is up (Revelation 11), God Himself is the One cleansing the earth of all evil influences. I doubt He uses AI to do it. So, depending upon where we are on the prophetic timeline, I can certainly imagine AI playing a role in how the events of Revelation unfold, but I can't see how they'll take center stage. For whatever reason, it doesn't look to me like they'll ever get that far. The Bottom Line We know that in the end times, deception will come. We don't know if AI will be a part of it, but it could be. It's important for us to know the truth, to meditate on the truth, to keep our eyes focused on the truth -- on things above, and not on things beneath (Col 3:2). Don't outsource your thinking to a machine; no matter how "smart" they become, they will never have true wisdom; they can't. That doesn't mean don't use them at all, but if you do, do so cautiously, check the information you receive, and listen to the Holy Spirit in the process, trusting Him to guide you into all truth (John 16:13). Regardless of how rapidly or dramatically the economic landscape and the world around us may change, God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power, love, and a sound mind (2 Tim 1:7). Perfect love casts out fear (1 John 4:18), and faith works through love (Gal 5:6). If we know how much God loves us, it becomes easy to not be anxious about anything, but in everything, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present our requests to God... and then to fix our minds on whatever is true, noble, just, pure, lovely, of good report, praiseworthy, or virtuous (Phil 4:6-8). He knows the end from the beginning. He's not surprised, and He'll absolutely take care of you in every way, if you trust Him to do it (Matt 6:33-34). Discover more Christian podcasts at lifeaudio.com and inquire about advertising opportunities at lifeaudio.com/contact-us.

A new MP3 sermon from Mesa Hills Bible Church is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Astronomy Reveals Creation/Salvation History/Bible Timeline Speaker: Dr. Jason Lisle Broadcaster: Mesa Hills Bible Church Event: Special Meeting Date: 6/7/2024 Length: 137 min.

A new MP3 sermon from Mesa Hills Bible Church is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Science Confirms Biblical Creation/The Ultimate Proof of Creation Speaker: Dr. Jason Lisle Broadcaster: Mesa Hills Bible Church Event: Special Meeting Date: 6/8/2024 Length: 126 min.

A new MP3 sermon from Mesa Hills Bible Church is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Creation Evangelism Speaker: Dr. Jason Lisle Broadcaster: Mesa Hills Bible Church Event: Sunday Service Date: 6/9/2024 Length: 58 min.

A new MP3 sermon from Mesa Hills Bible Church is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Creation Evangelism Speaker: Dr. Jason Lisle Broadcaster: Mesa Hills Bible Church Event: Sunday Service Date: 6/9/2024 Length: 58 min.

A new MP3 sermon from Mesa Hills Bible Church is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Science Confirms Biblical Creation/The Ultimate Proof of Creation Speaker: Dr. Jason Lisle Broadcaster: Mesa Hills Bible Church Event: Special Meeting Date: 6/8/2024 Length: 126 min.

A new MP3 sermon from Mesa Hills Bible Church is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Creation Evangelism Speaker: Dr. Jason Lisle Broadcaster: Mesa Hills Bible Church Event: Sunday Service Date: 6/9/2024 Length: 58 min.

Is it reasonable to believe the biblical text in today's age of skepticism? Clayton Van Huss interviews astrophysicist Dr. Jason Lisle, founder of the Biblical Science Institute, who exposes 420 alleged Bible contradictions as fallacious critiques. Dr. Lisle's insights provide a compelling defense of Scripture's reliability, making this discussion essential for anyone interested in the intersection of faith and reason. The book Keep Faith in an Age of Reason is available HERE https://www.swrc.com/keeping-faith-in-an-age-of-reason.html

In a comprehensive episode of Didache, Justin Peters delves into the contentious debate surrounding the Flat Earth theory. He brings in Dr. Danny Faulkner, a physicist with Answers in Genesis and author of "Falling Flat," to counter common Flat Earth arguments. They address various claims, including the visibility of distant objects, the Antarctic Treaty, and supposed biblical support for a flat Earth, providing scientific and biblical rebuttals. The episode also includes interviews with Colonel Jeff Williams, a Christian astronaut, and Dr. Jason Lisle, adding credibility to their refutations with firsthand space experience and astrophysical insights. Peters and Faulkner aim to reach those swayed by Flat Earth rhetoric, offering a reasoned discussion emphasizing scientific evidence's consistency with a spherical Earth and the misinterpretation of Scripture by Flat Earth proponents. Links Dr. Faulkner's book Falling Flat Article on Flat Earth and Firmament Answers in Genesis Dr. Jason Lisle and Biblical Science Institute Timestamps 00:00 – 09:02 Introduction 09:02 – 10:03 Interview with Dr. Faulkner begins 10:03 – 11:10 Who is Dr. Danny Faulkner? 11:10 – 12:01 What is our theology? 12:01 – 12:59 Are we Free Masons? 12:59 – 17:00 Why did you write Falling Flat? 17:00 – 20:47 Has Flat Earth been the majority view throughout Christian history? 20:47 – 25:45 What about the Antarctic Treaty? 25:45 – 28:03 Who are some of the prominent FErs you have met? 28:03 – 36:09 What about long-distance photography? 36:09 – 42:12 Why doesn't the atmosphere rush into the vacuum of space? 42:12 – 46:29 How did the astronauts make it through the Van Allen belts? 4 6:29 – 49:58 Did some Apollo astronauts become Christians? 49:58 – 53:56 Is the moon's shadow during an eclipse too small? 53:56 – 01:02:13 Does the moon produce cold light? 01:02:13 – 01:06:41 Shouldn't airplanes have to dip their nose for the curvature? 01:06:41 – 01:09:42 How high must one be to see curvature? 01:09:42 – 01:13:40 Isn't the ISS too small to be seen if it is really that high? 01:13:40 – 01:17:17 Does NASA in Hebrew mean “to deceive”? 01:17:17 – 01:20:31 Don't you have a Masonic symbol right there over your shoulder? 01:20:31 – 01:22:53 Has NASA admitted we don't have the technology to go to the moon? 01:22:53 – 01:27:19 What is the ISS really? 01:27:19 – 01:31:53 How does the FE model account for seasons? 01:31:53 – 01:36:03 How does the FE model account for meteors? 01:36:03 – 01:39:24 What about the shadow of Mt. Rainer on the bottom of clouds? 01:39:24 – 01:43:14 What about different star constellations in different hemispheres? 01:43:14 – 01:45:32 What about star trails? 01:45:32 – 01:48:54 Can the FE model account for night and day? 01:48:54 – 01:54:39 Can the FE model account for anything? 01:54:39 – 01:56:52 How can we trust science when it tells us we came from apes? 01:56:52 – 02:07:55 Does the Bible teach FE? 02:07:55 – 02:14:47 Why is this such an important issue? 02:14:47 – 02:15:48 What is the firmament? 02:15:48 – 02:17:43 What is Space X? 02:17:43 – 03:15:30 Interview with ISS Astronaut Col. Jeff Williams 03:15:30 – 04:07:25 Interview with Dr. Jason Lisle 04:07:25 – end Wouldn't God make us the center of creation? ➡️ Find all of Justin's essential links here: https://linktr.ee/justinpetersmin

In a comprehensive episode of Didache, Justin Peters delves into the contentious debate surrounding the Flat Earth theory. He brings in Dr. Danny Faulkner, a physicist with Answers in Genesis and author of "Falling Flat," to counter common Flat Earth arguments. They address various claims, including the visibility of distant objects, the Antarctic Treaty, and supposed biblical support for a flat Earth, providing scientific and biblical rebuttals. The episode also includes interviews with Colonel Jeff Williams, a Christian astronaut, and Dr. Jason Lisle, adding credibility to their refutations with firsthand space experience and astrophysical insights. Peters and Faulkner aim to reach those swayed by Flat Earth rhetoric, offering a reasoned discussion emphasizing scientific evidence's consistency with a spherical Earth and the misinterpretation of Scripture by Flat Earth proponents. Links Dr. Faulkner's book Falling Flat Article on Flat Earth and Firmament Answers in Genesis Dr. Jason Lisle and Biblical Science Institute Timestamps 00:00 – 09:02 Introduction 09:02 – 10:03 Interview with Dr. Faulkner begins 10:03 – 11:10 Who is Dr. Danny Faulkner? 11:10 – 12:01 What is our theology? 12:01 – 12:59 Are we Free Masons? 12:59 – 17:00 Why did you write Falling Flat? 17:00 – 20:47 Has Flat Earth been the majority view throughout Christian history? 20:47 – 25:45 What about the Antarctic Treaty? 25:45 – 28:03 Who are some of the prominent FErs you have met? 28:03 – 36:09 What about long-distance photography? 36:09 – 42:12 Why doesn't the atmosphere rush into the vacuum of space? 42:12 – 46:29 How did the astronauts make it through the Van Allen belts? 4 6:29 – 49:58 Did some Apollo astronauts become Christians? 49:58 – 53:56 Is the moon's shadow during an eclipse too small? 53:56 – 01:02:13 Does the moon produce cold light? 01:02:13 – 01:06:41 Shouldn't airplanes have to dip their nose for the curvature? 01:06:41 – 01:09:42 How high must one be to see curvature? 01:09:42 – 01:13:40 Isn't the ISS too small to be seen if it is really that high? 01:13:40 – 01:17:17 Does NASA in Hebrew mean “to deceive”? 01:17:17 – 01:20:31 Don't you have a Masonic symbol right there over your shoulder? 01:20:31 – 01:22:53 Has NASA admitted we don't have the technology to go to the moon? 01:22:53 – 01:27:19 What is the ISS really? 01:27:19 – 01:31:53 How does the FE model account for seasons? 01:31:53 – 01:36:03 How does the FE model account for meteors? 01:36:03 – 01:39:24 What about the shadow of Mt. Rainer on the bottom of clouds? 01:39:24 – 01:43:14 What about different star constellations in different hemispheres? 01:43:14 – 01:45:32 What about star trails? 01:45:32 – 01:48:54 Can the FE model account for night and day? 01:48:54 – 01:54:39 Can the FE model account for anything? 01:54:39 – 01:56:52 How can we trust science when it tells us we came from apes? 01:56:52 – 02:07:55 Does the Bible teach FE? 02:07:55 – 02:14:47 Why is this such an important issue? 02:14:47 – 02:15:48 What is the firmament? 02:15:48 – 02:17:43 What is Space X? 02:17:43 – 03:15:30 Interview with ISS Astronaut Col. Jeff Williams 03:15:30 – 04:07:25 Interview with Dr. Jason Lisle 04:07:25 – end Wouldn't God make us the center of creation? ➡️ Find all of Justin's essential links here: https://linktr.ee/justinpetersmin

How Did We Get the Bible?We are excited to bring you a special episode of the podcast this week where we had the chance to sit down with Dr. Jason Lisle. Dr. Lisle has his Ph.D in astrophysics and he uses his background in science to speak about how science confirms what the Bible teaches. We took time to ask Dr. Lisle a list of questions that we thought would help equip all of us to grow in our walks with the Lord, specifically in the area of christian apologetics and science. We also would like to invite anyone who lives in the Philadelphia area to worship and study God's word with us at our in-person meeting that takes place every-other Monday night at 7:30pm. Visit phillyyoungadults.com for additional information about our ministry.Feel free to message us on instagram (@phillyyoungadultscc) with any feedback, questions, or topics you want to hear about on the podcast or you can shoot an email to ya@ccphilly.org Visit our website here.

Fred and Doug Interview Dr. Phil Dennis about the doppler effect, the one way speed of light, and the problems with Lisle's Anisotropic Synchrony Convention   Dr. Dennis's Slides: If you want to follow along with our interview with Dr. Dennis, you might want to check out his previous appearance here, watch on the RSR YouTube Channel, or you'll definitely want to open up his slides!   Aim High: Fred Williams and Doug McBurney welcome back physicist Phil Dennis, who holds a PhD from the University of Missouri in Physics. Dr. Dennis's work included  providing algorithms for the Hubble Space Telescope, tracking algorithms, and other mathematical algorithms and was recognized by NASA for his work.   Rearranging Reichenbach: Hear how Jason Lisle's Anisotropic Synchrony Convention has the same problem of moving the goalposts ala physicists from the previous century.   Eternalism vs Presentism: Hear why a commitment to eternalism implies that time is an illusion, and/or that time travel is possible, (neither of which we at RSR believe to be the case).   The Need for Speed: Dr. Dennis believes we can indeed measure the one way speed of light, (addressed by Bob and Fred previously on RSR). Dr. Dennis cites  Cal Tech's Femtosecond Camera.   

Guest Speaker - Dr. Jason Lisle

Guest Speaker - Dr. Jason Lisle