Kerby Anderson
When was the last time you had a meaningful conversation? That is a question Sean McDowell and Tim Muehlhoff ask in their new book, End the Stalemate: Move Past Cancel Culture to Meaningful Conversations.
We live in a cancel culture. But that doesn’t mean we must either conform or remain silent. Nearly a third of people report they have stopped talking to a friend or family member due to a disagreement. And nearly two-thirds of people say they stay quiet about their beliefs due to the fear of offending others. We can bring light to the darkness. We can be a beacon of sanity that promotes meaningful conversations.
Sean was on my radio program to talk about the book. The first five chapters helped in “setting the stage.” How did we get to this place? He explained that it has been a “perfect storm” of factors: (1) people are hurting, (2) there is a clash of worldviews, (3) opinions are openly expressed on social media, and (4) there is a communication breakdown. That is why we are angry and divided.
The authors then provide six chapters with “practical tips for engaging others.” We learn how to engage explosive issues. We can also create connection and emotional awareness. There are helpful suggestions on how to engage in perspective-taking, how to structure a conversation, and how to speak the truth in love, from a biblical understanding.
There is also a helpful section on presenting the other side using strawman and steelman arguments. A strawman argument comes from paraphrasing an argument in the weakest possible way. A steelman argument is to consider the best and strongest argument. If we wish to have a meaningful dialogue, we shouldn’t minimize the other person’s opinion and perspective.
We need to apply the lessons in this book so we can end this stalemate.

Kerby Anderson
Dr. Casey Luskin (Discovery Institute) was in my studio recently to talk about evolution’s failed predictions. I was able to find an article he wrote in the past about “Design vs. Descent: A Context of Predictions,” which you might want to read to get a fuller explanation.
He begins with a quote from the famous philosopher of science Karl Popper, who wrote that all scientific theories must be falsifiable. Certainly, a scientific theory that is taught in the public schools should have empirical evidence and thus be falsifiable.
Casey Luskin discussed four lines of evidence. Here are two of them.
One line of evidence is biochemical complexity. A prediction of descent would be that there would be few machine-like biologically complex structures in the cell. A prediction from design would be that we should find machine-like irreducibly complex structures that cannot be easily explained by a gradual evolutionary process. He described such irreducibly complex structures and then argued that the best theory to explain the data is design.
Another line of evidence is biochemical functionality. The prediction of descent would be that the genetic code in living creatures would contain a significant amount of genetic baggage. This would be “junk DNA” that is left over from failed genetic adaptations. The prediction of design would be that the genetic code is not full of functionless “junk DNA.”
As we have increased our knowledge of genetics, we have discovered that the so-called “junk DNA” has an important function within the cell. He argues that this functioning DNA would be expected or explained under a design paradigm.
If we look at the predictions and the scientific data, we discover that design is a better explaining theory than descent.