OpenTheo

A Biblical Ancient Apocalypse

For The King — FTK
00:00
00:00

A Biblical Ancient Apocalypse

March 8, 2023
For The King
For The KingFTK

This episode my friend Andy and I dive into a Netflix documentary series from Graham Hancock called "Ancient Apocalypse". We show some of the main claims and overall thesis of Mr. Hancock and then provide our own analysis of the data based on a biblical worldview. Thanks for coming on Andy!

For information on the show click here

Cover image taken from By Netflix - https://m.imdb.com/title/tt22807484/, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=72438936

Key Text:

* 1 Timothy 1:3-4

Social Media:

* Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/For-The-King-105492691873696/

* Gab page: https://gab.com/ForTheKingPod

* Twitter: https://twitter.com/ForTheKingPod

* Fountain.fm -> https://fountain.fm/show/U78tm316mhRmq1LFZ6HS

Support:

* Donate Crypto: https://commerce.coinbase.com/checkout/f63fd7db-919e-44f6-9c58-8ec2891f3eb5

* Kingly Clothing: https://www.bonfire.com/store/for-the-king/

Contact:

* Website: forthekingpodcast.com

* Email: forthekingpodcast@gmail.com

Share

Transcript

(music)
Don't think I will even ask you to make Jesus Lord of your life. That's the most preposterous thing I could ever tell you to do. Jesus Christ is Lord of your life.
Whether you serve him or not, whether you bless him, curse him, hate him, or love him,
he is the Lord of your life because God has given him a name that is above every name so that the name of Jesus Christ every knee shall bow and tongue confess that he is Lord. Some of you will bow out of the grace that has been given to you and others will bow because your kneecaps will be broken by the one who rules the nations with a rod of iron. And I will not apologize for this God of the Bible.
(music)
Hello friends, welcome to the For the King podcast. This is your host, Rocky Ramsey. I am joined this episode with a good friend, Andy.
Welcome, brother.
Thank you. I'm excited to be on the podcast.
Excited to have you. How did you end up here? How did you end up here doing this with me? Well, we decided to watch a documentary together that we thought was interesting called Bicram Hancock called Ancient Apocalypse. And it was good.
It was a good time. We would get together in the evening after the work day. We lived pretty close to them.
And we would just watch Graham Hancock's little docuseries on Netflix and had a lot of fun breaking it down and talking about it. So you can look at the fruit of our work on the cover image of this podcast episode. You can see our timeline that we came up with, you know, interacting with some of the stuff that Graham Hancock exposed us to.
So that's going to be kind of a, we'll circle back to that throughout the podcast, but that's kind of what we did and what we're interacting with this episode. So maybe before you listen to it, you can go look up a little bit about Graham Hancock, just a little bit about him, some cursory stuff. He's a British man.
I mean, Wikipedia says he promotes pseudoscientific theories, but he's been on Joe Rogan and talks about a lot of his investigative journalism
in mainly the realm of archaeology and history. That's kind of where he camps out that. And he has a few books out.
I found one on Audible I'm going to listen to at some point. So he's got some literature out. He now has this docuseries and stuff.
He's been interviewed by a lot of different other journalists or media outlets or whatever. So he's pretty popular. And again, he's been on Joe Rogan.
So you can go listen to his interview with him.
But he does. He looks at that the archaeology and history as an investigative journalist.
He's not really that by trade, I guess, or by expertise. So that's who this man is. And he just recently released, what was it this past year? I think yeah, I think it was very recent November.
Yeah, very, very recent, very new series.
And it's maybe I don't know for certain, but it seems like it's a compilation of his work. It's like a it's like a good entry point into what he's been doing for a long time.
Yeah, it's a great summary. Some of his books are a little bit longer and seem harder to get into. Yeah.
The one I found on Audible is free called Fingerprints of the Gods.
Oh, yeah. I've heard of that.
That's like a 20 hour audiobook. So a good, great, hefty book.
So I might do that at some point.
But so so that's the topic for today.
It's a you know, we're going to be talking about the ancient apocalypse series on Netflix. And the point of that series, I guess, to give some background on that as we introduce what's going on here is walking through his timeline or his presentation of human history from evidence that he's compiled and set up kind of his own framework of how he views human history.
So there's 10 series. Sorry, there's 10 episodes in the series. And we wanted to pick out a few of the major sites that he goes to because it's basically him going to a site and interacting with the site and talking about it.
That's what each episode is. So the first episode, he goes to a place called Ginnung Padang or something like that. I think it was in Indonesia, one of the islands out in the Pacific there.
Yeah, Indonesia. And it's basically a massive brick like structure that has multiple chambers buried beneath it. So that's how he kind of introduces it.
Whoa, we have this, you know, 10,000 year old structure.
That's really, you know, really, really old site. Yeah, that the people that would have built it supposedly would have been nomadic and hunter gatherer and kind of infantile in their thinking, infantile humanity.
Yet they built this massive, massive structure that is chambered and dug into the mountain. So he begins his claim, slowly building up starting there that, oh, wow, maybe these humans 10,000 years ago weren't stuck in the Bronze Age or stuck in the Stone Age. Maybe they were able to build massive structures and they were architecturally sound in the way they would build things way more than we think or anticipate out of people in that age.
So that's where he starts out. And that's kind of the first thing. Anything there you want to? Well, one of my favorite points from that site was he mentioned that the stone, so if you look up a picture, there are all these different rocks that are like oblong.
They're kind of like big spikes. They almost look like spears. And he mentions that there aren't any of those, that type of rock in the analysis that you do with the rock.
There aren't any of that type of rock naturally occurring around the site. So he mentions that they had to be imported from like, hundreds, thousands of miles away. And like, you think about, I mean, during COVID, we couldn't even get our own supply chain to work.
Yeah. And so you think about like these hunter-gatherers in popular culture, popular archaeology that are transporting like a whole mountain full essentially of these rocks that are hundreds of thousands of tons. Yeah, huge amounts of rock.
And I mean, just to think about like, think about the archeological impact that would have is just insane.
Yeah. Yeah.
No, I forgot about that. I mean, yeah, the stones, they were like, they're like just kind of scattered throughout the mountainside.
Yeah.
But clearly pattern. Yeah, he goes over that they're like rooms and here's an inner chamber. At that, at that innermost chamber is where you have those like deep caverns that Rocky mentioned.
Yeah. Yeah. And they still haven't even excavated to that yet.
So it'll be interesting, I guess, as archaeology continues on that train of thought that he's presenting that, oh, wow, these people were, this is an older civilization doing something pretty spectacular.
Yeah. So that's how he begins again, his argument here is going to be that humans are, ancient humans are much more advanced than the current contemporary archaeology would say that, you know, we have like Bronze Age or Stone Age humans that can't really build anything.
And they're more nomadic. I guess Bronze Age is when people start to settle, but Stone Age, they're just running around and gathering things and eating fruit and hunting animals and following herds of animals all over the world. They're not settling down and building massive things on mountainsides.
Well, this is where he starts to build his argument that it is. So that's the main claim here on that first site.
Then we can start moving on to some more episodes.
One of the episodes he goes to a Mexican temple and he starts to dive into ancient lore of these ancient societies that are way older than, you know, Iron Age or whatever, Bronze Age.
It's like we're talking about these are Stone Age civilizations that have the lore that he's going to interact with. So at this Mexican temple, I forget what the name of God is and stuff and all that, but we have a story of a God that comes to these people to teach them civilization, right? He comes to them on the water, I think, and there are giants.
There are massive humans that are like 30 feet tall that help them build these temples and build civilization stuff.
So that's a part of this lore here. And then he looks at the temple and sees some spectacular things that these ancient humans did there as well.
Moving on to the temples of Malta. That's going to be a kind of...he continues to build on this, so that's one of the next sites he goes to. Here on Malta, which is an island south of Italy in the Mediterranean.
Actually, Paul went to Malta, so it's kind of cool thinking about this site specifically.
Because Paul would have seen these things probably while he was preaching or maybe even preached at one of these temples. But there's a bunch of temples scattered throughout that whole island that are these big stone structures.
There are serpents depicted on them.
There are some...we start to get some, not hieroglyphs, but like, I guess, just like art symbolism. And what's really unique about these is they are...each of these temple complexes are oriented towards...is it serious? Yeah, serious stars.
The star is serious. And he tracks...he actually goes into a constellation database to track how the stars moved over time.
And he starts dating these temples based on where Sirius was according to these temples and how they're oriented.
Because they're no longer tracking Sirius, but they would have been back then. Yeah, and just to clarify, the reason that he didn't pick Sirius out of random, that would at the time and might still be the brightest star in the sky. So that would have held significance to civilizations at that time.
Yeah, when they're looking at the...that was probably...well, they probably had more behind that one star too. Like it's a certain god or something. Yeah, yeah.
Okay, so anything else there? That's pretty much the big point there. So we start seeing stars tracking, so we see high level astronomy from apparently hunter-gatherer nomadic people. We see high, high level mathematical geometry, especially in the architecture of the whole complex, just pointing towards one star in the sky.
I mean, that's pretty intense stuff. I mean, I don't...it would take us a second to figure that out. We're modern man.
Yeah. Okay, I think one thing that I like to point out there also is like there are over, I think over 20 of these temples move. Yes, yeah.
There are over 20, and none of them are painted the same way. And his theory on this is that as the star Sirius would have moved slightly...actually, I think it's Earth moved slightly in its rotation, that Sirius would not line up with the gap in their temple where they saw Sirius, where it was supposed to line up. So they'd have to build this whole new huge stone temple.
Keep tracking. Yeah, which would have been this huge architectural undertaking. Yeah, so they had resources not just to build it once.
Like, "Oh, here's the big thing."
Exactly. It's like, well, apparently they had enough manpower and extra resources to dedicate every hundred plus years. Bigger than years.
Yeah, to build a new one of these massive temples. So that's a pretty important site for him, seeing not only high-level architecture, but astronomy. Right.
So then we get to moving away from the Mediterranean and going to the Caribbean. There's an island, I forget what the island name is, but an island in the Caribbean where there is a road-like structure that starts on land and descends into the sea on this island. His main point here is, where was this road leading to? Was it Atlantis? That's when that episode is where he starts to bring up Plato's accounts of Atlantis and it being a mighty city and having lots of technology and being advanced and stuff.
Yeah. He's trying to push this narrative that humans are more advanced in the past, so he's going to take Atlantis very seriously. And he's presenting here, the mimini road might be connected to a transport network from Atlantis in the past.
Yeah. So he brings up that, but what I thought was extremely fascinating out of that episode is he has these old projections from Spanish explorers that are based on... There's like a list of the projections that it was based on, basically the database for the projection that date back thousands of years. And on those Spanish projections, those maps, there are land masses that were totally different than what we see now.
There's a land mass that on the southern end that he says was where the ice extended during the last ice age before the underdrias, which is an interesting point. I think they would have known it was ice and not land, and maybe drawn it a little different. I don't know if it literally was land or maybe his thesis is correct that it was ice, but I thought that was fascinating.
And maybe there's some more work I think maybe Christian archeology can do there, thinking about these old projections, these old maps that were extremely accurate, but show really weird land masses that are not there at all. Yeah. Right.
Right. Right. Atlantis sinking.
Yeah. That was a land mass that apparently was above sea level at one point. That was a below sea level.
So we have land masses that have come in and out of existence and he takes that seriously. Yeah. So maybe felt there.
Yeah, I think I think it's so modern archeology would say that the Bimini Road is just a naturally occurring.
Oh, yeah. Yeah, that's a weird claim.
If you like it. So if you have if you haven't watched ancient apocalypse, essentially, there are these huge or if you haven't seen the road either, there are these huge stones that are like, think of like stonehenge type stones, like huge, enormous stones that are hundreds of tons probably.
And they're level using smaller stones underneath them.
Oh, yeah. And like if you're thinking about leveling something like that, that's like something that you would do on like a landscaping project.
Yeah, like you would like make sure that it's like the stone when you're putting in the paper, so is like level and you might put in some extra dirt here and the attitude.
Yeah, but naturally, I don't know how you can look at a small stone underneath how to back it there. It's clearly distinct. It never was part of that original stone.
So I don't know how you can look at that and say that's naturally occurring. I don't know what I don't personally know if Atlantis was a real civilization. But it's hard for me to say that that is naturally occurring.
Yeah. I agree. I thought he did really good work on that one.
I forgot. I forgot there were stones sitting underneath. Yeah.
Yeah, I think that one was pretty clear that that's a manmade structure. I mean, especially when there's no other stones arranged like that around the island, because he kind of highlights it. They go diving.
They go scuba diving to look at, you know, these big massive stone structures underwater. Nothing else like it on the reef there. Right.
So yeah, I'm very, very fast. They're massive. Whatever that road was used for the vehicles that were interacting with that road were massive.
Yeah. And that's where we were looking at it. And we thought, well, maybe the way that it leads up, so if you look up a picture of it, the way that it leads up to the to the island like that, whatever, I think it's like actually them any island.
I think the way that it leads up to it in like a smooth way, we're like, well, that might have been a way of getting ships on and off the land for fixing maintenance. I don't know. Yeah, you might do.
Yeah. Yeah. Marina.
Right. Exactly. So you would bring them up on like rollers, like trees.
Yeah, I think that would make a lot of sense. Yeah.
And that's probably what it was used for.
And we still we can still see it today. And those those rocks date back, you know, he he puts it on a certain date and says, hey, this is during nomadic humans.
Right.
How could they have done this? So he continues that narrative with that really fascinating site.
Then in the next episode, he goes to Turkey and looks at this this site called go back to the tepee and another one in Turkey called Darren. So go back to the tepee is just like a worship center.
Basically, there's a there's a little head that shaped like a serpent.
So we get more of the like serpent imagery that was at Malta also. And we get some of the zodiac signs start to be he starts to expose that a little bit.
So there's like Scorpio, there's a scorpion and then there's a few other ones. I can't remember what they were, but other kind of zodiac signs in the sky. And then again, there's just another temple, another high level temple.
And that's another site that is deep. They haven't excavated yet, but there's a bunch of chambers under there somewhere.
So that was pretty cool.
And then somewhere else in Turkey, there was another town, I think a town might be called Darren Kuyu or something.
But there's a town and you go in a house and similar to how like, you know, you have an old root cellar that hasn't been used since 1800s. It might be an old house similar to that.
But instead of going to a root cellar, it goes to a whole underground city basically.
Yeah. And you walk through and it basically looks like an underground beehive.
That's kind of what you can imagine.
Or like an anthill. Yeah, that's probably better way to put it.
Like literally an anthill, you know, like little rooms and chambers in the ground.
So the question is, what are these people hiding from? Did they know there was a catastrophe coming and they built an underground city to hide from something? So he kind of leaves that a little open-ended, but by the end of the... We got one more site we're going to talk about and then we'll tell you his thesis. Anything on those two you want to talk about? Not at the moment.
Okay. So where he kind of ends at, I think in the ninth episode or tenth episode, because it only goes to ten, is the Serpent Mound in Ohio in America. This is huge structure that's dated pretty old.
That's again, astronomically literate. It's matching up with certain equinoxes, times of the year with the sun.
So we have a mound that's again a serpent.
So we see the serpent imagery over and over and over again. We as Christians know where that comes from.
He takes them on a little different route, but it's perfectly matching up to astronomical things so that they can probably worship the sun or something.
Right?
So that's kind of where he ends. He ends in America. He looks at a lot of... I think he goes up to Oregon.
He goes up to some crazy canyons up in like northern America, kind of where the last ice age, the glaciers would have extended, he said. And how these caverns would have been... These huge canyons and caverns would have been carved out during this event, Younger Dryas. Right.
So he uses all these different things to make a case that humans were... I'm sorry, I guess before we do that, do you have any wrapping up thoughts with all the sites? I don't think so. I was going to mention, I didn't want to spoil anything, but for a go-buckly tappy and Darren Kuyu, both of those, I think, have points that go back to his thesis and what that main event that he's leading up to. Exactly.
Without spoiling anything, go ahead Rocky. So then the way he synthesizes all that data, archaeological data, is he claims during this event around 10,000 years ago, which is where he's placing a lot of these temples and these sites he's going to, and these myths that he's interacting with where you have civilization being destroyed by some cataclysmic event, then you have some angelic-like being coming to teach you civilization and the giants being there to help you. Why does like every single civilization have that narrative? Well, he says because around the same time of these temples, there was this event called the Younger Dryas where we had an Ice Age that happened after a comet or some asteroid strikes the Earth, sends the Earth into an Ice Age or whatever.
Then, so that's where a lot of the people get wiped out. And then at the end of the Younger Dryas, things start to heat up and we have all these glaciers, all this extra water, you know, heat up like crazy and just flash flood events all over the world. We get a worldwide flood, basically.
Right.
Or what seems like a worldwide flood to these people. Yeah.
Berries all these ancient temples and things and his claim is at the equator is where these people would have survived, basically. So that's why we have on these high mountainous regions or these kind of separate regions on Earth is where a lot of these temples are at and stuff. And these temples that are built after this event tell of people that survived, that knew the tools of civilization and come to teach all these people how to rebuild civilization.
And then each of these temples put that into their myth or each of these peoples put that into their myth, which then on these newer temples are depicted as giants and angelic beings coming to them to teach them. The tools of civilization. So, so there's an old ancient, really highly intelligent people.
And then all those cataclysmic events happen. NASA flooded all that and these, these people, most of these people die, but then you know, the equator, there's some safe zone or something. These people survive.
And then once everything, you know, starts to go back out, people start to spread again and then teach civilization.
And then that is, that's how we get these myths. And that's how we get these temples, these high level archaeological temples.
How do they exist and why were people able to do that? Well, because humans actually were much intelligent prior to this cataclysmic event. Right. So that is his main.
That's how he synthesizes all this data. And that's going to be his claim from his kind of secular, atheistic worldview.
Yeah.
That's what he comes up with. So leave anything out?
Yeah, no, that's good. It's just, it's if you watch ancient apocalypse personally, I found it very anti-comactic.
I know. So he was building this whole case for this global event, this huge thing that was going to happen. And he was like, well, an asteroid hit a glacier in Idaho that caused local flooding.
Yeah. Yeah. And so for me, I mean, that's not the global event that I was expecting to have.
Yeah. So we're going to get into that. Well, OK, well, let's just let's just piggyback off that.
Like that's his operating assumption.
The whole series is let's take these myths seriously. Right.
And then at the end, his synthesis is basically just throw all that out the door. Yeah. Like angelic beings, giants, worldwide flood.
Actually, we get none of that in his synthesis. Anything relating to serpents? Yeah, anything relating to serpents. He just his claim is that serpents are comets.
Right.
Comets in the sky. Comet will leave a small trail line, a water vapor trail behind it.
That's that is his that's how he synthesizes all of that. So I agree with you. It is anticlimactic.
And it's it's tough to hear him kind of boast in his novel idea when Christian archaeologists have been doing this for like a long time.
Right. And already have solutions to all the problems that he's talking about.
Yet he's an atheist undermining all that and then taking all of his assumptions seriously and then just completely disregarding it in the end.
Yeah. And still trying to fit it into an atheistic worldview and if it's so much better into a biblical worldview in a biblical time.
Exactly. Yeah. So so that's what we want to present to you now.
So that's that is what this series is.
That's the brief synopsis. Please go watch it and find out for yourself.
But here's our interaction. Here's our critique of it. Andy and I.
So here's here's the biblical timeline of human history that we want to propose.
So if you can look at the cover image, I mean, it's very rudimentary what we came up with. But we just did this hanging out one night and you know, I'm not going to say it's perfect. I haven't like perfectly thought through all this.
We just kind of came up with that afterwards. But you know, we have the major events biblically that can help us sort through what happened to some of these temples or some of these myths and stuff. So we have creation.
You know, Genesis 1 2 and we have the fall of man and 3 man falls and falls into sin.
Then I think it's important to also know as we're going into this, like God created man in his image. We were created advanced.
Yeah, we were not created as as evolution would say we weren't. Yeah, we weren't. Because if we evolved from chimpanzees, monkeys, apes, we it would make sense that we started out as one of three others.
And then we slowly went through the iron age, the stone age, the bronze age, iron age. And now we're at the peak. I mean, that makes sense if you hold that view.
But as as believers, we would say that we're created in the image of God, distinct from animals and very distinct. Exactly. And we're we are advanced.
Yeah, that's good. Yeah, I mean, we're created advanced. Yeah, that's that's huge.
That's our operating assumption.
Andy and I as what we're operating under that humanity is advanced. We should have expected them to build like pretty sick temples.
Yeah, it's not a big deal for humans. We've been doing that for a long time. And we see it even Genesis four with Cain and Abel, Cain's descendants to volcano and all of them.
They're working with metal. They are good at stringed instruments and making music like that. Like again, like Andy saying we're already we were made evolved.
Yeah, in the image of God, we were made at the peak, you know, transhumanist in the USA. We're already like we already have the divine in us, in a sense by being made in God's image. We have a soul.
God gave us the breath of life. Those are important operating assumptions that Christians should go into when thinking about archaeology and history.
So makes sense that there was a out of nowhere.
All of a sudden, humanity is there on the scene making awesome temples. It's almost like we did evolve.
Yeah, and from a physical standpoint, you have people that are living that are experts at these things, experts in stringed instruments, expert in stone working metalworking, and they're living for almost 1000 years.
Oh, yeah. So it makes sense if I mean, think about how much of our lives we dedicate to learning, like the first 20, I mean, the first 20 years of our lives are learning. And then we are productive for maybe 40 years of our life.
Yeah. And then we brains pretty much die. Yeah.
So to think through what how how much more productive we would be if one we were able to learn for that much longer, continue to gather information, continue to build and create masterpieces of of our work. If we had hundreds of years to develop something, what could what could we create? Yeah, of course. How much could we imagine if Albert Einstein or Nikola Tesla had 1000 year life? Exactly.
Yeah, Isaac Newton. Yeah. Well, what would happen then? Yeah.
I mean, if you if these brilliant men have time, you know, so yeah, I think that's a big point. We need to think of it.
What if there were giants to help? Yeah, what if we had figure muscles? Right.
I'm like, so so we want to take that seriously, too, as Christians, because, you know, Genesis six, that would be the next big event.
So we had creation fall man, and we have the flood happening in Genesis six, right? And that's a global cataclysmic thing that's talked about. It's a physical act.
Yeah.
It makes it rain on the earth. And there's fountains from the deep being bursting forth.
That's a that's a pretty big event. Cataclysmic event. Yeah.
So there's our cataclysmic event. And then after the flood with all that water vapor and with just the specific heat of water, the way water traps heat, there would have been an ice age like event after a flood.
It wouldn't actually happen with the way water traps heat and especially water receding that fast.
And then in Genesis 11, we get babble. We get these men building a super big tower. Yeah.
That word in Hebrew is not like a like a fire tower you'd see in a forest that you're hiking at.
We're talking about like a cigarette. We're talking about a temple.
Yeah, we're not talking about again, like a stick in the air, like a cell phone tower, right? We're talking about a massive, probably very beautiful innate or ornate.
Yeah, that's what I was going to say ornate, like ziggurat, yeah, massive temple. That's what they built in babble Genesis 11 here.
So kind of makes sense with what we see in the ancient world. There's ziggurat and temples everywhere. Yeah.
Right. So then we have babble and then God scatters the people according to the language.
So they go from a common culture with the same history with the same classic cataclysmic cataclysmic event happen to those people.
And then God divides them and they go all over the world and build similar temples with a similar myth. Right.
That's exactly what we see Graham Hancock talking about throughout the whole series that result in exactly what he's finding.
Yeah, exactly what he's theorizing. Yeah.
He asked the question, how in the world could all of these separate civilizations that were not seafaring, they were not able to travel across the world and communicate like we think all that kind of stuff.
How would they have been able to do that?
And everybody builds the exact same temples with virtually the exact same myth. Right. How's that happen? So again, he posits advanced ancient civilization that had seafaring and all that, which they did 100%.
They were in communication.
But God scattered their languages during all that and then they weren't able to communicate any longer. So then they have that.
That's why we get the myths having slight differences according to that culture.
So that's exactly what we see happening. That's what we should expect under the biblical worldview, the biblical timeline of human history.
And then eventually Christ comes on the scene of redeemed humanity.
So those are like the major events of the world as far as the biblical timeline of human history is concerned. Yeah.
So we fit some of our, you can look and see some of the things that we try to fit on our timeline here. And I mean, Christian archeologists would probably look at this and like laugh, I guess maybe like we have some stuff wrong. But our main operating thesis was just things that in the narrative are claimed to be buried under a flood or buried items.
We would say that's probably happened from the flood. The flood happened and buried it.
But then things that are more not buried, not super deep in the ground, but like there's all these cultural differences and the myth talks about the flood.
Then we assume like for instance, Atlantis, we don't have anything Plato, Plato through Socrates doesn't tell us about Atlantis having a flood myth. But in the myth of Atlantis is them being flooded. So we're going to say Atlantis is pre-flood.
Right. But the myths, the civilizations that had myths of a flood, we're going to say that's post flood. That's probably after battle too, because all the myths are different according to the culture.
So we tried to map that out on here to the best of our ability. So that's going to be what we're going to propose as the timeline of biblical history and how we're going to fit in some of these some of these sites. What do you think Andy? Yeah.
One thing that I think is also interesting about just the idea of Atlantis is multiple times in ancient apocalypse, multiple times in multiple different episodes.
Graham Hancock mentions that why was why was Atlantis destroyed? And he mentions he literally says because of their hubris, because of their pride. Yeah.
And it's like, as a Christian, you're going like, yes, of course. That's exactly what God says in the Bible. That's what Genesis says, that they had grown wicked and there wasn't a man wanting to do the will of God.
Yeah. And that's exactly what what Graham Hancock is saying. But I mean, again, in his in his description of in his resulting theory in the last episode where he talks about the meteor shower, I guess, and this big comet and the younger dry as as the result.
Like nowhere, nowhere is that a significant statement. Yeah. Nor is hubris mentioned again if you can't you can't judge a proud civilization if you don't have someone judging it.
Yeah, exactly. Yeah.
Yeah.
If a judge would pass that assumes a judge. Right.
Yeah, yeah, it was odd the claims.
I mean, another thing that was odd was when when the when the myth literally said there were giants that helped them build the temples. He says, well, what they really meant was we're talking about intellectual giants.
We're not talking about actual giants.
We're talking about just smart people that they viewed as giants. And you're just watching that like he just boasts the whole time that he's taking the myth seriously. And then he allegorizes the myth.
Right.
It's like, well, you're not taking it seriously. He takes the flood part seriously.
Why is the flood not just allegorized? Oh, it's just judgment the water. Yeah, the Bible talks about it and does talk about the symbolism of water like the old that that ancient world was dayludes.
I think it talked about first or second Peter.
That old world was dayludes into the new world came Genesis six, right? So the world was baptized. But that was a baptism of judgment. Right.
Baptism symbolizes both judgment and salvation being cleansed by water being baptized in the new world.
And Christ, but then also we're being judged. Our old man is being judged with the death.
Yeah. So that's what water symbolizes and God saved the world by flooding it because like Andy said, there was no man found to do the will of God. So God judged them.
So he doesn't take any of that seriously at all. No, any of the reality of the situation. He just he just treats it as a symbol.
But yeah, he still points it out. Interesting. It's very interesting.
It's like he's he's playing this prayer.
He's playing this perfectly into a biblical worldview. He's presenting the evidence just like I would as a biblical with a biblical worldview.
Yeah, exactly. Yeah, it was fascinating watching it and then he goes the wrong direction. Yeah.
So that's honestly guys. That's why we want to do this episode to say, look, we have a better answer. We could like, let's just assume all of his data was well found.
Yeah. Pretend this was the last episode of his show. Yeah, exactly.
Like who's synthesizing it better him or us. Yeah.
I mean, it's not even us.
It's God's word. Right. It's not like we're doing anything novel here.
We're just like assuming God's word is true and say, wow, that's a much better answer. Yeah. To all the data he's presented.
Yeah. So that's why we want to do this episode. So let's get into some, maybe some more technical questions as we think about some of his claims and you know what we're claiming.
So again, we're assuming the biblical timeline is accurate. How much is the Bible?
How much can we stretch the biblical timeline? How much like, can we look at what he says and say, well, we're just going to shove the timeline into it. How much can we do that? Or how much like, do we need to maybe do some more work? I guess what you think.
Yeah. It's hard because it's like what he's hypothesizing is that the world is essentially, I think he says like 10,000 BC is when this event happened, give or take, which would have been 12,000 years ago. And most young earth creationists would, which we are.
Would say that the world is anywhere between six and 10,000 years old. Yeah. And we get that from a variety of places.
I think most of the gaps that are filled in from history, we would say are from the genealogies in the Bible, which again, we believe are accurate. But then there's always a question of, well, did older genealogies, there's instances where maybe certain like fathers were known or like, so that, so it's, then you know,
so that, so it's, then you're stretching that and that's where you get between the six and 10,000 year old, which would be 8,000 BC is when the world would have been created. Because obviously we're 2000 years after Christ.
So thinking through that, yeah, that's, that's a, an interesting proposition to say, well, could it, could it have been 12,000 years ago instead? And what would that look like from a biblical perspective?
Yeah, I think that's, that's a, that's a good question that we'd have to do some, do some work on. I mean, we obviously have to consider dating methods. He's going to be using conventional dating methods, which have assumptions built onto them that would cater to a secular atheistic version of human history.
I think the one that we'd have to contend with the most would be just the constellations of him dating just based on the way stars are moving. Right. Especially serious.
Yeah.
And how specific he was able to get date that back to how each of the, how each of the temples lined up at a specific date, he counted. Yeah.
And went back to that.
Like 9,000 something. Yeah.
Like, yeah. Like nine or 10,000 BC. Yeah.
I think that's an interesting claim and it's something we'd have to think more about.
You know, I mean, something I've heard is that when the fountains of the deep burst forth and did alter maybe the axis of the earth and move the earth faster than just its natural movement in the cosmos. So maybe that could have thrown serious off faster and kind of changed everything.
So I don't, I don't know really exactly what we can do with that, but I do. I mean, I, I think we both agree we need to stay within that six to 10.
I don't know if we can even stretch past that.
I mean, maybe somebody has some interesting proposition genealogically that, oh, maybe they'll stretch back that far. But, but still with what he's claiming very close to what we'll take.
We'll take 12,000 compared to what? 13 billion.
Yeah. I would, I would a hundred percent. Yeah.
And there's, there's probably, I mean, what are you doing with dates like that? And just kind of with a lot of assumptions built in. Right.
It's already difficult to get an accurate number.
Yeah. Okay. So now what from Hancock's documentary is stretched.
I think we've, we've already hit on this a little bit. Some of the symbols he doesn't take seriously.
His claim at the end is all of these zodiacs and serpents that we see at these sites are then looking to the heaven specifically the, let's say that one, Darren Kuyu, the underground bunker, basically.
Yeah.
Remember that city we talked about. Yeah.
You know, this is where his, his claim comes into, you put a teaser at the beginning of the episode, we're going to circle back to that. Well, it is, you know, proposition on why they would have, you know,
position on why they would have built an underground bunker essentially is because they knew that there are comets that are a road that can hit the earth. That's what the Scorpio, all of the zodiacs are basically like timetables for them to know when certain comments come to pass.
And that's why the serpents, which represent comments in his interpretation are there on the side as well, because, oh, when you see Scorpio in the sky at this arrangement, serpents coming, which is the comment. So that's kind of what he's saying is they're basically tracking comment movement that are, could hit the earth. And Darren Kuyu was basically a place of refuge when a comment does hit the earth to basically not die from the fallout afterwards.
Yeah. So yeah, interesting take. I mean, in the biblical view, maybe they were trying to hide from John's, God's judgment, or maybe they were, I don't know, somehow trying to avoid the flood.
Yeah. Or maybe it was just completely unrelated to that. Maybe it was just during a time when there was a big huge army or a king around there.
And they were just trying to hide from warfare or something.
Yeah. Who knows what exactly they used it for.
But he does say there's a lot of places for food storage and things like that. So it was he's kind of viewing it more as like an underground bunker, a place to find refuge for to live for a while.
Right.
And that's like the only part I feel like of the documentary where the like the meteor shower happening makes more sense intuitively. Yeah, then a flood.
Well, drown them out.
Yeah, if it was water. But then then we have to think about, we have to think through then how exactly did the flood happen? Like, obviously, it rained. We know that.
And we know that the fountains of the deep burst forth.
But we don't know what that would look like. We don't have any idea what someone's reaction to that happening might be that catastrophic event.
Like, how how did that look? I mean, again, we have like, assuming that the I mean, that we have like lava under the surface, if water is bursting forth from the ground, I mean, it's gonna probably I mean, if the thing about like tectonic plates that are shifting and breaking and moving, that would be kind of like,
moving that would be causing this massive, yeah, this massive bursting forth of water that's flooding the earth. Like you think through, like there would probably be lava in there too. And like there would be some of these like, hot rocks that would probably be falling from the sky.
But that are, I don't know. But that's that, like, these are things that we can like think through.
We, we know that the flood is accurate.
So then it's just a matter of fitting in some of this evidence that he gives us and what the facts that we see from ancient civilizations, we can see from there, what, like how to best interpret what the Bible says. Yeah, yeah.
Yeah, maybe they lived in a valley with dinosaurs, they didn't want to be around T-Rex.
Yeah, like there's like a lot of different ways we can think about it biblically. Yeah. Oh, for sure.
So yeah, that's a I've heard there would there would have definitely been very hot, vaporous water, like, yeah, holding water, pouring out of the earth. Yeah. So, yeah, there's some things we think he stretches in the in the documentary.
He doesn't make seriously. And especially the younger drives he stretches that to make it like it would have covered. Yeah, it's a local flood.
And it doesn't square well with what he's claiming about the myths. Right. So, why let's talk through he's not he again like I read earlier on the Wikipedia page.
He's considered a pseudo scientist. He he's, you know, promoting quackery. Yeah, that's that's how he's viewed and he's an atheist.
He's an atheistic evolutionary guy.
And even his own kin are fighting against him. So, you know, let's just think through why is that why? Why is he even, I guess, rejected by contemporary archaeology? Yeah, because you think about it and he's promoting an evolutionary worldview.
He's not exactly going against what evolutionists would say in in a theological sense or what they say about God.
Yeah, but I think it again you think through what evolution is trying to trying to achieve and it's trying to achieve a godless society. And if if there's an event like this that happens where man was advanced and then something happened where we weren't I mean, some might theorize that well that's just people wanting to say that they're the most advanced at this current time and that's pride of now.
But then we also have to think through well does again does Graham Hancock's perspective fit more with the Bible and a God and yet a biblical worldview. And I think it's pretty clear that it does because if you started the question some of his some of his resulting theory in the last episode, you start to see some cracks. Yeah.
So, yeah, I think so you think they're sensing that his contemporaries atheistic evolutionary contemporaries are sensing that like whoa, you're kind of selling selling the exact. Yeah, yeah, you're you're proving what the Bible is saying in a lot of ways. Yeah, because the because the strong part is the is the is the evidence.
Yeah, and that I mean that's what as as Bible believers, we know that these things in Genesis happen, they actually happen historically.
Yeah, so the evidence does point to that. It's just a matter of reading the data in that way because we trust the Bible above.
Yeah, all truth. Yeah, I think it's important that when we think about presuppositional apologetics.
I don't know if you are with that Andy, but that's kind of where I fall.
I'm not really a classical apologist. And when when you enter into the scientific method, you have presuppositions that underlie the way you interpret data.
Sure.
So you can interpret data one way or the other based on your presuppositions that you hold to prior to that. So, you know, if you presuppose that humans, you know, were created by evolution, then you're going to interpret data totally different rock data or things like that.
You're gonna say, well, there's got to be billions of years old.
That's how long it takes to make a human. So it's got to be that. So we're only going to look at look within that.
So your presuppositions matter in the way you're conducting science. The scientific method presupposes a Christian worldview, rationality and logic and reason. Yeah.
The scientific method cannot be used to verify that the scientific method works. You have to presuppose that it works based on logic and reason, which is only coherent in a Christian worldview. Yeah.
It's the only place you get it. You don't get it from evolution. You don't get logic or reason or anything from evolution.
You just get survive and reproduce seeing animals. That's it. Yeah.
So, you know, I think I think we do need to think about that. His, his, his interpretation of the data is inconsistent with his, his evolutionary atheistic and he tries to maintain that consistency at the end of the series. And we're kind of critiquing that and saying it's not, he's being inconsistent.
Exactly. Anything there? Nope. I think that was a good summary of that.
So how does the younger drives flag of it compare with the global flood? Why does this little known flooding of it show the inconsistencies in modern science? Yeah, I think. Yeah. I think it's interesting that in school, I mean, I was homeschooled, so I didn't maybe have the same school experience that a lot of people.
I remember learning about that. Yeah.
But like you think about the evolutionary model and the idea is that we evolved from mud into bacteria into not fish, like frogs, amphibians.
And then, oh, we decided to go walk up on land. Yeah.
There are monkeys and then there are humans in a, in a very summarized view.
That's what happens in evolution. And to have all that happen, you need to have a pretty unchanging world, I guess you'd say.
And apart from like a couple of major events that everybody knows about, like the comets that took out the dinosaurs.
That's what evolutionists would say. Yeah. Not the flood.
Yeah. A comet. Yeah.
I don't know if it was all the faucets. Yeah. And not buried based on the timeline.
Yeah. Okay. Anyway.
So, so to say that the younger dry ass, which archaeology assumes like the archaeology as a even modern archaeologist would say that that's true. But if we say that's true, then you have to ask, well, that's not what evolutionary science assumes. They assume that it's, it's been this unchanging world for a long time.
That's how we, that's how they can say that dating methods are accurate because we can see at places like Mount St. Helens where there's this, where there's this cataclysmic event that happens in a region that totally throws off how the dating method works. Yeah.
And those rocks are dating back millions of years now.
And that's how we get that. Oh, this layer of rock was a million years old from those dating methods. And if, if we say that there are these cataclysmic events that happen even regionally, then we have to say that dating methods aren't accurate for that purpose.
Exactly. I think that's a good question. I think that kind of blows a hole in his, his assumptions, right? The global flood sent all these myths.
It would have produced the kind of dating that we see. Yeah.
You know, and the younger dry us is not even if it is this local flood, I mean, that, that only happened 12,000 years ago.
Apparently there's been here, you know, billions. So how many cataclysmic events have resulted in dating methods?
How many have resulted in carbon 14, carbon 12, you know, ratios being different and throwing off carbon dating or any of the, you know, the lower periodic table elements date the dating methods. And it just shows the inconsistencies.
Yeah, it shows the inconsistencies between the, between widely accepted archeology, which again, widely accepted archeology would assume the younger dry us that's widely accepted in the field.
So that's, that's people that aren't Graham Hancock that would call Graham Hancock, a pseudo archeologist. They would say that the younger dry has happened at the same time that are at the same time that scientists are saying that, oh, the world's always been unchanging.
Exactly. Yeah. So just kind of blows a hole in the wildly accepted narrative that, yeah, that, that these, these different fields are able to be reconciled.
Yeah.
When they clearly aren't. Yeah, that's interesting.
I think it's a good point. I think it's, it's something to contend with here. Oh, yeah.
Another point I want to bring up here. This is also showing the climate climate has been changing. That's just a part of the process of earth at all times.
Yeah. It's waxing and waning. It has a certain equilibrium to it.
There's a hotter time and there's a cooler time.
And, you know, our earth is not, it's not fragile. It's designed to do these things.
It's made to do this, just like our bodies made to kind of within a range. Some people, they're sitting temperature, they're homeostatic temperature or whatever.
It's going to be a little higher.
Some people's a little lower. There's a range. Earth is the same way.
There's a range in that.
And you can just look at that ice core samples. I mean, that's already talked about.
It's kind of funny that that's already like a widely accepted thing.
But the climate change alarmists are not on board with that. But yeah, that perfectly shows that and blows that out of the water.
So as we kind of wrap up here, a few of the things. Yeah, we kind of already touched on the inconsistency of between modern archaeology and science. Yeah, I think we hit most of that.
Yeah, I think so. So yeah, you know, this is our critique of this Graham Hancock's ancient apocalypse. You can find it on Netflix.
It was very, very interesting.
I think you'll walk away as a Christian being encouraged, I think, when you look at the data and you look at, whoa, he's actually taking seriously these myths. Because as Christians, you read these myths and you're going to say, yeah, there were giants.
Genesis 6 says there were giants.
And then the myths say there were huge humans called giants. Great.
There was a global flood. Great.
There's God-like beings that lead humanity astray.
That's also talked about in the Bible.
In Deuteronomy 32, God sets up the regions of the earth according to the sons of God, which are angels. So you can look at Daniel, I think chapter 11, where the archangel Michael goes and fights the prince of Persia.
It's one of the, he would have been the angel that was set over Persia. But it looks like from the biblical text that some of these angels that God has set over in Deuteronomy 32 said over the world that they can go rogue and the archangel Michael fights him. So that seems to be happening in these stories.
We have angelic-like beings coming and giving humanity knowledge.
That also happens in the book of Enoch. We have the Watchers coming down and giving humanity knowledge on cosmetics and how to make women beautiful and fake and how to use technology and stuff.
So the book of Enoch is extra biblical. It is quoted in Jude, but it's not canon. But I think it might actually have some pretty accurate history.
I would treat it as history that you can take with a grain of salt. Not canonized scripture, but the Jews did always read it along with the Apocrypha. And it was found with the Dead Sea Scrolls.
So the book of Enoch is pretty important, I think.
But even apart from the book of Enoch, you can see in the book of Daniel and Deuteronomy that there are angelic beings that come to humanity to give them knowledge, extra knowledge. And we have that happening all throughout these mythological stories, angelic beings, giants, global flood, a culture that all has the same kind of architecture, which is coming back to Babel.
Babel was where the Ziggurat kind of started. And then we have all these other cultures having Ziggurat and temples and pyramids. And then the serpent symbology is everywhere.
You have all these pagan devil-worshipping societies always depicting serpents.
It was in Malta. It was in Ohio.
It was in Gobekli Tepe in Turkey. So all over the world we have symbology of the serpent.
Why is that important? Well, the serpent is what led Adam and Eve astray.
He's crying around like a warring lion, the dragon. He wants to destroy humanity.
That's why he comes to humanity and leads them astray.
So we have a lot, I think, of biblical data. You walk away seeing all these myths and the way he portrays it as, whoa, the Bible gives me an accurate description of human history.
I love it.
So I walked away encouraged. I guess, let me summarize here, important points. And then Andy, you close us out with any last thoughts you got.
So important points we think you can extract from Graham Hancock, taking the mythology seriously, presupposing that humans were advanced in the past. We should under biblical worldview. We can look at the similarities between ancient cultures, like we just said, and you can presuppose ancient catastrophe through flood, heavenly beings exist in giant swapia, just like we just talked about.
Those are the main points we think you can walk away with from watching that as a Christian and still maintain your Christian allegiance to God's word. So Andy, any last thoughts, I guess, before we wrap up here? No, very interesting. I would agree.
I want to wrap up with a verse from 1 Timothy 1, a couple verses here, that I think are important because as interesting as these discussions are, I think it's important to say,
ultimately, we have to believe the Bible first. And while we might disagree about Graham Hancock, and whether or not he's pseudo-archaeologist or how much of these were created before or after the flood, how much of our timeline you agree with. I think it's important to remember this warning from Paul in 1 Timothy when he says in again, chapter 1 verse 3, "As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus so that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine, nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith." So I think it's just important to remember that as we're thinking through what happened, how exactly did these events and these buildings fit in with the Bible.
Ultimately, the story in the Bible is the most important. There's a reason why creation in these events only took, what, like 11 chapters in Genesis? Yeah, all of that's 11. Yeah, it's not the important part of the Bible.
It's not the main part of our story. And the main part of our story is focus on God and glorifying Him and Christ.
There's a reason why it was hit 2,000 years ago is when our world, I mean, we reset its calendar.
We reset our calendar around a single person, the most important person in history.
And that's what's important is the gospel. And again, whether or not the world was created 12,000 years ago, 13,000 years ago, whether it was created 5,000 years ago.
I mean, ultimately, we have to remember that the Bible is true, the gospel is true, and Christ is most important. Yeah, that's good. Let's end right there.
So thanks for listening, guys. Appreciate your attention through this longer episode.
But it was, I think it was it was needy, needy to talk about and just want to interact more with culture.
That's what I'm trying to do with this podcast is apply the Christian worldview to all of life, all of Christ for all of life. So watch a watch a series on Netflix. I'm gonna apply.
I'm gonna apply God's word to that. That's what I'm gonna do as a Christian.
So hopefully you're you're benefiting from these kind of conversations that you can engage in this exact same kind of activity on your own.
You know, you don't need Andy or I to make, you know, help you think through these things. You can have God's word as your sure and steady anchor and foundation to everything that you encounter in the world. So go into the world confident that you can apply God's word to that and have an answer to those that would ask you for a hope that's within you, you know, with gentleness and respect.
So, yeah, continue to do that friends. Hope that you are encouraged by this episode. You can reach me at for the King podcast at gmail.com. If you want to interact with anything I talked about.
And if you want to, I guess ask Andy anything specifically, you know, reach me. I'll get to him. So if you want to send an email or anything and you can always check out what I'm doing at for the King pod on gab or Twitter.
It's my social media outlets for the podcast. So appreciate you guys listening to the King of the ages, immortal, invisible, the only God, the honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.
Sole day. Oh, more. Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh,
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
[BLANK_AUDIO]

More on OpenTheo

Can Historians Prove that Jesus Rose from the Dead? Licona vs. Ehrman
Can Historians Prove that Jesus Rose from the Dead? Licona vs. Ehrman
Risen Jesus
May 7, 2025
In this episode, Dr. Mike Licona and Dr. Bart Ehrman face off for the second time on whether historians can prove the resurrection. Dr. Ehrman says no
What Evidence Can I Give for Objective Morality?
What Evidence Can I Give for Objective Morality?
#STRask
June 23, 2025
Questions about how to respond to someone who’s asking for evidence for objective morality, what to say to atheists who counter the moral argument for
Can a Deceased Person’s Soul Live On in the Recipient of His Heart?
Can a Deceased Person’s Soul Live On in the Recipient of His Heart?
#STRask
May 12, 2025
Questions about whether a deceased person’s soul can live on in the recipient of his heart, whether 1 Corinthians 15:44 confirms that babies in the wo
What Would You Say to Someone Who Believes in “Healing Frequencies”?
What Would You Say to Someone Who Believes in “Healing Frequencies”?
#STRask
May 8, 2025
Questions about what to say to someone who believes in “healing frequencies” in fabrics and music, whether Christians should use Oriental medicine tha
Is It Wrong to Feel Satisfaction at the Thought of Some Atheists Being Humbled Before Christ?
Is It Wrong to Feel Satisfaction at the Thought of Some Atheists Being Humbled Before Christ?
#STRask
June 9, 2025
Questions about whether it’s wrong to feel a sense of satisfaction at the thought of some atheists being humbled before Christ when their time comes,
The Resurrection: A Matter of History or Faith? Licona and Pagels on the Ron Isana Show
The Resurrection: A Matter of History or Faith? Licona and Pagels on the Ron Isana Show
Risen Jesus
July 2, 2025
In this episode, we have a 2005 appearance of Dr. Mike Licona on the Ron Isana Show, where he defends the historicity of the bodily resurrection of Je
More on the Midwest and Midlife with Kevin, Collin, and Justin
More on the Midwest and Midlife with Kevin, Collin, and Justin
Life and Books and Everything
May 19, 2025
The triumvirate comes back together to wrap up another season of LBE. Along with the obligatory sports chatter, the three guys talk at length about th
Is There a Reference Guide to Teach Me the Vocabulary of Apologetics?
Is There a Reference Guide to Teach Me the Vocabulary of Apologetics?
#STRask
May 1, 2025
Questions about a resource for learning the vocabulary of apologetics, whether to pursue a PhD or another master’s degree, whether to earn a degree in
Jay Richards: Economics, Gender Ideology and MAHA
Jay Richards: Economics, Gender Ideology and MAHA
Knight & Rose Show
April 19, 2025
Wintery Knight and Desert Rose welcome Heritage Foundation policy expert Dr. Jay Richards to discuss policy and culture. Jay explains how economic fre
Licona and Martin Talk about the Physical Resurrection of Jesus
Licona and Martin Talk about the Physical Resurrection of Jesus
Risen Jesus
May 21, 2025
In today’s episode, we have a Religion Soup dialogue from Acadia Divinity College between Dr. Mike Licona and Dr. Dale Martin on whether Jesus physica
No One Wrote About Jesus During His Lifetime
No One Wrote About Jesus During His Lifetime
#STRask
July 14, 2025
Questions about how to respond to the concern that no one wrote about Jesus during his lifetime, why scholars say Jesus was born in AD 5–6 rather than
Licona vs. Fales: A Debate in 4 Parts – Part Two: Did Jesus Rise from the Dead?
Licona vs. Fales: A Debate in 4 Parts – Part Two: Did Jesus Rise from the Dead?
Risen Jesus
June 4, 2025
The following episode is part two of the debate between atheist philosopher Dr. Evan Fales and Dr. Mike Licona in 2014 at the University of St. Thoman
An Ex-Christian Disputes Jesus' Physical Resurrection: Licona vs. Barker - Part 2
An Ex-Christian Disputes Jesus' Physical Resurrection: Licona vs. Barker - Part 2
Risen Jesus
July 16, 2025
In this episode , we have Dr. Mike Licona's first-ever debate. In 2003, Licona sparred with Dan Barker at the University of Wisonsin-Madison. Once a C
Nicene Orthodoxy with Blair Smith
Nicene Orthodoxy with Blair Smith
Life and Books and Everything
April 28, 2025
Kevin welcomes his good friend—neighbor, church colleague, and seminary colleague (soon to be boss!)—Blair Smith to the podcast. As a systematic theol
What Would Be the Point of Getting Baptized After All This Time?
What Would Be the Point of Getting Baptized After All This Time?
#STRask
May 22, 2025
Questions about the point of getting baptized after being a Christian for over 60 years, the difference between a short prayer and an eloquent one, an