So, just looking at a residue curve map, you can synthesize the column sequence. That may not be possible for this particular azeotrope or other RCM. You try it out. Can I use A here as a trainer to break this azeotrope?  The boundary is linear. So, what I am trying to tell you is RCM, the sides. Now, A, B, C are just the names. What does it mean? If I say A and B, say ethanol water azeotrope, I identify some component B which gives you this RCM, then I say that it is possible to separate it. But then if I identify, suppose again in this case, B and C are ethanol water. B and C are ethanol water because minimum boiling azeotrope. Now, I identify a component A which gives you the RCM for the terminal system like this. In that case, I say that it is not possible to design a column sequence. So, that is how RCM would help you to synthesize a column sequence. This case is very typical case. Now, we are going to learn this. In this case, you have this as azeotropic composition. This is going to be your feed. And the question is, can I use C to break this azeotrope? I can follow same method and see whether I can get A and B in pure form. Now, look at this RCM. A is stable load or unstable load or saddle. B is stable load or unstable load or saddle. So, very typical, very peculiar case I would say where A and B are saddles and I want them in pure form. Now, whatever we have learned so far, saddle coming at top or bottom, was it possible? In any case, we have looked at, see either you get stable point at the bottom or unstable point at the top. At a time, both are not possible because material balance should be valid. See even ideal system, this is your unstable, this is your stable and this is your feed. At a time, you can get this at the bottom or get this at the top. But not at a time, it is not possible to get this at the top and get this at the bottom. It is not possible to design a columns. You have to get unstable load at top and stable load at the bottom. Why? Material balance should be satisfied because your feed is somewhere here. Once you say that I have this as a bottom composition, my top composition should be here on this line. Whereas, once I say this is my top composition, then the bottom composition should be on that line. So, at a time, you cannot get these two as end compositions. Where will your intermediate component go? So, one column is not possible to give. It is not possible to get these two as end compositions in one column. So, let us look at this case now. Extractor distillation, very important. Many commercial applications as I said ethanol water separation, then you have acetone methanol separation using water as entrainer, butadiene extraction from C4 stream using acetone atrial as an entrainer. Many examples. This is your RCM, A, B, C. This is my feed, case 3. I gave you one example just before this. We solved it in fact and designed or synthesized a column sequence. Now, can I use the same method or methodology rather to break this feed and get A and B in pure form? A, B mixture, aziotrope. Am I adding C? The resultant would be, this is my overall feed. This is my overall feed. What is the next step? To look for, suppose this goes to the column, look for either stable node or unstable node which will come out at the top or bottom. Now, in this diagram stable or unstable node. Now, which is the stable node? C. Am I interested in C? I am not interested in C. So, what is the use? I cannot, there is no point in separating C. Anyway, I am adding C in pure form. What is the use to say like no point in separating C? So, forget that. What is the unstable node? A is unstable. A is saddle. B is unstable. Yeah, D. You are calling this as D. Fine. So, the feed itself is unstable. What is the point in separating feed? Very peculiar case where if I just go for simple distillation and look for unstable or stable nodes, I will end up separating C which I am adding here. Otherwise, I will end up separating A, B, aziotrope. So, there is no, as such there is no point doing this. So, this RCM does not allow me to separate or break this aziotrope using this as an entrainer in a simple distillation column. Now, it is very important, simple distillation column. So, this is not possible. This is not possible, but they do it commercially. Ethanol water separation using ethylene glycol is a very well known process. I gave you many examples. Methanol acetone using water as an entrainer is very well known. So, all these RCMs are like this. Methanol, acetone, water. Ethanol, water, ethylene glycol, right? Butene, butadiene, acetone nitride. Yeah, acetone chloroform water. There is a boundary, there are some curved boundaries and all. Anyway, but same, same RCM. They do it commercially. So, what is going wrong now? Whatever we have learned so far, I am not able to extend it or apply it to commercially important system or already practiced. So, there is some difference, the way they do it and the way we are doing it here, right? So, let us try and understand that. So, the simple distillation column is not able to do it. That means, I need to modify my column. Now, what is simple distillation column? Simple distillation column is a feed going in and I have two products, top and bottom. This is a simple distillation column, a single feed and top product, bottom product. That is my simple distillation column and simple distillation column cannot do this. That means, what they are doing commercially is something different from a simple distillation column. What is that difference? I am interested in A and B. I am interested in A and B, right? This is going to be my resultant composition. Now, why I am not able to separate A and B because A and B are saddles here. They are saddles here and I cannot withdraw a saddle composition from top and bottom in a normal simple distillation column. That is the main reason I am not able to separate A and B in pure form is simple distillation column, right?  Let us assume that I am removing pure A from the top. The column profile as I go from top to bottom will move in which direction I am starting from this. This is my X D, okay?  This is my X D. Which direction will I move when I go to the bottom in this direction or in this direction towards C because I will follow the residue curve, right? Rectifying section follows the residue curve. So, I will move in this direction, right? This is my rectifying section profile. It looks a bit different from what we have learned before. Now, it goes this way because the RCM is different here, right? I have to follow the RCM, okay, for a rectifying section profile, okay? So, it is going to follow the RCM. Now, this is my overall speed. This is my top composition. The bottom composition would be here, right? Okay? Straight line, leave a rule. Now, this is my bottom composition. If I go from bottom to top, which direction will I go? This or this? Towards B or C? C? Bottom to top. Bottom to top. I will have to go in the direction of RCM or opposite to RCM. Bottom to top. Stripping section. Opposite, right? Opposite. So, RCM direction is this. Stripping section would be this. And anywhere this is saddle, okay? So, you are going to see the same behavior as we have seen before, at least for stripping section, right? It is going to go in opposite direction and then we will fall down because we have saddle here, like what you had in the case of ideal system, right? A, B, C where B was saddle, right? So, this is your stripping section profile. This is your rectifying section profile. Is there any scope for making them intersect? This is going in this direction. This is going in this direction. Even if I increase the reflex ratio, intersection will not be possible. See, in normal case, in ideal system, your rectifying profile is like this. Your stripping section profile is like this. So, I increase the reflex ratio. I can cross. I can intersect, right? In this case, though your stripping section profile is like this, rectifying is moving in a different direction. Or rather its pattern is different, okay? And that is the reason, since rectifying section is not following this particular pattern, the intersection is difficult and that is why I do not get a feasible simple distillation column. So, what is the solution? The solution is to make them intersect somehow. Now, if you know the configuration used for extractive distillation, it is not like this. It is not like this. It is not like a simple distillation column. You remember the configuration? Where do you give the solvent? Solvent is the internal or the external component. Do you have a combined feed? Above the feed. It is very important, right? The solvent, this is solvent, external component. In this case, it is C. It is not mixed with your feed. It is given somewhere at the top, okay? So, this is your C and this is your A, B mixture, right? That is your extractive distillation configuration. Now, I do not call this as simple column. Why? Because it has multiple feeds, right? It has two feeds, right? It has two feeds. So, when you have two feeds, things are different. You have how many sections you have now? In the column, you have three sections. With a single feed, you have two sections, rectifying stripping, okay? If you have multiple feeds or two feeds, you have rectifying section. You have stripping section, you have stripping and more importantly, an additional section which I call it as middle section, right? Okay? So, I have introduced one section in the column and this section will have different geometric property. That means, rectifying section, equation is what? This equation is, you know it, right? y n plus 1 i is equal to r by r plus 1, x n i plus x d i by r plus 1, right? This equation, which is true for rectifying section will not be same as that for the middle section, okay? Because middle section, again, you have to do material balance, okay? How do I get this equation by doing some material balance, no? I showed you the boundary at which you take the material balance and you derive this particular equation. This equation will change for middle section profile, right? Because you have some other feed also coming in, okay? If you take the boundary, it is like this, this boundary I have to take for material balance, okay? And its geometric property would be different. It will not only depend on the flux ratio, but will depend on how much feed I am giving, okay? Right? And that middle section, that middle section is responsible for joining these two profiles or making them intersect or bringing a continuity. So, if you start from x d, okay? You can go to x b this way.  So, that is how we explain, right? So, even if one residue curve does not go from this to this region, I can introduce a middle section, I can have a double feed column and make these two profiles intersect. Because the middle section has no relation with residue curve. Rectifying section has, stripping section has, but if you write down the material balance for middle section, it has a different property. It does not follow reflux ratio under extreme conditions or does not follow residue curve under extreme conditions, okay? So, this is what I have explained just now, extractive distillation. If you just look at the RCM, RCM does not have boundaries because you have one pair, unstable and stable, okay? However, residue curves indicate that the profiles do not intersect. Just now we have seen the profiles. This is your rectifying section profile. This is your stripping section profile. Oh, it should be stripping, okay? This is your stripping section profile and this is your rectifying section profile. Just go by residue curves, okay? They do not intersect. There is no possibility of them intersecting. A double wave column is necessary to bring them together. That means, I introduce a middle section, okay? To bring these two together, so that the middle section profile behaves like this, okay? And I have an intersection. I have continuity. If I start from Xd, I will go to Xb, which is desired, okay? The middle section of column has different geometric properties than the RCMs. That is what I told you. So, that it does not follow RCM. It goes, it is much different, okay? Whereas, rectifying section profile is a relationship between residue curve and rectifying section profile. And even stripping section, it goes opposite. So, I know from residue curve, I can just get some idea about how the stripping section and rectifying section would behave, but not the middle section. Middle section is totally different, okay? You can do this exercise by taking material balance, okay? For any stage in the middle section, okay? Now, that is what I said. There is a mistake there. Instead of rectifying section, it should be, so this is your solvent. So, remember, extracted distillation cannot be performed with this single field. You have double field, okay? The solvent is high boiling, right? And you have a middle section. So, the moment you see this residue curve map, okay? You should say, okay, I will have this configuration. This is the typical behavior of this residue curve map. There is a connection between these two. That is what I am trying to say. Once you have this, I can immediately say that I can have an extracted distillation column with this configuration, which will give me this saddle as the end composition, okay? Right? So, in this case, the bottom composition would be, so this is your overall feed. So, overall feed, though I am not mixing them and giving them as a single feed to the column, the overall feed is still there, okay? Virtually, it would be there for material balance, right? So, this is your overall feed. This is your azeotrop. This is your C. So, the overall feed would lie on the line joining azeotrop and C. So, this is your overall feed, okay? Resultant feed, right? And that is going to go to the column. So, in the column, I will take D or rather A in pure form, okay? On the top, right? The bottom would be W, okay? So, I have separated this component in pure form. What is the next step? This comes at the bottom. I am interested in A and B both. I am interested in A and B both. So, this will be going to another column, right? This composition will go to another column, right? What will I get in that column? The top composition would be? Top will be? B. And bottom will be? C. So, then I will recycle C, which is nothing but a solvent, right? So, in ethanol water system, you have ethylene glycol, ethanol water, right? Ethylene glycol will take out water, okay? So, at the top I will remove ethanol, right? Bottom will have ethylene glycol and water. This will go to another column. I will separate ethylene glycol from water. I will get ethylene glycol here. That is your C, okay? And water here. And this ethylene glycol will be recycled back, okay? And this is my RCM, ethanol water. This is my azeotrop. This is my ethylene glycol, complex distillation, okay? And same is true with methanol acetone or chloroform acetone. So, water will be here instead of ethylene glycol. This is extractive distillation. And then how to calculate number of stages? Same method. Now in this case, now the things are bit different, okay? In this case, things are bit different. This is a simple column, okay? But this is a double fin column and here we need to be very careful because how much ethylene glycol you will add, okay? That is that question I have not yet answered, okay? How much ethylene glycol you will add and where will you add it in this column? I said, okay, towards the top means where, right? So, that anyway we have seen in the RCM, okay? We have seen that in the RCM where to add. But how much to add? Okay, there is some limit. It is like reflux ratio. There is a minimum reflux ratio, right? We operate the column at the reflux ratio higher than the minimum reflux ratio. Similarly, in this case, there will be some minimum solvent rate, okay? Or in other words, there will be something called as feed ratio. That means the solvent rate, flow rate divided by the feed flow rate. There are two feeds, no? One is solvent feed and the actual azeotropic feed, okay? This is azeotropic. So, as I said, like in this particular case, you have a typical residue curve map and this is azeotrope. I want to break it. Can I use C to break it? The answer is yes. But you cannot use a simple distillation column. You have to use a double-fit distillation column like this. And you have to feed solvent which is the least volatile component or highest boiling component at the top somewhere, okay? Now, the question is where to put it, okay? Now, this particular diagram would help you telling where to put it. Now, I can count number of stages 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. And at this particular stage, okay, if I add my solvent, then this helps me to connect these two, right? So, position-wise, it is not a problem. But how much to feed, okay? That means what should be the flow rate of solvent or what should be the ratio of solvent flow rate to the azeotropole actual feed flow rate, okay? So, for that, as I said before, like minimum reflux ratio, there is a limit on this rate as well. So, it is not that you can feed as much as you want, okay? There is a maximum limit and there is a minimum limit as well, okay? So, let us see how it works. And before that, there are some tips, okay? There are some features of extractive distillation systems. Along with reflux ratio, extractive distillation is also associated with an additional parameter that is feed-ref ratio, okay? This is the important decision which decides the amount of solvent to be fed, right? For a given feed ratio, there is a maximum limit on the reflux ratio. This is a very peculiar characteristic of extractive distillation. This is a maximum limit on reflux ratio. So, there is a minimum reflux ratio. See, for every distillation, there is a minimum reflux ratio. But for extractive distillation, for a given feed ratio, there is a maximum limit on reflux ratio as well. So, you have a range of reflux ratio in which you can operate. You cannot go beyond a particular range of reflux ratio. Hence, there is a region of FR and RR, that is feed ratio and reflux ratio, in which extractive distillation is feasible. So, region, okay? Our range. The region is determined by the geometric properties of the column profile. We will see that in the next slide, okay? Now, the choice of solvent is dictated by RCM and practical considerations, okay? I have not talked about practical considerations like it should not be corrosive and should be cheaply available and all that, okay? Any textbook on extractive distillation, say, TREBAL and book on mass transfer talks about it, okay? So, that is important. But at the same time, okay? I cannot use any solvent, okay? I should use a solvent which gives me this RCM, okay? That is important. So, thermodynamics is given by RCM. And whether it is thermodynamically feasible to do extractive distillation with that particular solvent, okay? It should be decided based on RCM. Now, this is something I had told you before. In the normal column, you have two sections. In extractive distillation, you have three sections. If you want to get the trajectory equation or operating line equation, right? Under constant molar overflow assumption, I am not considering energy balance. What do I do? In the rectifying section, okay? I consider a stage, right? And then you have these two streams crossing this stage. I take this boundary, right? And I write material balance. That is a normal method, okay? That equation of y is equal to r by r plus 1, okay? Xn and whatever equation you have, okay? So, that comes by this material balance. And that is still valid here. That is still valid here, okay? Whereas for stripping section, you have this boundary, okay? Again, you get one equation in terms of s by s plus 1. That is still valid here. But then for middle section, for middle section, you consider a plate, right? And take the boundary like this or you can have boundary like this, okay? And then take material balance and you will have a corresponding equation. And that equation is different geometrically compared to rectifying section line and stripping section line. And under extreme conditions, you will see that it does not boil down to residue curve. That is why, okay? Its nature on the residue curve or rather that ternary diagram we have seen is totally different. It does not follow residue curve at all, right? So, I am not going to derive that equation and talk much about it. You can do it on your own. You can see that it is different. But important point is, look at this line. The middle section balance would involve not only reflux ratio but feed ratio as well. Here in this case, you have only reflux ratio. Here in this case, you have only reboil ratio. Whereas, in this case, you have both FR and RR, okay? So, now I will just go back. This is your middle section line, okay? You have a feed pinch in stripping section, right? As you go on increasing the number of stages, after infinite stages, you will get a pinch for stripping section. You have a feed pinch in rectifying section sometimes, okay? If you go on doing that calculation for infinite stages, you get a feed pinch here. Similarly, for the middle section also, if you go on increasing the number of stages, it is quite possible that you will realize a pinch, okay? Now, this feed pinch in rectifying and stripping section would depend on what? In which, on which parameter the feed pinch depends, it changes its position, right? When that intersection, that is fine but which parameter? Reflux ratio, right? It depends on reflux ratio. So, this feed pinch would depend on reflux ratio. This would depend on the reflux ratio, right? Now, the feed pinch or the pinch in middle section would depend on? Yeah, both. Reflux ratio and feed ratio. Yeah, that is right. L by V, right? But that L by V will be the function of both feed ratio and reflux ratio, right? So, for a given feed ratio, what is the reflux ratio? That will determine the pinch position here, okay? So, the feasibility depends on both FR and RR, okay? Right? This is a typical behavior we see, like if you just see the feasibility with respect to FR and RR, okay? Now, this is your reflux ratio. I have kept FR constant, that is feed ratio constant. Now, you have a minimum reflux ratio. It is quite some similar to what you see in normal columns and gone operating at higher reflux ratio, calculate number of stages. At this particular reflux ratio, what happens is number of stages would increase, okay? In a normal column, what happens? As you go on increasing reflux ratio, it is good, okay? At infinite reflux ratio, you get minimum number of stages. Whereas in this case, after certain reflux ratio, okay, you get higher number of stages, okay? Why? Because your FR is constant. Now, this particular parameter, okay, is also important. What happens is if you go back to your RCM, the feed pinch here, okay? For a given FR, if you go on increasing reflux ratio, this will move inside and the intersection would be difficult, okay? Right? So, for a given FR, for large values of reflux ratio, this feed pinch will move but this will go inside, okay? And intersection becomes difficult. That is the way the middle section behaves, okay? Why it behaves in all, okay? We can leave it, okay, right now. We can look at the equation and see, right? But then, for large reflux ratio, what happens is you have the feed pinch for the middle section going inside and that is why your number of stages would increase, right? And after certain reflux ratio, the intersection is not possible. So, even if you are rectifying section feed pinch moves, middle section is away from it, right? And then the intersection is difficult. That is a peculiar behavior of the extractive distillation columns where do not be another impression that you go on increasing reflux ratio and you get better and better performance like normal columns, right? Beyond particular reflux ratio, feasibility becomes an issue, okay? It is not feasible beyond this particular reflux ratio, okay? Because you have kept FR constant. On the other hand, if I plot FR versus RR, that is feed ratio versus reflux ratio, this is the behavior I see. That means, for any FR, I have a minimum reflux ratio, right? I have a maximum reflux ratio. So, for any FR, I have a minimum reflux ratio, I have a maximum reflux ratio, right? And I should operate in between these two, right? If I go on increasing FR, this range expands. There is not much change in the minimum reflux ratio, but maximum reflux ratio is quite sensitive to FR, okay? And you can very well understand that because the maximum reflux ratio is decided by the pinch in the middle section and middle section would have FR in it, right? The equation will have the feed ratio in it. That is why this is quite sensitive to change in FR, whereas R min does not change much with FR, okay? And you get this particular region and you have to operate your extractive distillation column in this particular region. In this particular region, only the distillation is feasible or extractive distillation is feasible, right? In normal distillation column, I have R min and beyond R min, I can operate at any reflux ratio and operation is feasible. But in extractive distillation, you have something called as maximum reflux ratio, okay? You should be aware of that. And there is one value of FR below which irrespective of whatever value of reflux ratio you have, okay? You do not get feasible design, okay? So, there is a minimum value for FR as well, like minimum value of reflux ratio, you have minimum value for feed ratio as well, okay? So, method to design extractive distillation column. The first step is, of course, you should have VLE, okay? But choose a solvent such that the RCM, when I say RCM, that means for RCM, I need to have VLE, right? The RCM is that of extractive distillation. What does it mean? It should be like the RCM I showed you, okay? It is a typical RCM for extractive distillation, okay? Where you have AB saddle and C is the least volatile stable point, okay? Determine the feasible region for FR and RR. So, this region is determined, okay? By doing those calculations, finding out those pinch points. Reflux ratio is normally 1.3 to 1.5 times minimum reflux ratio. FR is two times, that is again the thumb rule, okay? Two times the minimum FR. This is your minimum FR, okay? So, you are somewhere here, okay? Or here rather. So, that is the value of FR and RR, you should operate it at. Thumb rule, okay? Then determine number of stages. Same, you just count number of stages the way we did before, okay? Once you have number of stages, go for rigorous simulation. That is what we have been saying, okay? Because all this exercise is the conceptual design exercise, okay? That helps you to do rigorous simulations later. So, whatever assumptions we are making, the main assumption is not considering the energy balance. I am not considering energy balance here at all, okay? I am writing the equation R by R plus 1, right? I can do that only when you have constant molar overflow assumption, right? And I am not considering that while doing all these calculations. That means, whatever number of stages I am going to get here, that is an approximate number, okay? This is not the real number. I have to do rigorous simulations later to fine tune my design, okay? So, the last step is always rigorous simulation and then you can do optimization control and other things, okay? Which are most of the times independent of what you do here, okay? So, next case is azeotropic distillation, yeah? So, if I see like in that is observation like, see when you have minimum reflux ratio, if you operate the column exactly at minimum reflux ratio, then in a normal case, then your number of stages would go up, right? You have almost infinite stages, okay? So, your equipment cost is very high, right? If you are operating very close to minimum reflux ratio, that is, yeah, but that is what they observed actually, okay? This is basically the observation based on the energy requirement, okay? So, if you have FR exactly at a minimum FR and reflux ratio just 1.3 to 1.5 times, okay? Still your column will work, okay? But then the number of stages is the middle section, okay? Which are not just dependent on reflux ratio, they are dependent on FR as well, okay? Would be slightly higher, okay? So, the equipment that optimization, okay? For the cost, capital cost and energy cost, you perform for this FR and RR values, okay? Because this is a multi-discount variable problem. It is not just one DCN variable like normal distillation, right? So, you get normally you get 2 times FR minimum and 1.3 to 1.5 times RR minimum, okay? That is your point at which you normally operate. But that is, that is why I said, okay? You have at this point, this particular value of RR and FR and you determine number of stages, you are going to perform simulations and further optimization also is the next step, right? Okay? So, this is again an assumption. This is just an empirical number, okay? And you can find in this later on after doing simulation. So, the, right?


Diesel Lord of the weasels Good morning. Hey man Chevy McFluff How are you doing today? Cool that looks great Speechless I know it's another new day sometimes makes me speechless too all of the hope and the promise of a new day So exciting So exciting morning everybody Time to get up and Adam Commander Mama our sunbathing wiener and take a break from the tanning to come say good morning Boy Good morning Good morning. Good morning. You're looking great. I'm showered When did we get frosty flakes?  She goes back home. We go chauffeur Josh today. So she's working a short shift It's about 1130. It's 11 quarter after 11 right now. I got to pick her up at four Mostly because the terrain right now the battery isn't doing so good So we're getting that looked at on Tuesday, which is tomorrow today since I'm not working. I'll play mr. Schofer and The afternoon I'm gonna get the Terrain running so that we can take that here to pick her up and at least get the battery and the vehicle moving today And then I'll put it on a triple charge overnight so that in the morning when I'm at work She can start it up easily and Bring it in to get all fixed up. We're getting the multi-point inspection. I believe on it Making sure that everything not just the battery blockator, but everything else is also in good work in order Like to make sure the vehicles are running well all the time. I want them to last a long time Be nice for this truck want to have it for like another 15 years maybe I don't know It does everything I need it to so As long as I keep it running good and looking good and you know Keep up with that little rust that's showing up on my rear fender. Well, it's the only place where it's rusting right now And I got to get that looked at this summer Keep up with stuff like that and all the little things fix them before they become big things Should last a long time I don't want to be behind the big truck because I'm not in a big truck totally get it But at least he's in the right lane See this way all the small cars can get past them when the light turns green What bothers me is when two trucks line up side-by-side like this at a traffic light And let's say if it's sort of in town like this here and that truck was making a left turn soon Yeah, it's not like a set rule that you got to be in the right lane But if possible you try to line up the trucks on one side and all the cars on the left so that they can get going because Most of these cars well, it's Sunday today when I'm filming this pardon me Not Sunday Monday a long weekend So not a lot of these people have anywhere to be or anywhere to go but on a weekday, you know Everyone's in a rush to get nowhere Let me just try to let them try to stay out of their way Is that a Yaris? That's a Yaris Bravo Toyota that looks a lot better than they used to Remember when the Yaris was like the ugliest car on the road you could spot them a mile away.  I like that. We're gonna come up beside it if we can It's a little blue car in that lane there I don't know if I'm gonna be able to get beside it because no one else here is in A hurry right now. Like I said, no one's in a hurry today. They did a good job remodeling that it actually looks like a decent vehicle I used to always make funny Yaris is now I can't do that anymore Then again, I make fun of everything I make fun of everything equally including myself all the time Aha, we are gonna come up beside it See they're really small so they'd be really good on gas This blue thing here on the left much better design Pull up things tiny though I've got a little baby in the back seat too Personally, I'd be a little nervous having a baby in such a tiny little car like that with like Big full-size pickup trucks and big semi trucks on the same road as me I think I was talking about this the other day right now I like to drive one of the bigger vehicles on the road. It's safer. You know, I get into an accident I'll be just fine for the most part unless if it's like really really bad But if you're in a tiny car is lose lose like tiny car like that little yaris or a smart car or one of those Chevy What are they called sparks? Spitting all over the place here should be wearing my mask That's why you got to wear your mask. I don't spit on people when you're talking like I do but uh If I was in a tiny little car like that uh on the road, you know It's a lose lose situation in that if you get into an accident you are the loser every single time We're hoping that you know if we have a more than one kid Maybe three kids in the future depending on how many we're able to have We need a bigger vehicle. I would definitely personally uh vouched for the the the Chevy Tahoe Or suburban something that's family friendly big four-wheel drive You need four-wheel drive here in the wintertime You never want to get stuck somewhere and get stranded with your family and with your kids in the vehicle So you need to have big four-wheel drive high ground clearance. You can get over all the snow Lots of storage space in the back and you're one of the bigger vehicles on the road So like I said, if you get into an accident The bigger the better the smaller guy always loses But that's just me Britt is still at work and she's getting home in about an hour hour and a half So I'm quickly vacuuming the house I've heard that this helps uh with the baby making We're hoping for a baby. So I was told if I do this It helps I guess we'll find out All right, everybody, we're gonna be headed out to the terrain right now and See if we can get the old girl started She's been on trickle charge for most of the night yesterday and all day today So I should keep the battery warm enough that it Should turn over and if it does that's a good sign Because my what I'm trying to avoid is I've got to go to work in the morning tomorrow I'm gonna be leaving the house around 7 a.m. Or so And Britt is going to be taking the terrain to her dad at GM service And we're gonna get the whole Vehicle looked over and it's gonna go into the shop there like I told you six point inspection I think it's a six point. I don't know how many point it is Lots of points can have the whole inspection the whole shish kebab is all gonna be going down So I want to make sure that she can start it when I'm at work because I can't just Quickly come home get the vehicle started for her. I gotta know what this trickle charge thing's gonna work Because the battery is very weak right now, but all we need to do is get the vehicle running so we can get it there That has to happen tomorrow when I'm not here. So Shall we? we'll quickly go and See if she'll start So like I said, we've had this charger on it trickle charging Okay, let's see what happens Guys ready moment of truth No problem at all Good that's a really good sign Good okay, so I'm gonna get the Heats the heats seated up the seats heated up here. We're gonna go pick her up in just a little bit


Alright, good morning everyone and welcome to this course PC212 on Christian Apologetics. Thank you all for connecting, joining and it's really good to have you all back after the long sound break. I know some people we have been in touch where it's good to reconnect after the break. So welcome back. I have turned the recording on so this entire lecture and also the next lecture will be recorded for the benefit of those who would like to go and listen to it. This recording will also be used on our e-learning portal. Recordings will be available both in the Google Classroom, in the Classwork section, as well as the e-learning portal for students who are studying on the e-learning portal. So welcome. Let's pray and pray together. Then we will get started today and look forward to joining with all of you this semester and growing together, interacting, learning with you. Okay, so I'm going to just request somebody to lead us in prayer. Who wants to pray? Who would like to pray? Just can open up. Okay, I'll pray first. Oh Dinesh, go ahead please. Thank you Father. Thank you. Thank you for this time. Thank you for this class. I know your purpose is your will is to attend these classes. I know for each one of them, each one of the students, you are making a will and opening those through many lectures like Pastor Hashish. I pray your will may be completed in our life as per the whatever ministry you have decided. Father, thank you, bless the whole class. Father, may your interpretation may not occur. May all the students be blessed in this teaching. Bless Pastor Hashish's health. Also, students health may or your will happen as per your will happen, Father. I plead you once again for protection for students, family, lecturer, this time, Father. I submit all the students, all the students and all the lecturers in your might hand, bless them, give them wisdom. Also, help us to grab the wisdom knowledge. In Jesus' mighty name, I pray. Amen. Amen. Amen. Thank you Dinesh. Thank you. Alright, welcome everyone. Welcome back. It's good to have you all back here in class and look forward to a great time. Alright, so we're going to get started with the introduction and then get into the course that we have before us on Christian apologetics. The PDF of the course overview PDF as well as the PDF for this first lecture has been put up in the coursework section in Google Classroom. So please download it and you can use it. I will also share it from my computer as we go along. And week by week we will release the PDFs to you for the lectures on a weekly basis or each time we get into a new chapter. So chapter by chapter will release the PDFs to you so you can download it and use it as we journey to this course together. Alright, so let's just do a quick introduction, a quick overview to this course, what we are looking at, what we intend to cover, and then we will go forward from there. So our course on Christian apologetics really, what are we looking at? What are we journeying into? We want to be in a place where we could provide answers or respond to questions that people have about our Christian faith, about what we believe, about what the Bible teaches. And we want to do it in a manner that will impact their hearts, impact their hearts and minds. So we want to do it of course in love, the Bible tells us to speak the truth in love, so we want to do it lovingly. And yet we want to do it intelligently, that means we need to have reasonable answers. Now Christian apologetics as it is today in the Christian world is a very, very vast field. And you will find that there are people who take several different approaches to this whole field of Christian apologetics. There are those who take a very philosophical approach, meaning their answers, their responses will be hugely philosophical, dealing with the questions of why and what and so on, using logic and philosophy. Then there are those who are more scientific or evidence-based, you know, and so here you have people who study archaeology or study different scientific fields, streams, and their response or their approach to apologetics is evidence-based, you know, okay, we found this, we saw this, and it's based on that. That's another stream of apologetics.  And fourth stream would be what we would call as a spiritual or supernatural, where we come from a purely spiritual point of view, basing our responses on spiritual or supernatural experiences. What we want to do in this course is something quite different from what, you know, generally the way apologetics is approached. We want to try and blend all of four of these. So, you know, there will be some parts of what we talk about which are philosophical in nature, some which are scientific, evidence-based, some which are theological, biblical, scriptural, and some, of course, will come from a supernatural perspective. So we want to try and blend these. So, that's our approach in this course. That's going to be our approach in this course on giving answers to questions. Now, some of the things that we are going to address now, like we said, you know, apologetics itself is a huge, huge area. So, you know, we've intentionally picked out certain things that would be of use for us. And so what we're going to do today, we will start off with just trying to understand apologetics. And one of the things that we want to impress is that true biblical apologetics is a combination or is a blending of reasoning and demonstration. In many evangelical circles, apologetics is purely, you know, words or reason, and it's confined to that. But we want to see from scripture that the defense of the gospel is not only reason, it's also demonstration. It's both wisdom and power. So Christ is the wisdom of God and the power of God. So biblical apologetics is really a combination or it's a blending of wisdom and power, reason and demonstration. And that's the way we should be doing it. We don't have the option of, okay, I will only do reason or only demonstrate. You need to blend both. And that's what we will emphasize. Then we'll talk about questions like on the existence of God, creation. We will talk a little bit about science and faith. We'll explore some things about Darwin's theory. We'll look at the Big Bang theory of cosmology. We will then shift to, you know, the Bible is authenticity and accuracy. Why do we believe the Bible is true? We'll also talk about the uniqueness of Jesus, the resurrection of Jesus. Then we'll talk about, you know, how it's the fact that salvation is Jesus. Why do we say salvation is only through Jesus Christ? Then we talk about how do we communicate our faith with Hindu, Hindus, Muslims, and we will take a look at other worldviews. How do we interact with people of other worldviews? We will also address a few contemporary cults. How do we respond to them? And then we will talk about responding to certain social challenges that we all are confronted with in our modern world. And then lastly, we will talk about a little understanding of suffering and then get into some time for answering common questions along these lines. So really, we try to cover a lot of ground. We're going to try to balance width and depth, but obviously we're not going to be able to delve in one subject too long because we also want to cover other topics, as you can see. But what I hope is that you would get an understanding of how to think, how to respond, and then if there are areas that you are interested in, you can delve further into those areas. We'll have three simple assessments as we go along based on the content we cover and our grading scheme. Exams are easy here, so don't worry. We will be giving you course material as we go along chapter by chapter, but of course there are a lot of online resources that you could go to to look at, to listen, videos, a lot of content is available online. There are also good books, authors available, some we've mentioned in our course overview. You could get them for free and I think some of these PDFs we will make this, we'll put it up on the coursework section if you're interested in reading. Of course there's a lot to read. I do not expect you to be able to read everything in the next four months, but hopefully the PDFs we give you will condense content from various sources and will be useful to you as we go along. Alright, so before I go further, I just want to pause for a moment and see if there are any questions people have about the course, things we're going to cover or things that we are not going to cover any questions. Okay, so let's get started with our first chapter. I'm just going to share the PDF so that we could all follow along. And so an introduction here to biblical apologetics and what I really want to emphasize in this first chapter for us is that biblical apologetics is a combination of reasoning and demonstration. It's a combination of word or wisdom and power, so we have to blend the two. But let's take a look at the Greek word apologia itself, from where we get the English word apologetics. Alright, so if you kind of just and I've just picked up some of these scriptures and just to have a quick look at how was this word translated, how was it used in the New Testament. If you go with me to these scriptures that we see, we will quickly trace these scriptures through. Acts chapter 22, Paul, Acts 22 verse 1, Paul is standing before, he's just been apprehended now, this is when Paul has returned to Jerusalem after his third missionary journey. This is somewhere around 8057 or somewhere around that time he's, you know, he's, he just goes from, you know, he finishes his third missionary journey travels back to Jerusalem as soon as he gets there.  And so there he stands up and, you know, very interestingly, although there very interestingly it is the Jewish people who at that time have come and apprehended Paul, you know, they've, you know, blamed him as a as a desecrator of the temple and so on. The Jewish people, the Hebrew people. So very interestingly, at that time, now Paul is a man who can speak Greek.  He could have spoken in Greek, but he chooses to speak in Hebrew. He really gets the attention of his audience.  And so he begins Acts 22 verse one, you know, brethren and fathers, hear my defense before you now. So that's the word apology. So try to picture the situation, right? Paul is facing a hostile crowd of Jewish people who have caught him. They want to get rid of him. And he is defending. He's doing an apology before them. Okay. Acts 25 and the verse 16. Acts 25 verse 16. Does somebody want to read that for us loud please? You can unmute your mic and read it. Acts 25, 16. I told them that it is not the Roman custom to hand over anyone before they have faced their accusers and have had an opportunity to defend themselves against the charges. Thank you, Samuel. So here again is the word apology and the word apology has been translated in the New King James. It says to answer for himself, to answer for himself. And once again, Paul is in a very tight situation. He's standing before King Agrippa and he's defending charges against him. So basically he went through three kings. He went through Felix, Festus and Agrippa. He had to stand before them. In fact, you know, it's very interesting to see each king's response.  One says, Paul, I will think about what you're saying. Meet me at a later time. And another one says, Paul, you always, you almost convinced me to become a Christian. You know, so it's very interesting as Paul presents his defense before these three leaders to see the leaders' response. But here's one of that instance where Paul has to apologize for himself. He has to speak up and defend himself before these leaders. So, verse Corinthians 9 and verse 3. Somebody could read that verse. Verse Corinthians 9 verse 3. My defense to those who examine me is this. Okay, so here's a different situation. Thank you for the silence. The situation here is the Corinthians. I think I'm going to mute your mic please. The situation here. Okay, I'm looking at my PDF. So I hope students will be let in. Okay. So the situation for Corinthians 9 is a little different. Paul, the people in Corinth have been made to question Paul's apostleship, you know, because of various people have come in and sown seeds of doubt and so on. Paul's apostleship is in question. This is not by people outside the church. It's people inside the church. The question is apostleship and so Paul says in verse 3, verse Corinthians 9, my apology to those who are questioning my apostleship. So one second he's defending. He's giving an answer. He's explaining to those who are questioning his apostleship. Second Corinthians 7 verse 11. Can I read? Please go ahead Charles. Second Corinthians 7 verse 11. For observe this very thing that you swallowed in a godly manner. What diligence it produced in you? What clearing of your slaves? What indignation that what fear, what vehement desire, what zeal, what vindication. All things you proved yourselves to be clear in this matter. So here the word apology is used in a very interesting way. It is translated here as clearing of yourselves. So what is the scenario? The Corinthian church has a lot of problems happening. And so Paul has written his first episode. And then he has written his second episode. And really his first episode has a strong rebuke to them that they've been tolerating sin and all these things going on. You know, so it's been a while. It's been an instructive letters also been everybody rebuking later. And in response to the apostles rebuked to them. They have done apology. That means they have tried their best to clear themselves of the wrong of things that were not right.  And you cleared yourself in your apology of or the wrong that was happening. We look at a few more. And that's got to Philippines one will look at verse seven. Somebody could read that. Let's go ahead. Just as one verse seven, just as it is right for me to think this of you all because I have you in my heart in as much as in my chain and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel. You all are particle with me of grace and verse 17, but the later out of love, knowing that I'm appointed for the defense of the gospel. Thank you. So here the context is the gospel. The good news of Jesus. And Paul is saying, I am called or yes, he has the sense of responsibility. It is calling that he is engaged in the defense, the apology of the gospel. Right. And the context of what's happening in Paul's life. This must be around AD. I think somewhere on AD 64 to 66 when Paul is in Rome. He's under house arrest. And he's writing his, you know, his prison episodes to the Philippines, the Colossians. Now he's writing from there. He's actually in prison. And he's writing from Rome. And he's saying, look, I am defending the gospel. That's my call. Right. I'm presenting an apology for the gospel. Second Timothy 416. Can somebody read that for us? Thank you Timothy 416. At my first defense, no one stood with me. But all forsook me. May it not be charged against me. Not useful. Thank you. All right. Thank you. So here the context is Paul having to deal with somebody who was really against him. He's talking about Alexander the coppersmith and who opposed Paul. This was likely have this happened in Ephesias. When Paul had come there, you know, here on his third missionary journey. Of course, Paul was there in a second missionary journey. And in his third missionary journey, Paul spent three years in Ephesias. And so it's very likely somewhere around that time there was the master of this man was really against Paul. Now, if you look in the background, it's the first missionary journey at Ephesias. The goddess Diana, her influence on the city was broken. And so a lot of these coppersmiths and people who made these things. The images of goddess Diana was really against Paul. They all got angry because. And this is an axe 19 the influence of this goddess or Ephesias was broken. Subsequently, Paul comes and spends three years in Ephesias. He's nurturing up the next generation of leaders there. And now later on around 1868, Paul is writing to Timothy, his final episode, and he's remembering all those things. He says, you know, when I went through all those things.  So this I think is an X 20, only part of X 20. I said, I had to do it all alone. No, I had to defend myself. And he says, so the context was again defending the gospel standing up for the preaching of the gospel. Last is for speed Peter 315. Somebody could read that for us. This is Peter speaking. One Peter. Go ahead. Go ahead, I think you're ready. Okay, thank you.  So this is Peter, the apostle speaking, right. Peter is saying he's instructing the people on this word. He is writing to the Jews who have been dispersed. They are spread out in very responsive Asia minus. He's writing to the, the dispersion, the Jews who have been spread around. And they are going through a lot of difficulty. They're facing a lot of persecution. And many of them are not necessarily in well to do positions.  You know, in those kinds of situations, Peter is writing to those people.   To everyone who asks you, why do you carry this hope in you. So the context is a persecuted people. People who don't have too much in life, who, you know, we would say are in lower rungs of society in some ways. We don't have too much going for them. But yet they are holding on to Jesus in their hearts. I mean, people see that they're asking, why do you have this hope? And Paul says, give them an apology. Give them an answer. Give them a defense of why you do this, but do it with meekness and fear. Okay. So we've gone through several scriptures here, you know, starting from acts 22 all the way to first Peter three, just to give us a little flavor of how the word apology is used. And I want to just listen to you. Okay. You know, we've, we've all looked at these verses. What can you make of the meaning of the word apology? And you got to put all this together. Right. So we've looked at about seven, eight scriptures, different places. What do you make of the word apology? What does it mean to you having seen how it's being used in the New Testament? Just feel free to share your thoughts. I would see the humbleness. Okay. Dinesh says humility. Anita says to stand up for the gospel with meekness. Okay. Anyone else? What, you know, when you look at all of these scriptures and how the word apology is used, what do you see? Go ahead, Samuel. As I see a lot of defense. And I think, so when I look at the context around there where Christianity was just coming up, Jesus Christ was crucified. I, I, I understand that, you know, I think mainly, you know, the, I mean, with the great commission, I think apostles were going out and spreading the good news and and at the same time, they had to defend. So I see a lot of that. I think, but when I, when I look at our current context, the world around us, I feel the word guide should be there somewhere as an apology. You know, right now it's like, we don't need to defend Christianity as much as probably we had to do then the apostles had to do that. But I feel, I see, look around and I see more people being lost, even people born in the Christian family being lost. And I see a policy of being more like a guide to those who are lost. Thank you for sharing. Thank you. I'm seeing other responses here in the chat. Kennedy says, there's a difference of your faith.  And Mano says, giving a strong defense for what we believe. Good, good. Let me ask you, what kind of an audience was being addressed? Was it, you know, a very, very supportive audience? Or would you say, in all these cases, there was a hostile audience? What do you see? Yeah. So, you know, that's a very, that's a common denominator in all of these cases. Yeah. In all of these cases, the audiences were hostile.  Come and explain to us what you believe. No, no, no, no, no. They were like, we are against you.  So it is, you know, in all of these cases, it's really an audience or a people who are against, who are questioning, who are very hostile in nature. So that's a common thing we're seeing in all of these scriptures. And in all of, in those environments, Paul, the others, mostly Paul, and then even Peter's saying, okay, hey, you need to do an apology. Yeah. So, so. Apology. Yeah.  So let's example is this class that we are having. Most of I and I, I trust that all of you are very, you know, supportive. None of, there's nobody here who's hostile. And we're learning apologetics.  So this environment is very supportive. And what really apology is done in an environment that is hostile.  They're very opposed to what is happening. So that's one, one thing to take away from all these scriptures. Secondly, we see that apology. As you see in all of these contacts is an attempt to reason with your audience. The person doing the apology is doing it as we saw with love, with meekness and with reference. So it is not a, you know, it's not a debate as such. It's not an argument, but rather it is an explanation that's being done with love, meekness and reverence. That's something to take away.  And, you know, that's not what the Bible is encouraging us to do. In fact, we will see scripture in the Bible tells us not to get into those kinds of situations. What we need to understand is that even though the crowd is very hostile, Paul is not being hostile to them. In fact, in all of these situations, there's a crowd that's very angry. There's a crowd that's very hostile, but Paul is, you know, if you look at how he presents in each of these cases, you can see compassion, you can see meekness, you can see reverence coming through his explanation of what God has done in his life or his explanation of the gospel and what he's going through for the sake of the gospel. That's again a common thing you see in all these scriptures and Peter emphasizes that. Okay, so our takeaway is, apology is us in the midst of a hostile environment presenting an explanation, not a debate or an argument, but an explanation of what we believe, why we believe it, and we do it in love, meekness, humility and reverence, reverence to God, reverence to the truth that we are handling. Okay, now I'll just go forward here and this is not in your notes. It's just a little side journey. We'll come back to the notes.  But I want to ask a question. Do you think Jesus, you know what, in a modern language, you would say, do you think Jesus was an apologist? That means, do you think he explained or defended what he was doing? And can you think of some examples? Anybody? Okay, I see your responses. Anita says, yes. Rose says, always. Shekwan says, yes, good. Rose, why don't you share? Charles, go ahead. See, I recognize your voices even though it's been three months. Okay, he was an apologist. He was an apologist. Watch like he is talking to Nicodemus and that night and Nicodemus is like, can I go back into my mother's womb and be born again? He's explaining, he's telling him what he knows from within. Nicodemus doesn't know, but now he is telling him how that being born again can be. But we also see, even other times when he is faced with, especially the high priestess, and they are telling him, why are you doing this? And he's like, but now, Chek, come on. If I am doing this because of Zerbebou, how can this send away, how can Zerbeb send himself away? So he has a matter, he has a content that he has within himself and he's talking to the people who do not understand what he has. Therefore, he is defending, if I would put it in this way, that like Peter says it in 1 Peter, that he is defending what is in him so that those who are listening to him are able to understand it. That's what I think. Very good. Thank you. Thank you. Good thoughts Charles. Good, good. Pastor, can I share? Go ahead please. Pastor, for me, I'm just thinking of John chapter 10 verse 38, where he's talking to them and to the Pharisees and he's just saying like, you know, to them, if you're not going to believe me that I'm in the Father and the Father is in me and the works that I'm doing is of the Father. So he's telling them like that even at least see the works that I'm doing and you believe that I'm in the Father and the Father is in me. So in that portion of the scriptures, I just see like he has been teaching and he's also been demonstrating and in that place he's just, I feel that he's like, you know, defending by saying, see, look at my teaching and if you're not believing in the teaching that I'm doing, look at my works. So he's demonstrating both the teaching and the works and saying, see, this is who I am. I am the Son of God and I'm being sent from the Father. So I feel that portion of the scripture kind of speaks strongly concerning this pastor. So good. So Jesus is defending and he's defending not only by what he is saying, but he's also defending by pointing to the works. And so he's presenting a defense for who he is. Good. Good. Anyone else? I'm just looking at the chat here. Let's see what's happening here. Christopher says Jesus defended in parables. Samuel says, Jesus spoke about the kingdom of heaven and how things are. Anita says, when he encountered the Pharisees, Rebus says with the Samaritan woman, Alice says a scenario healing on the Sabbath and he defended why he did that. Right. So, yes. So the answer, I think there is a consensus here that, you know, Jesus, while he truly was the Anointed Son of God and worked many miracles and healings and all of that, he also defended, you know, he was also an apologist, like in the definition we are putting together, that he defended who he was, what he did, what he did, what he did, and so on. And it's also interesting to kind of study his approach in apology and in defense, you know, and you can look at this in the Gospels. For instance, you know, when this was, I just mentioned a few instances. This is actually a side trip, no charge, completely free. We'll come back. It's a little excursion we are making. When you think about Jesus in Matthew 17, the Pharisees come and they say, you know, the question Jesus and Peter says, hey, don't you pay taxes? So really their intent is to find fault with Jesus and his disciples. And then Jesus, you know, of course, he tells Peter to go catch a coin and so on. But what do you find Jesus doing? Okay, sorry, the Pharisees come and ask Jesus, is it right to pay taxes? I got my scenarios mixed up, but they ask, is it right to pay taxes? And how does Jesus respond? It's very, very, you know, it's just God's, the wisdom of God, right? He says, bring me a coin. He says, on whose inscription is it on the coin? And they say, Caesar's. And Jesus says, give to Caesar, what is Caesar's, and give to God, what is God's? Now, it's really amazing because they're trying to catch him. They're very hostile. They actually want to trap him because if he said, yes, you have to give money to Caesar, they will think he is supporting the Romans. If he said no, then they will turn him over to the Romans. So either way, if he said yes or no, he's going to get in trouble. But look at the wisdom. Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, give to God what is God's. They couldn't catch him, you know. And so there's another time in the Gospel of Mark, it says, these Pharisees came to him and they tried to catch him with his words.  They went away. They said like, there's never a man who spoke like this. They couldn't find fault with him in his words. So his works were very powerful. They couldn't deny it. But even his words, they couldn't find fault. And with his words, he explained with his words, he defended.  His works were works of power, his words were words of wisdom. And both ways people couldn't question. So we can set Jesus up as our model, as the great apologist. Who's the great apologist? Jesus, because we want to be like him. His works were works of power, his words or words of wisdom to the point that they could not catch him with his words. In fact, even the Roman soldiers, this is in John 7, you know, they had been sent by, of course, there was this interaction going on between the Pharisees and the Roman soldiers. They sent the soldiers to capture Jesus. And then they go back without apprehending Jesus and they ask, what happened? And you know, the soldiers say, never a man spoke like this man. You know, so the soldiers were sent to capture him, were so amazed by what Jesus was teaching in the temple. They went back and said, we've never heard anybody speak like him. The man spoke like this man. And they just didn't even apprehend Jesus, you know. So, you know, we can say, you know, Jesus is the great apologist, although, you know, not many tend to look at him that way. But if you look very closely in the Gospels, you find that, wow, this is, you know, the man that we want to be like. In works and in words. Okay, so now let's go back to the notes, the course notes. I don't know if I'm going to finish this today. All right. But in the course notes, I want us to think a little bit just before we go for a break. I want us to think a little bit about the Apostle Peter. So we read that we read first Peter 315. But Peter says, you know, he's telling the Jewish people, the believers. He says first Peter 315, always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that in you. Now, let's think through on this, because first Peter 315 is a key verse for apology for the ministry of apologetics and in many Christian circles. But I want us to think about this. Would first Peter 315 necessarily mean intelligent, brilliant answers? Or does it from Peter's context also include something more? Because, you know, many times people take first Peter 315.  So then, you know, a lot of emphasis is placed on the philosophy or the scientific or the, you know, the great theological things. But who was writing first Peter 315? It was Peter. Who was Peter? He was an uneducated fisherman. How likely is Peter thinking about strong philosophical arguments? How likely is it that Peter's thinking of some great scientific evidence based response? How likely is it that Peter's thinking about some theological argument? Or is Peter thinking of something else when he says give a defense of the gospel? Because he is an uneducated fisherman. What would Peter's defense most likely be? I wanted to point us to is an Acts 4. And you think about what kind of a defense Peter gave when he was questioned in Jerusalem for his faith in Christ. You go to Acts 4 and we look at verses 13 and 14. Could somebody read this and then we'll go for a break please? Acts 4, 13 and 14. Somebody could read this for us. Shall I read first? Yes, go ahead. Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John and perceived that they were uneducated and untrained men, they marveled and they realized that they had been with Jesus. And seeing the man who had been healed standing with them, they could say nothing against it. Amen. Thank you. Think about this. Peter and John and several of the other apostles were essentially uneducated and untrained men. So for them, apology at does not necessarily or does not always mean great philosophical arguments or great scientific evidence-based responses or great theological responses. For them, the best apology would be what happened in verse 14. A man healed. Do you want to argue about that? Do you want to question that? So what I want to impress on our hearts is that for us, while we are people who are educated and had the opportunity to learn and continue to learn and so on, I'm not against philosophical responses. We are going to learn that. I'm not against scientific evidence-based responses. We are going to learn that. I'm not against theological responses. We are against that. But I want us to keep very importantly, there are times when philosophy, science, theology may not convince somebody, but a miracle, a work of God cannot be questioned. And sometimes that is the best defense for the gospel that we are preaching. All right. So we're going to take a little break. I will come back after the break. And if you have any questions, we will pick it up and then move forward. We'll be back in 10 minutes. God bless. Thank you.


Yeah, you need to put the mic on. Yeah, do you have the mic on there? Yeah, please put it on. That's fine. So I put it on my neck. Does it clip that onto your top there? Just like that. Okay. So is it working? Is it working? Okay, thanks. So, may I start? Okay. Hi guys. My name is Tamás Punt, and I was working on LibreOffice for three years from now, and now I am a contractor at Collaborar Productivity. The main topic I would like to talk about is LibreOffice base. Maybe it's not a famous component LibreOffice's writer and clerk, but it's used in different areas. First, I would like to talk some things about base. So if you are not familiar with the component just I would like to let you know some details. There are two modules which are strongly related to the base module. The connectivity and the db access. The connectivity module is used for connecting to a database management system. Microsoft Access uses its own database management system, but LibreOffice base is used only with external databases. At least it's not in the core project. Also, there is a module called db access. It is representing the logic which is used for showing the UI itself and operating the database management system in the background. And what I would like to talk about is the improvements in that area. There are three main topics which I would like to talk about. The first one is the default database management system. There are two options when you want to connect to a database. You can either have external connection, that means that you can use a database server or you can use an embedded database. That means that you have the odb file. It's actually a zip file as you may already know. In the zip file itself, there is the data and the schema of the database. If you want to go for an embedded database, then you can choose either Firebird or HisQLDB. And that's one topic because we wanted to make Firebird the default and HisQLDB is absolute. The other topic is migration from HisQLDB to Firebird. That's needed because we turned HisQLDB as an absolute solution and it has a Java runtime environment as its dependency, which is a huge dependency in its own. And also the third topic is about my SQL connector. With LibreOffice, you can connect to my SQL and MariaDB not only with GDBC but with the native connector as well. First, I would like to talk about the connectivity module and the SDBC driver itself. It's the API which LibreOffice uses and it's very similar to the GDBC API. We have a driver which can create connections and with each connection we can create statements. For example, a query or insert statement and so on. And we can have for example with that X database metadata information about the database and all that can be received with the help of result set and it also has information which is contained by X result set metadata. So these are interfaces and there are several implementations of the driver for each database management system or for each connecting solution. For example we have ODBC and EDBC which X has as well. But LibreOffice has a native connectors. These are just examples. The three interesting example is the QLDB and the Firebird driver which I'm most concerned in and in my SQSC that's the native connector name of the implementation of the native connector and with QLDB and Firebird we can choose either to connect to a remote server or to an embedded server. Okay So comparing Firebird and QLDB as an embedded database that I found three reasons why we would go for Firebird. The most important is maintainability because QLDB is a Java-based database management system because of that we have to make a Java calls from C++ and that causes some trouble when we would like to debug the application and also another aspect is performance and the third is the state of the implementation itself that's the one we can change. So one of my works was about improving the Firebird driver like two years ago we made an upgrade to the 3.0 version which was kind of huge work because the architecture of the Firebird management system database management system changed and because of that we had to remake the make files related to this which can be a bit tricky. Also another was to allow auto-incremental values and saving the RF format of Firebird inside the ODB file with this method we achieved that the ODB file is portable which is kind of a requirement we have also creating relationships didn't work with the UI which is now working and there are a lot of more changes which had less impact but they were interesting as well. After upgrading the Firebird driver there is this need that we should get rid of the QLDB because of the Java dependency that's a tricky thing to do because one thing that is really needed from the users is to ensure that their files are usable in the future times as well so backward compatibility is really important because of that we created a migration assistant tool which has the task to move the database itself which is inside the ODB file to another format the Firebird format but problems that I faced during the migration creation of the migration tool is that the migration should be processed without the QLDB system itself so that uses Java environment because of that it cannot be used and that's the whole point of the migration so I had to look at the implementation of QLDB and also the Fireformat which was not documented every pieces of it also a big challenge was to understand the binary format in which the data is stored okay but the migration assistant tool is created and it works in almost every database that it's created of course there are problems which are dragged in the bugzilla one big program is that we also want to migrate the views and the views can be really complex considering that we have functions which are not compatible and which are not present in the SQS standard for example when we want to migrate QLDB to Firebird QLDB has the Concat function as a keyword for concatenating strings and the other hand Firebird has these two vertical lines to do that and that's just one example there are a lot of functions which are not in the standard and also that would be good if this tool would be able not only to migrate QLDB to Firebird but to migrate QLDB to everything that means the SDBC API or to move a step further it should be possible to move something to something of course it has a complexity and I would like to now turn to the third topic which is the minus QL connector so what we have here there are more ways to connect to MySQL or MariaDB database one is GDBC and there are three native ways there are the C API and the C++ API and the C API is implemented by MariaDB and MySQL part and the difference is the license while MySQL C++ connector cannot be used in the core project because it's GPL licensed but on the other hand MySQL the MariaDB C API could be used and because of that before the work we did the MySQL native connector was used as an extension so what? the problem with having the MySQL connector as an extension is that it needs further steps to install it it seems to be not a big problem but it annoys the user the user has to know that it exists and so but the biggest problem with that is maintainability because when it is an extension the driver itself then it wouldn't track the changes which we made on the core project and because of that it can happen that the extension cannot be used anymore also for example clang plugins wouldn't apply on the extension and any other static analysis tool and tests and so on ok so when I implemented the driver I used the new driver I used the MariaDB C API and in that way we could move the core stuff into the core project and there is an example function just for fun so you can see that it's a C API this function MySQL statement prepare is used for preparing prepare statement it gets three parameters statement handle which represents the statement itself and MySQL query ok and what I also have here is interesting concepts of the MySQL implementation one interesting thing at least for me it was the memory management because I get a bunch of pointers from the MySQL API but I don't have to free them there are separate functions for freeing the resources also an interesting thing for me an interesting thing was that there are two implementations for result set in the C API separate implementation for the statements and the prepared statements that's interesting because SDBC has only one typically that could be solved and another interesting concept is to how to move the cursor MySQL allows only to move the cursor of the result set forward but SDBC would allow to move it backward as well that can be done but it's performance problem because then you have to reopen the cursor and you can go wherever you want another thing that we accomplished is to test the functionality of the driver the problem here is that it's not an embedded database so we cannot do that automatically the one who wants to test this functionality has to have server MySQL server somewhere because of that the unit test which we made can be used only with explicitly saying it after the build so there is this manual execution and we can pass an environment variable which contains the URL for the database and the password and then the functionality can be tested and some other interesting problems I faced one is a parallel execution of more results it's not supported by the C API but supported by the SDBC so what I did is to store the result in memory with that it can be curated later that way I can free the minus QR resource and I can use it again another challenge was the ex database metadata implementation because the C++ API which was before had provided methods which was really similar to the which were really similar to the SDBC methods so there were nothing to do but with the C API these methods are not available so I had to use SQL queries the challenge with that is that it's not as strongly typed as C++ and the developing in that way is a bit tricky but the most of the methods now works and the third which I would like to mention is that three days from now I worked on a bug here in Brussels in the Hackfest and that's when we use the native MySQL API so the SDBC API which I implemented then when we open the relations tab this tab is used for creating relations which means foreign keys mostly so when we open it it turns out to be a bit slow that means on my machine MySQL server it takes about 7 seconds and why is that so slow one answer could be that also a bunch of system tables are shown in the tables menu there and that is maybe not so interesting because most of the users is not concerned about relations between system tables so my plan is to get rid of those system tables and only QRE the normal tables for the relationships menu okay so that was all I wanted to talk about I don't know if you have any questions yes testing base I don't know when did you come too late obviously okay about the migration about the migration part there is tracker page in bugzilla which contains links to all of those issues there are a lot which are solved and there are a lot which need further work on that I'm aware of them okay thank you


Here at the government of Canada, we're proud of our investments in the oil and gas industry. We've bought pipelines, provided billions in subsidies, and stood by their side through tough times. But now, fossil fuel companies are making record profits while Canadians are struggling to pay the bills and cover the cost of climate disasters. Big oil benefited from taxpayer support. It's time for them to pay us back. That's why we're introducing attacks on the oil and gas industry's excess profits. Climate disasters are causing billions of dollars in damage to our communities, and it's going to take a massive investment to rebuild and get us off fossil fuels. It's only fair that the industry that created the climate crisis covers the cost of solving it. And since it's clear that fossil fuel companies won't invest in real solutions on their own, we're doing it for them. We'll use this new windfall tax to speed up Canada's shift to 100% clean energy. And instead of wasting money on false solutions like carbon capture, we're investing in making life better today with things like immediate financial help for communities affected by climate disasters, millions of unionized green jobs, retraining and support for oil and gas workers, lower electricity and heating bills, free zero emissions public transit, investments in health care, education, and our communities.