The young earth argument makes so much more sense to me. I have abandoned all old earth and evolution theories. I accept the Biblical account to be accurate and true.
@@travisshaffer552 When you compare billions of years as proposed by mainstream scientists, 6000 years is quite young. The billions of years paradigm is necessary for their fake evolution theory.
Also in the whole picture the 1000 yr Millennium reign of Christ ruling the Earth from his throne in Jerusalem brings the whole of the ages to a fulfillment at 7000yrs. Then the new heavens and new earth to last for all of eternity.
That is one of the best comments I've seen from anyone, particularly in regards to the discussion of Earth's origins. It goes perfectly with Proverbs 3:5-6. I'm not sure what to believe exactly when it comes to the age of the Earth, but I do believe one thing for sure - that our Father in Heaven created it - whether as a young Earth or as an event millions of years ago with evolution unfolding as a result... I believe without doubt that it was done by God in the manner in which He intended with His infinite wisdom, regardless of what we mere mortals think is the case. Afterall, we humans don't have the best track record when it comes to getting things right. We should have some humility as a result. So thank God for His grace and mercy! ✝
@thomast626 Forgive me, but you seem to accept the 'possibility' of evolution. God said, specifically, how He did it. Evolution declares God to be a liar.
@@thomast626 The Bible clearly says ... follow & obey God not Man ... and the Universe as created over ... 4 x 24 hr days ....5994 years ago, before an ALL KNOWING God created the Sun & Solar system and put Earth into its orbit creating the day & night, morning & evening, and year. The Universe is less than 6000 years old. And if you actually understood the scientific method you would have easily figured out the evidence of Creation.
I have been a Christian for many years and could not even speak about evolution theory but it became too hard to just ignore it . Isn't it possible that God used the evolutionary process to make everything. The Bible has so many issues. The Ark for example can be torn apart extremely easily scientifically.
@@Jerlynvins my man. Let me ask you a question. Can a cat ever become a dog. Or can a pigeon ever become a shark ? Answer is clearly no. But one more thought for you is, how many times do you need to wash your clothes in the washer for them to be perfeclty folded inside ? In infinite amount of times that clothes can never be folded, ever. So in these 2 thought process you can cleary see that there is a creator. And believe me our God is great.
Even from a "scientific" perspective it wouldn't be possible to use evolution as the process for everything. There's a lot more evidence for a young Earth than old, most of it is either suppressed or ignored. Or in many cases dismissed through ad hominem attacks. Spike Psarris has a great series that covers Astronomy. Nathaniel Jeanson has an incredible series on human DNA and what it reveals. Immanuel Velikovsky does a great job of dealing with historic accounts and their meaning. There are many more, these are some of my favorites. You'll see a lot of attacks against their character and general dismissiveness of their findings but little detail and no hard evidence. Look into it for yourself and then make a more informed judgement on the matter.
If you think the Bible has "so many issues" you've not researched it enough. And the research on DNA has effectively proved Neo Darwinism totally false.
@@whoswho6641no offense but you make no sense here. The difference in DNA between a cat and dog is quite small. Furthermore I have no idea what you mean about washing clothes and what that has to do with evolution.
Cats make cats cats, dogs make dogs. There are NO EXCEPTIONS. SUPPOSEDLY crocodiles haven't changed in millions of years. Why? They were and always will be crocodiles.
@@haggismcbaggis9485 That is your interpretation of the creature, but our observation of the creatures that aren't extinct is that they all produce after their own kinds.
Ah, the "cats make cats, dogs make dogs" argument, a favorite among creationists and opponents of evolution. It's a simple yet flawed understanding of genetics and evolutionary biology. While it's true that species reproduce within their own kind, the concept of speciation and evolution goes far beyond that simplistic view. Evolutionary processes like genetic mutations, natural selection, and environmental pressures lead to the diversification of species over time. As for crocodiles not changing in millions of years, that's not entirely accurate. Crocodiles, like all living organisms, have undergone evolutionary changes and adaptations to survive and thrive in different environments. While they may appear similar to their ancient ancestors, they have indeed evolved over time, just at a slower pace compared to some other species. So, while it's catchy to say "cats make cats, dogs make dogs," the reality is much more nuanced and complex, showcasing the wonders of evolution and the diversity of life on Earth.
@@FirstnameLastname-cx6go farmers rely on life producing after it's own kind. Things change within their own pool. They do not skipper fish to other ponds over time. If you make that claim (which defies observation) you need to demonstrate, the cop out of Evolutionism is an appeal to time, that things Evolve so slow we can not observe. Unfalsifiable faith in that which has never been seen.
As an ex-atheist, I 100% agree. "God, if you are there, I need to know. I need to know what is true" I said as a teen and in my early 20s at least on three separate occasions. In 1993 a friend tried to give the Gospel and he hit a wall. That wall came down we he shared with me a VHS on Mount Saint Helens, Evidence for Catastrophe. The ball was rolling toward a radical transformation.
Science is entirely neutral when it comes to religion. It doesn't make decisions based on religion. It makes decisions based on facts and evidence. It has no preconceived notions. It follows the evidence where it leads. Religion has a preconceived notion. It only except evidence that it approves of and disregards evidence that it disapproves of. You will note that the top experts in their field, and many branches of science, for many different religions, can agree on the evidence. The only people who disagree or people who hold a fundamentalist religious view and they feel their view is threatened. Religion and science or two different things. Scientific discovery should not be biased by religious beliefs.
Yes, this is the problem with YEC. Hebrews 4:9-10 is clear. Have you entered into the 7th day as the Bible asks you to? In Genesis 2:4. The entire time span of God’s creative activity is called a “day”. So yes, Genesis tells us that the word day in Genesis is long time span. The events that happen on day 6 can not happen in 24 hours, too many events, must be a long time span.
@@djsarg7451 Exodus 20:11 For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. God did not rest for millions or billions of years on day seven as an example to man to rest one day out of seven. The six days of creation had a morning and evening. Adam was made on day six and sometime later he sinned and death entered the world. There was no death before Adam The Bible clearly provides the genealogy of Adam to Jesus the Christ. Based on this timeline in scriptures the Universe and all therein was created only about 6,000 years ago.
Well, when God created Adam, he wasn't a baby. He was fully grown. So, to us, the Earth is billions of years old, but God created it instantly and made it ready for our use. People need to stop putting limits on what God can do.
What an interesting point , this way the earth can be both 6,000 years old and billions of years old. in other words, God made a new thing but He made it out of billions year old material.
Not putting limits on God with the exception that He cannot lie. He said he flooded the earth recently and according to scripture, He created make and female in the beginning. So, it really does make a difference in order to not have blind Faith.
@@user-gx2yy1df6f No, He didn't. He created all things within 6 days a little over 6000 years ago. God Himself states this clearly in Exodus 20:11. And again in Exodus 31:17. He makes clear even everything in Heaven was made in the 6 days. The beginning in Gen 1 is the beginning of all things. If there was material billions of years old, there would have to be another beginning to account for it, and thus God would have spoken in error in Gen 1:1; "In the beginning.......
The fact that these thick sedimentary layers also include many monoclines and synclines and folded rocks means all these layers had to be ductile in order to curve at the same time. Creationists have done microscopic analysis of these curved layers and have shown that they are no different than the horizontal layers of the same stratum. That blows away the whole idea of an evolutionary geological column. In addition, it blows away the validity of radiometric determinations in dating these rocks.
@@MrLogo73 with no transition layers ... just as there aren't any transitions forms proving Evolution. Natural & Unnatural (breeding) Selection was known back in the 1850's ... to only cause variation or adaption within a species. We know today mutations never creates new genes with new traits. Because Universal Functions ... is the Hypothesis for Sir Issac Newton's Watchmaker Analogy over 300 years ago and all machine Analogies. Evolution, Abiogenesis and Big Bang fail the scientific Method and should have been relegated to ... fantasy. Whereas Universal Functions easily passes the scientific Method ... becasue space, time, Laws of Nature, matter & energy ... are clearly natural Funcitons ... with information like purpose, reason, rules, properties, processes & design ... which can only come from the Mind of an Intelligence.
@@Hsauzier Except that there's two things that are huge, major problems for the YE hypothesis: Look up the heat problem and the mud problem, especially if you also believe in the account of a global flood. AIG eventually acknowledged it's a big problem to where they concede they might have to abandon using science to prove YE and appeal to a miracle instead and other holdouts have attempted to perform damage control by making up ad-hoc counters that end up getting falsified, or try to downplay the problem and kick the can down the road, but as it stands now, it's a major problem for trying to use science to validate YE including the global flood.
*@Baseball4lifer* What was the primary point that changed your mind from believing the earth is billions of years old to a position that the earth is 6000 years old? *Reply to:* _"I clicked this video so fast!!! Thank you CMI for opening my eyes to a world of creation!!"_
who are these god squad speakers they keep wheeling in, and I'm being over polite when I call them speakers and I would only say one word to them, "DINOSAURS".
*@Baseball4lifer* What was the primary point that changed your mind from believing the earth is billions of years old to a position that the earth is 6000 years old? *Reply to:* _"I clicked this video so fast!!! Thank you CMI for opening my eyes to a world of creation!!"_ *Note:* Just asking a second time in case my first attempt didn't make it through to you.
🎯 Key points for quick navigation: 00:00 *🌍 Earth's Age Determination* - Science is about observation and repeatable experiments. - When making pronouncements about the past, it is essential to consider the inability to observe the past directly. - Our beliefs influence how we interpret evidence, especially when it comes to historical matters. 01:27 *🔬 Scientific Evidence Interpretation* - Scientific evidence is interpreted in alignment with preexisting beliefs. - Science is limited in illuminating historical events due to its focus on observable, repeatable processes. - Assumptions and beliefs play a crucial role in interpreting the evidence presented. 05:15 *📜 Role of History in Understanding the Past* - History often trumps science when it comes to addressing historical matters. - Different belief systems and worldviews influence how individuals interpret scientific data. - Understanding the history one believes in is critical when determining the age of something. 21:49 *🧭 Death and suffering as a result of rebellion against God* - Death and suffering came from our rebellion against God, not from Him. - God's love is shown through sending Jesus to pay the price for sin and suffering. - Belief in a young Earth aligns with the hope for a new heaven and Earth without sin and death. 26:13 *🌍 Challenges to the old age of the Earth* - Sedimentary layers and fossils do not align with the claimed vast periods of evolutionary time. - Rapid sedimentation and fossilization contradict the slow processes of evolutionary timelines. - Lack of evidence for elapsed time between layers supports rapid formation of sedimentary rocks. 33:40 *🕰 Issues with radiometric dating methods* - Potassium-argon dating inaccuracies due to argon trapping in rocks skew results. - Excess argon complicates accurate dating and calls the whole process into question. - Cross-checking radiometric dates with other evidence is essential due to errors and assumptions. 43:59 *🦕 Soft tissue and DNA challenges* - Soft tissue preservation challenges the idea of millions of years - DNA decay analysis shows it doesn't support ancient age claims - Recent burial in flood event likely explains soft tissue findings 47:20 *🧬 Carbon 14 in dinosaur bones* - Carbon 14 in dinosaur bones contradicts millions of years timeline - Scientific journal states radiocarbon dating in bones is inaccurate - Efforts to defend against challenges to evolutionary theory 49:15 *✨ Evidence supporting biblical creation* - Looking at the world through biblical eyes reveals design and purpose - Clear evidence of a creator in the world around us - Understanding the world through the Bible enhances the gospel message Made with HARPA AI
These AI answers are based on selective questioning and cherry-picking. For brevity's sake I'll limit the use the Carbon 14 measurement and the soft tissue fossil problem as examples of the data being misinterpreted, truncated, and misapplied: If you look into the specifics on Carbon 14 dating, you'll find that it's not the only means of being able to measure the overall age of things on the earth. It's found to be reliable dating extinct organisms back to about 50,000 years, because carbon-14 has a half-life of about 5,730 years. But there's also a method called relative dating where carbon 14 dating is combined with radioactive dating in order to factor in the dates of radioactive decay in the substrates that the fossils are buried between. But let's say for the sake of argument that we'll grant the so-called problems that was also brought up by this poster about radiometric dating and just stick to Carbon 14 dating, and we find that the young earth model still has a problem, because the 50,000 year age limit with carbon 14 dating they accept and try to use to refute an old earth is still a long, long way off from the approx. 6,000 year limit that's being claimed as the age of the earth. As to the soft tissues, YE creationists love to make a field day with it, but Paleontologist Mary Schwitzer who was the first scientist that discovered soft tissues on a dinosaur fossil rejects the creationist claim that this demonstrates that dinosaur remains are only a few thousands of years old. In fact, she has gone on record by saying there's no scientific consensus on how long it takes for soft tissue to actually decompose because there's many variables involved. Paleontologists discovered that there are many factors that can affect the decomposition rate of tissues, including the rate of speed the dead animal was buried, the environment in which it was buried, amount of oxygen in the atmosphere, how fast the sediments surrounding the dead animal cemented, how much exposure the fossils had to any bacteria or fungi as general examples; and as a specific example, evidence has been found that soft tissues preserved in environments with higher oxygen levels like those found in shallow marine limestones and in sandstones actually resist decomposition. Schwitzer herself also said that finding soft tissues in dinosaur fossils simply means "we don’t understand degradation at the molecular level." So appealing to Carbon 14 dating and soft tissues in fossils hasn't it any way refuted the current scientific consensus that the earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old, sorry. And those are just two examples I used to refute out of all those other common YE claims.
Millions and billions of years calls Jesus a Liar. Jesus while in the flesh on Earth verified the truthfulness of the scriptures and God can not lie. I can recall as a teen buying into the whole gap theory and millions of years. We had a family friend who was a great preacher when it came to preaching Gospel but he had no answers for the beliefs I had accepted. He just told me I was wrong and left.
It matters! When I was on my journey to Christianity, I was having issues believing in the Bible as a God inspired book. On a fluke, I ended up at a little church in Savannah, Georgia, where I was visiting friends for the first time. That weekend they had a guest speaker, pastor Paul Viet, the dino pastor. He went through the Bible with a fine tooth scientific comb, explaining dinosaurs, fossil records and all the issues with evolution. He gave me exactly what I needed, when I needed it. That pushed me over the edge, and the whole improbability of that weekend blew my mind. That was back in 2007 and is one of my favorite memories of this path to believing.
@richardplaatjies7680 maybe you should actually read the bible more. they didn't start calling them dinosaurs until the 1900s. Look up Job 40:15-24. There's your dinosaur.
@@stevebone88 Hi it is good to know that you know what i am talking about, behemoth or dinosaurs it is the same thing. But this does not change the fact that this teacher is wrong in his teaching. II Timothy 4: 03 - 04 Shalom
I love Dr. Hardwood's no compromise no negotiation stance on the Word of God - even if it doesn't make sense it's still the Word of God and it's our understanding that needs to be corrected. That's how believers are supposed to approach God's Word. His thoughts are far above our own. There must be an element of faith - accepting Him as True even if it doesn't make sense because we have experienced Him. That's what most skeptical believers need - an actual encounter with Jesus. When that happens you will believe the Word of God especially when it doesn't make sense 😅
Of course, it's easy to say something doesn't make sense, especially when no examples are provided. But you know what doesn't make sense? To believe that if we're all just the product of an accident, and all of our thoughts are just electro-chemical reactions that we should expect anything to make sense. The atheistic universe has no rational basis for logical thinking. For you to expect something to make sense is to borrow from the Christian worldview because only the Christian worldview can provide a rational basis for logic.
So even when it's wrong it's right because it's in the bible? Rather a silly argument. The earth is 4.5 billion years old. Science has proven this using many different methods. To simply deny it because it's not in the bible is ridiculous because the bible is not a science book.
It says in the Bible "The only way to God is through me (Jesus)" and yet the preacher says any faith will do contradicting the Bible. There are something like 3000 different Faith's....... any God capable of creating the Heavens and the Earth would surely be capable of communicating his instructions without relying on the scribings of relatively primitive men ? 🤷♀️
For millennia, it was people's "no compromise, no negotiation stance on the word of god" that killed so many innocent people by refusing to see that it is germs and not sin or miasma or evil spirits which cause illness. That is why thinking rational people reject that stance.
If something doesnt make sense, then either the author was an idiot, or incompetent at writing comprehensible statements. Not sure which is better. But ask yourself this.. you are an omniscient being.. why on earth do you write so much nonsensical stuff, if you, and only you, know exactly what words would convince everybody. Why are most people not convinced then? Further, why is so much of the stuff you wrote obviously wrong or contradicting? Maybe, just maybe.. it wasnt an omniscient being who wrote it, but desert dwelling, superstitious people.
I'm sure you've heard of the late Chuck Missler. He is a believer and asked his audience he was speaking to how many believed in a young universe and who believed in an old universe. The audience was mixed in their opinion. Chuck then said, "What if I told you it was both?"
But not even the strongest telescope looking out into the farthest reaches of the universe hold up the idea of an old universe. Even non creationist are unable to find evidence of an old universe.
I can imagine that God created an old universe/earth just like he created Adam and Eve in an adult mode or like Jesus made good wine that must be old to be good. Why not? Like you can build an earth that looks old in a computer game.
You're saying that as if though are innocent little truth seekers who have nothing but the best for humanity at heart when the exact opposite is true - they are mostly sinners who detest the very idea that they are responsible to a supreme moral arbiter. Being so shocked that they keep failing to find the Truth is like being shocked that a man who murdered his pregnant wife and two daughters fails to tell the cops the truth (see Christopher Lee Watts).
Ions decay from atoms of rocks and other sediments. This rate of decay can be measured using mathematics. These measurements have reached over 4.5 billion years. These are facts.
@chrismartino3519 Yeah, creationist scientist is an oximoron because to be a scientist and try to prove God, then you must first denounce him. You can't assume a conclusion before you've even started. Now I can believe in God and know (to an extent) that the universe is bliions of years old. God exists outside of time and space so how's he gonna explain billions of years and complex chemical processes to people who haven't even developed toilet paper yet 😅
@@chrismartino3519 decay rates start with assumptions as to the quantity that was in the artefact when it started to decay. Those assumptions are incorrect and the other problem is the assumption that decay rates are always consistent. There are reasons to believe they are not at all consistent in the past. You need to go and do some more research of the creationist literature to understand the argument.
I have autism and OCD, for me to u derstand something I have to take it apart in minute detail. So looking into this and other Christian things has made my faith deeper and strong as when I look it is like looking into the mind of God, in my humble option.
The verse 2 describes the only thing created so far ..other than the space to put it.. science is importance so verse 3 was extremely important because the light spectrum allows for freezing and Heating.
The next verse is where God places the atmosphere between the ice and the Seas.. the pressure formed by this process allowed the insects to grow huge and in fact because of the inverse Square law, that atmosphere was absolutely necessary for the size of fossils we have in the fossil record.
And finally, everything was Leviathan in those days, or huge... because of the atmosphere people and animals lived long and got real big.. but God was mad at man and removed the ice which in turn caused the flood.. when the ice was removed.. all of the vegetation and animals began receiving the radiation that is looked for by the age dating tests. That's Peter's World standing inside and outside of water verse❤. . That's what we will learn ..that's how he did it.😅
Mythtrekker610, You missed one small detail to take apart. Why can't anyone demonstrate a god even exists using ANY objective demonstrable evidence? Why are people relegated to trying to define an imaginary being into existence?
I just saw the top of a very tall Mountain in BC and the ridge line was so narrow it was skinnier than a balance beam with a shear drop off on both sides near vertical, as soon as I saw it I thought, how can this not be warn down? I would say all pegmatite veins and mountains are the same age as my trees, 4200 yrs +/- 100 yrs
I watched an interview years ago with an expert of some kind, I can't remember if they were a geologist, but it was some very credible and experienced professional, who said exactly this. He was explaining how time lines could not be relied on, because after the big bang of creation, time was expediently faster than it is now. It slows as it expands. It makes a lot of sense. When I heard the first interview here, it concurred with his timeline also. He said modern man doesn't take the fact that time was so much faster when they account for timing in carbon dating etc. He was coming from a purely scientific point, not a Christian one btw..
I believe I was saved before I became a young earth creationist but the Holy Spirit brought me to a love of the truth and I was overjoyed to find Ken hams ministry in lockdown. Fast forward to today and I’m reading through John with my atheist friend whose main objection is the scientifically held age of the earth and its contradiction with Gods word. It’s important work that you’re doing, God bless you.
@@SheridanFalkenberry thank you, your prayers are very much appreciated. She was in a coma a couple of years ago and we were told she wasn’t going to make it. We prayed for her and she miraculously woke up and recovered, now she’s seeking God. one of her stumbling blocks is the age of the earth and evolution. I think people find it hard to accept they’re whole world view is not true but we keep praying and presenting her with the truth.
@@caronbryan9612 Patient endurance in effect. Keep teaching your friend the truth. God is able to overcome the programming we received in state run institutions.
@@elizabeth84266 - the gospels are an eye witness account yes. The book of Genesis is not. It is also not a history book as the original comment stated. It is a book of origins.
@@RJ-s41ty How do you come to the conclusion that Genesis is an eyewitness account? It is impossible to be one when it covers what happened across 1500 years... Your position is flawed mate. Sorry. Most Scholars think it was Moses who wrote it. He would've been inspired by God to write about it, plus would've collated other writings together to make it a complete work. Not an eyewitness account dude.
Ive debated many on the subject. I wont mention God or the Bible, just scientific facts. The other person though will eventaully get mad, lash out, and bring God into the conversation 90% of the time.
@@stephentucker2714 the trouble with young earth is that the genealogies given in different books of the bible skip generations. And the early parts of genesis were god telling us about his creation, his love for us, and our disobedience. Yet despite all our disobedience god still loves us and allows us freedom still to choose. What it is not, is a scientific explanation from the universe. It talks about seperation of the water exposing the land. But doesn't bother explaining evaporation, air and clouds having huge amounts of water and that is the rain. Or Moses told to keep sick people seperate from the rest of the community, thousands of years before understanding germs. God didn't tell them about viruses and how these invisible things can make you sick. It's not a scientific text. It is a bunch of history showing us God's love and power.
@chrisoakey9841 absolutely! I personally believe in the young earth but, have heard many Christians explain why they don't. I don't see a problem with it as far as salvation goes at all despite how much many atheist want it to be a problem. I've been saying that for years! It's not meant to be a science book, but instructions for salvation and why we need it. I don't read a cook book to learn about physics, that doesn't mean physics doesn't exist based on the cook book.
@@stephentucker2714 if God can make the universe, he can make it look like it is at any stage of development he likes. But that is not the goal of the bible. Thanks for the comment.
These people who say "Why does it matter?" are two types of people. One type, are those who struggle with science and want an excuse to not educate themselves. The other type are those who have idolitry in their heart. They want to be accepted by the world and the secular science community and don't want to put God's Word above man's. I had one guy tell me that if believing in Christ required him to believe in the Genesis account of 6 literal days, then he would not be a Christian because the Bible is then wrong. His way of believing in Christ was that the Bible didn't violate his belief in an old earth. So, his belief in secular science is above his belief in Christ and the Word of God. That's idolatry. But, these people don't admit they have idolatry in their hearts or that they have trouble following scientific concepts, so they pridefully dismiss the ministry of creation research. There are many who are following God's calling on their life to show how the world around us backs the Bible, but these types attack or arrogantly dismiss these callings. And MANY of the people I know who had fallen away from Christ used science as one of the excuses.
One of the dangers of holding onto ancient beliefs is that when they are shown to be incorrect, that throws your faith into question. Many Christians accept the Earth is old and that life changed over time and they believe that God is in charge of all of that. Many Christians have accepted that the Earth is not 6000 years old. You can believe in modern science and still believe in God. Science does not attack religion. It just reveals the truth of how the world works. Galileo was thrown in prison and forced to recant his scientific discoveries because the church felt threatened. Science is not idolatry. It's an open-minded acceptance of the truth, and a realization that ancient texts are to be taken for the lessons they are teaching but not necessarily to be taken literally. If religion accepts science then you will see fewer people leaving religion. If it's a choice between reality or mythology, you're going to be losing believers. Probably better to accept scientific knowledge as understanding the truth of God's universe rather than rejecting data and evidence. If you're going to be like the people who forced Galileo to recant his discovery because you feel threatened, you're going to wind up losing believers.
On April 12, 1633, chief inquisitor Father Vincenzo Maculani da Firenzuola, appointed by Pope Urban VIII, begins the inquisition of physicist and astronomer Galileo Galilei. Galileo was ordered to turn himself in to the Holy Office to begin trial for holding the belief that the Earth revolves around the sun, which was deemed heretical by the Catholic Church. Standard practice demanded that the accused be imprisoned and secluded during the trial. This was the second time that Galileo was in the hot seat for refusing to accept Church orthodoxy that the Earth was the immovable center of the universe: In 1616, he had been forbidden from holding or defending his beliefs. In the 1633 interrogation, Galileo denied that he “held” belief in the Copernican view but continued to write about the issue and evidence as a means of “discussion” rather than belief. The Church had decided the idea that the sun moved around the Earth was an absolute fact of scripture that could not be disputed, despite the fact that scientists had known for centuries that the Earth was not the center of the universe. This time, Galileo’s technical argument didn’t win the day. On June 22, 1633, the Church handed down the following order: “We pronounce, judge, and declare, that you, the said Galileo… have rendered yourself vehemently suspected by this Holy Office of heresy, that is, of having believed and held the doctrine (which is false and contrary to the Holy and Divine Scriptures) that the sun is the center of the world, and that it does not move from east to west, and that the earth does move, and is not the center of the world.” Along with the order came the following penalty: “We order that by a public edict the book of Dialogues of Galileo Galilei be prohibited, and We condemn thee to the prison of this Holy Office during Our will and pleasure; and as a salutary penance We enjoin on thee that for the space of three years thou shalt recite once a week the Seven Penitential Psalms.” Galileo agreed not to teach the heresy anymore and spent the rest of his life under house arrest. It took more than 300 years for the Church to admit that Galileo was right and to clear his name of heresy.
As someone who went through the pain of aquiring a masters degree, i can proudly claim that i do not have trouble following scientific concepts. As such i know that a young earth is simply impossible. Young earth creationism is absolutely on the same level as people claiming the earth is flat. Both parties managed to convince themselves that all the evidence that doesnt support their opinion must be wrong, and jump at every little crum they think is evidence for their case. In reality, both are delusional.
I don't believe in 6 literal days, who are you to say I'm not a Christian? How do we know that a day to us is the same as a day to the Lord? Doesn't it say that a day to us is like a thousand to the Lord in scripture? How do we know that eons didn't pass before each stage *day* of creation? Why is it that 6th day man was created before Adam, and differently like the animals? How long was it after the 6th day when Adam was created?
If such a flood had happened 4500 years ago when the pyramids were being built, the Egyptian wouldve been wiped out and history would be very different.
@@PaulDormody you are under the assumption that the pyramids weren’t built yesterday and made to look 4500 years old. See, the problem is your assumptions are wrong 😁
A very important point on why it matters: Does it matter - if you claim a witness is a liar? Because that's what they are attempting to do. They are attempting to discredit God's character, so they have an excuse why they don't need to listen to Him.
God bless you CMI 🙏🙏🙏✝️ We know that God's word is true and we also know Genesis 1 was written historically. Not metaphorically. Jesus also took the OT as literal. No reason for us to do any different today.
I like your choice of words: "no reason" to do any differently today. Those of us who choose to use our ability to reason have found good reasons to do differently. One reason, our explanations for natural phenomena actually explain. Another reason, our findings are backed up by tangible observable and verifiable evidence.
''We know that God's word is true'' No. You believe without evidence and AGAINST the evidence. In other words, you started with a conclusion that must be true no matter what while denying science.
@@adelinomorte7421 if you believe in evolution then best of luck with your god materialism…. Because you sure don’t believe in God if you believe in evolution….
@@Skovyd They don’t believe God in the least. The Bible says sin started with Adam and death through sin. Yet if evolution is true then death existed millions of years before Adam. Jesus came to redeem people of the curse brought upon by Adam, so they make Jesus irrelevant without even realizing they do so. Besides, it’s the worst theory in existence with exactly zero evidence supporting it….
@@Skovyd Evolutionists believe that God was not the founder of the earth, instead it was a natural phenomenon, beginning with inorganic molecules evolving into today's modern person. Evolutionists also believe that modern human evolved from an ancient form of Primate, and that primate evolved from single cell organisms called Eucaryotes. Evolution is thus 100% contradictory to the existence of a God. Unless you are a Pantheist who believe that the Universe itself is God.
Newsflash.. science can perform tests on the past. For example when plate tectonics was first proposed, we predicted we would find similar fossils on different continents, since those populations were once in one location and were split apart when the continents split apart. Also we predicted we would find Tiktaalik, the fish that was first to be able to venture onto land.
Science CAN measure the age of the Earth, they have done it. By study and experiment they have worked out it is 4.5 BILLION! years old. They haven’t just believed it from Religious books that the Earth is thousands of years old and took it as the TRUTH! They’ve questioned it, that’s how Science works. To say the Earth is only 6,000 years old is RIDICULOUS! LAUGHABLE! HILARIOUS! NONSENSE! 😂🤣😂🤣😂
Well don't you worry your head. God isn't going to force you to believe in or follow him. You won't be forced into Heaven against your will. Everyone that ends up in Hell chooses to go there of their own free will and you it appears unfortunately for you seem to have already decided that is where you wish to go upon death. That should please you. You get your own way . Live how you want now , do what you want now, answering to no one while here now becuase there is nothing after death according to evolution. You sadly will have a rude and terrfying awakening upon death. If you want to believe the religion of evolutionism have at it. It's your loss. A religion btw is any "cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith." Evolution is by defintion a religon because it is believed on by faith not scientific fact as there is no actual evidence of abiogenisis or macroevolution in the fossel record and aboigenisis is simply impossible scientifically. Evolution therefore is dead at the start because abiogenisis the cornerstone of evolution is impossible. No beginning for your storytelling. You would do well to read the actual papers of the evolutionary scientists The dispare of ever fining a first cause or a way to allow one organism to change into another. What they say is very different from the popular presentation on TV, in movies and purposely used in the schools to program and indocrinate the kids. Aliens won't save you either because your supposed aliens need an origin as well and if you assume aliens made the aliens who made the aliens, etc who made the life on Earth ,you will rapidly run out of time even with 14 billon years. Eventurally you have to have a first cause for the first aliens.😉 If you ever change your mind which I hope you do, know that God loves us so much, sinful and fallen though we are, that he came to Earth as Jesus a human being, lived a perfect life while being temped in every way just like we are and then died in our place to pay for our sins that must be punished. When you accept and follow Jesus he forgives all your sins and you can then enter into the presence of God. Without Jesus you will spent all eternity paying for your own sins against a infinite God and never be able to accomplish it.
How old was Adam when he was created? He was 0 years old. How old did Adam look? Probably about 30 or 40 years old. How old was the universe when God created it. It was zero years old. How old did the universe look when it was created? It was as old as God needed it to look to function.
Ah, the timeless conundrum of divine age manipulation. It's a fascinating concept that requires some impressive mental gymnastics to reconcile with scientific realities. So, if I understand correctly, Adam was created as a full-grown adult but with zero years of existence under his belt, and the universe was created with the appearance of age but with a birth certificate that reads "Day 1." It's like the ultimate cosmic magic trick, where God says, "Let there be light... and a fully formed universe with all the bells and whistles!" But hey, who needs consistent laws of nature and observable phenomena when you've got divine intervention? I guess when you're the author of reality, you get to bend the rules however you see fit. Just remember, when you start blurring the lines between appearance and reality, it can make for some interesting philosophical debates, if nothing else.
@@lawrencehalpin6611 First of all, that has no bearing on whether or not you are right. Second, if some OTHER religion is wrong then "well that would not be good for you.", so that doesn't save you anyway. And finally, NO you do NOT have a better life. You have a lie that you have CHEAPENED by believing that all of this planet is just a place to wipe your feet before you go to your heaven, and people like me suffer for all eternity, and YOU BELIEVE I DESERVE IT. Right?
Obviously the creation week was supernatural. It had to be for God to create everything that fast. Therefore science is never going to get it right. Only the bible explains what science cannot.
You are correct, but the presentation they gave could also be flawed. He's taking the 7 human days literally which is directly contradicting the Bible. 2 Peter chapter 3 verse 8 States Gods day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as a day. Taking this scripture literally would mean that at the end of creation, 7 thousand years would have already past. However this scripture only tells us that what man thinks is a long time is only a blink of the eye to God. It also guarantees us that we don't know what time period a day is to God. A thousand years, a billion years but definitely not 24 hours.
To beleve in evolution over creation is to say God is not all powerful and basically you take God completely out of the picture. Satan didn't cause Adam and eve to comit some horrible act, he simply got the to question Gods word. God is all powerful and he created us in his image. Thank you for doing these videos.
Satan is the morally virtuous character in the Christian story and god is the maniac. Satan never lied in the bible and was always honest. God in the bible lies, order mass murder, committs mass murder and condones slavery. Have you ever considered that history (in this case the bible) is written by the victors and that the character you call god is actually the evil victor and that satan is the ally of mankind?
Thanks guys. I love these chats. It confirms my belief in a young earth and gives me knowledge to share with my unbeleiving friends. It just makes so much sense 😊
Occam's Razor is the truth. The dating methods has been so much changed it is impossible to tell and each time before it changed it was said it was spot on.
People who believe in Genesis literally like this are extremely deluded. The standard yec arguments about assumptions with radiometric dating etc don't hold water given that different methods corroborate . Funny how they skip past their own massive assumptions based purely on faith that firstly their god actually exists and secondly that the Bible is inerrant and six days is God's word and not just the musings of whoever wrote it.
Deluded how? Name some legit assumptions. Maybe i can help you with those or give me some strong argument against the bible which could point out that it isnt accurate.
@@TheSnoopi8 I stated the assumptions in my post. Of course the Bible isn't accurate in a literal sense. For example no sane adult can take the noahs ark story as anything but a myth.
It is a known fact that the elements of the periodic table took millions if not billions of years to be created. They were created in the stars, and the stars took millions of years to be formed so, to think the universe is only a few thousands of years old is totally out of the question. The Bible does not give any time frame for the creation of the universe, it only says, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”, from here on in Genesis, the attention is placed on the formation of the earth and the emergence of biological life, which took also billions of years.
@@thartwig26 If you have an issue with "reality" as a world view, or "caring about believing as many true things as possible and as few false things as possible", then sure it's an issue.
You were the inspiration for a sermon I gave. As a Christian we need to understand Genesis as we understand John 3:16. As in Mathew 5:12 we are to be the salt... How are we to explain the good news to the world when they don't understand the bad news (the fall of man). You also inspired me to study science more indebtly.
"As a Christian we need to understand Genesis" WRONG, you as a christian, Genesis account would make you a plagiarist of the Hebrew Bible. Does, the genesis story first come to any christians???
The 6-day creation forms the basis for one of the Ten Commandments, which is the law that defines sin, from which we need to be saved. So don't tell me that this isn't a salvation issue!
That is entirely wrong. Evolution starts with the presumption that there is no Creator God. It was a scheme to show it was plausible that the universe created itself. It is not plausible, in fact. Yet those who were willing to believe it latched onto it so they could avoid dealing with the God of the Bible.
They will not and can not allow old earth to die, because it also ends the evolution fairy tale and they then left with creation and God. Some might say aliens seeding life, without the sense enough to ask how the aliens came to be.
Wilde, S. A.; Valley, J. W.; Peck, W. H.; Graham C. M. (2001-01-11). "Evidence from detrital zircons for the existence of continental crust and oceans on the Earth 4.4 Gyr ago". Nature. 409 (6817): 175-178. Wyche, S.; Nelson, D. R.; Riganti, A. (2004). "4350-3130 Ma detrital zircons in the Southern Cross Granite-Greenstone Terrane, Western Australia: implications for the early evolution of the Yilgarn Craton". Australian Journal of Earth Sciences. 51 (1): 31-45.
The scientific Method (Function) developed mostly by Christians( intelligence) relies on fixed laws of Nature (functions) to explain natural phenomena (Functions) and is simply: 1. Observe 2. Hypothesis 3. Test & predict 4 Conclude Evolution, Big Bang fail the scientific Method. However Universal Functions from Machine Analogies ... easily passes the scientific Method.
As a Christian who bases their faith on evidence, I would have to disagree with him on the one fundamental issue that there are always presuppositions to observation. That totally disregards agnosticism because if what he says is true, there is no such thing as agnosticism which I think is false because I was an agnostic for a few years and was looking for evidence that leads or strays from Gods existence and I can say that I did not have any presuppositions because I was strictly looking for the truth. If there are always presuppositions there can be no pursuit of real absolute truth; that pursuit does not exist because it will always be fallible. In a nutshell, I have found morality to not be relative for a number of reasons and there had to be someone to set those morals and everything doesn’t come from nothing, and life doesn’t come from non-life that’s too large of a leap of faith for me to believe. However, my decision on those issues did not arise from presuppositions that I had prior to my search for truth.
Hi Jesse as a Christian we should all believe by FAITH. BUT there are things in the Bible that we would like to know and understand . Like the age of the earth, No one knows but all i can tell you that the earth is more than 6000 years old. We have a time of human ( Adam) and the time of the dinosaurs and (?) before Adam. Were there life before that no one knows. This was a one way discussion, and i believe that this teacher is wrong. Most of these teachers will teach that the dinosaurs were in the ark but it is not so. That is what they get fed and with science the majority rule even in so called Christian teaching. The answer on dinosaurs are always that Noah let the babies on the ark. Just to think Noah went all over the earth to look for the babies. But GOD guided all animals to the ark. See with those groups if you do not stand with the leader you are out.Then is this teacher wrong YES he is.
Talks about interpreting based on what you believe, then goes on to say the Bible that was written over a few hundred years, and by different authors, and translated numerous times, is right. SUUUUURE thing buddy W ⚓️
My uncle is a devout Christian a professor and a worldwide expert in nuclear fission track dating. He says it’s impossible for the world to be 6000 years old. The evidence against is overwhelming.
All wisdom only comes from the bible, we can have expertise in extrabiblical matters and still be a fool. To be clear, I'm not at all calling your uncle a fool, just stating plainly that one's accolades outside of biblical truth are meaningless and not a marker of wisdom at all.
I think the biggest reason the discussion of evolution, and the fact that it's not a fact, is important is because when young people are taught that it is a fact, it gives them an intellectual reason to deny the truth in the Bible.
He said there is none stated in the Bible support his theory but those who believe in the same faith he is believing are guided by it. Is that what he said?
There is star light coming from billions of light years away. Some of the galaxies we still see star light from don't even exist anymore. That proves that the universe is billions of years old.
@@SheridanFalkenberry I read it. It throws around vague concepts and a few buzz words from physics, but doesn't really answer the question. The center of the Milky Way has a black hole around which stars otbit in a very peculiar way consistent with the way predicted by general relativity. If God fabricated this light and directed it at us, then he falsified a detailed historical record and thus, is guilty of lying. There's just no wiggling out of this. The Bible is a collection of lies, just like all of the other religions. We evolved from ape-like creatures, and when we die, we're going to stay dead. It sucks, but that's just the way it is.
@@whitney9844 It was the starting point of the light when it was emitted billions of years ago. Thus, the universe is vastly older than 6000 years, thus, the Bible is dead wrong.
How old did the earth appear to be when God created it? I assume Adam looked a lot older than 0 seconds old when his life began. In other words, God can create things that have characteristics which make them appear to be older than they actually are.
He created trees bearing fruit, so... Adam was created as a "fully grown" man, Eve, as a "fully grown" woman! So yeah, you're right. Edit: Picture in your mind a freshly landscaped yard. Makes the yard look 'brand new', doesn't it? So, apparent age is relative.
Someone said "There is starlight coming from billions of light years away. Some galaxies we still see star light from don't exist anymore. That proves that the universe is billions of years old." But if the universe expanded from a single point, whether that starting point was God or the Big Bang, it stands to reason that the light from those objects also started from that same point. So even if those objects are millions of lightyears away now, when they were created they were much closer. Perhaps very close. So even if those stars are only a few thousand years old we would see them today
The premise of Dr. Harwood's main argument is correct. Our assumptions drive our interpretations of data. Data does not "speak for itself." Data is interpreted to create information. Those interpretations are made based on the assumptions, even in experimentation (ie HYPOTHESIS/assumption comes before the actual experiment). This is not a criticism; just a statement of how science works (vastly oversimplified of course). I like Dr. Harwood's approach to the explanations. What I find to be so incredible about all the "debates" of God's existence (Hitchens, Dawkins, et al) is that they attempt to use data as information itself, all the while injecting their assumptions into the interpretation of that data. To believe God exists or does not exist, in both cases, is based on faith. "Science" does not excuse anyone from having faith, but it does blind people into believing they have "facts," and that those "facts" can only drive to one conclusion.
I disagree Data can speak for itself Look at basic statistics I can build empirical models with with high statistic probably and know nothing about about this underlying background of the data. In fact this is how machine learning and “AI” is so powerful. Because you can run the statistic in a data set with out biased human interpretation
@@Smaddx Perhaps I don't understand. but modern semiconductor and drug industries for example arnt just a human reviewing a scatterplot in excel... There are large predictive and empirical models that use hypothesis testing to literally take the human element out of it.
@@ndjarnag actually that is incorrect. AI is a conglomeration of computers and programs written by whom? How can science stand alone without interpretation? your model is like a tree falling in the forest with no audience; Does it make a sound?
@Jeff.Paborada what changed in humans from 6000 years ago that caused them to start writing? That makes no sense. In an evolutionary standpoint, humans from 6000 years ago would be identical to today's humans.
There is archaeological and historical ( both from Christian and secular sources) evidence for the veracity of the Old and New Testaments . Is there something you are having trouble believing Felupe?
Carbon dating contradicts the actual measurements of time. God can be able to make a grown tree overnight ( see the stories of Jonah). Earth is not that billion years old.
If you read the beginning of the Bible it only takes a few verses before God says, Let there be light, on day one. You'll notice the Earth is already there, so was water. Before light.
@@LookOutForNumberOne There is no difference on your side either. You make assumptions and then want to convert them to solid, verified proof out of thin air. You need to freshen up on your logical fallacies.
God contacted me and told me that the world was created 5 minutes ago. Not just the world but the entire universe and everything in it. The things underground, the things in the air, the planets orbiting the sun and the thoughts in your head including your memories. This was the word of God and I am the witness. Since I observed this, nothing that you see or believe can possibly be the truth because you came along later and are not a witness to the events. You are just making things up to fit whatever narrative you chose to believe before you read this.
A long time is not necessary when God made the universe ex nihilo (out of nothing). Everything was made for mankind to have dominion over and mankind appeared 6,000 yrs ago ...so bingo.
@@TrustinJesusChrist-John3.16 not by 294000 years though. 20% margin of error is allowed for. The earth is not young. Science has proven it time after time. The bible is not an accurate history of time no matter how often creationists try to change the data to suit their narrative
The question about Victorian geologists was not answered. Dr Harwood misunderstood the very simple question. See 26:18 and listen at least reasonably carefully.
If someone is a Christian, then how can they believe evolution as billions of years of death before homo sapiens appeared? It's written that sin and therefore death began to be only after Adam and Eve sinned in the garden of Eden.
If the daughter product was dated it would just be younger than the parent isotope so the earth could be even older further disproving a young earth. 4:45 also, the energy industry actually relies on radiometric dating to locate where gas and oil is trapped underground by creating a “basin model”. If radiometric dating was inaccurate the energy supple would crumble.
Both things you said are not true. Radiometric dating, at best, can give you and upper limit for the age of a sample. Second, oil companies aren't dating rock samples to find oil. They are surveying the surface and subsurface looking for specific geologic features and patterns that are common where oil is found. Then they literally drill and look. Oil exploration is a very here and now discipline.
@TheAaronYost but they most definitely do lol.. "....microscopically examine drill debris to determine if they are in the target formation , typically coral/marine shells. This is not done for all wells but for exploratory and step-out wells ( expanding a field). Primary interests are gas/oil ratio, hydrocarbon/water ratio, sulfur level. Age is only of interest as it gives information of the other properties."
@@bryancollier704 Actually there's a simpler way to dismantle the stupidity of this argument that belief in a young earth means you can't find fossil fuels. Geologic age estimates are based on assumptions about the past and conclusions drawn from observable data. As long as you make consistent assumptions and draw consistent conclusions the actual age of the earth is completely irrelevant. If I consistently make the same assumptions and consistently draw the same conclusions based on the data, I will consistently find oil in the same places another person, making different, but consistent, assumptions and conclusions will, even if one of us is using incorrect assumptions and drawing incorrect conclusions.
Thank you for these episodes, they really close the deal of a God, who through his love has shown his mercy and grace through his only begotten son, the Lord Jesus Christ the Righteous. The Good News will make an Episcopalian jump and shout !!!
I get the feeling this fellow isn’t a geologist. 🤔🙃🤣 and he’s really not exactly being challenged by the interviewer who is completely supportive of his position.
Whereas I repented from 6,000 year old creationism, evidence of “creation”, abounds. For example, there is far too much fossil fuels under ground to have been made by natural processes over billions if not trillions of years.
Yeah, if Darwin's model of macro evolution is correct, then it not only negates the book of Genesis, but it guts the very plan of salvation. Romans 5 suddenly becomes gibberish, specifically, and much of the Scriptures must then be reinterpreted or striken out altogether. If by one man sin did NOT enter the world, nor death by sin, then how does one man, Jesus, take our sin away and save us from it? The beautiful logic of it all is just trashed, and I believe that such was indeed the intent behind those who, before Darwin, began promoting the idea of billions of years and of macro-evolution.
Science is entirely neutral when it comes to religion. It doesn't make decisions based on religion. It makes decisions based on facts and evidence. It has no preconceived notions. It follows the evidence where it leads. Religion has a preconceived notion. It only except evidence that it approves of and disregards evidence that it disapproves of. You will note that the top experts in their field, and many branches of science, for many different religions, can agree on the evidence. The only people who disagree or people who hold a fundamentalist religious view and they feel their view is threatened. Religion and science or two different things. Scientific discovery should not be biased by religious beliefs.
Praise GOD for what CMI is doing. Thank God for leading us through Answers in Genesis and then through CMI, you set our faith on a firm foundation that cannot be moved. We study or record history because they cannot be repeated. In the same way the Bible give us an accurate history of HIS Story for our faith. If people want to talk about Long age, they will find it when Jesus Christ come again and HE set up HIS eternal age
The dumbing down was intentional. I got a degree in education and I was one of the few people who would ask questions. I went down the rabbit hole of the history of education and learned that there was a few wealthy people who had a lot to gain by making it the way it is today.
@@MrLogo73 - Here’s a fun little fact. You can have an illogical argument about something that is still true even if it’s not a good argument. It’s just not good evidence for the truth claim but it doesn’t make the truth claim itself less true.
@@boxelder9167 You're right about the illogical argument. But the one, who makes the claim, has to demonstrate, that it's true. He can not just assert, that it is. Even more so, the original comment on top wrote: "Problem is they will not present an opposing view . They want everyone dumbed down .." That is a conspiracy. And creationism, is not an opposing view. It's a conspiracy, nothing more.
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE debate an old earth evolutionary geologist or paleontologist on the trustworthiness of radiometric dating. Your arguments sound powerful when unchallenged, but they could be devastating if they stand up against a critic.
there is evolutionist who turned to young earth theory by their observations and scientific work turned based on that to belive that there is The God. Everything is assumptions what carbon dating is doing. Labs have done fossils within days with molecular picture within 100% similarity.
Why don't you look into Ukrainian labs z-pinch experiments? They did that on SFT and it's really interesting. 1st when the use plasma and make heavy radioactive isotopes the parent daughter ratios fall out like we see around us today. It is one of the better bits of evidence against radiometric dating. There are others who did comparisons of radiometric dating and found out no they don't always agree. That testing heavier elements gives you far older ages and the lighter ones give you far younger ages. Take all that and compare it to soft tissue in fossils? They have had well over 200 finds now in supposed strata that dated from 65 million to 500 million years old. Yet there have been so many tests in forensics showing those protiens can't last a million years. Yet they will swear up and down some Dino from this strata is dated at over 65 million years. Yet soft tissue absolutely disproves that and puts a cap on of less the 10k years. Ultimately there is all the proof you need out there to prove radiometric dating is flawed. You just have to look. The guys getting paid to date that rock are not going to tell you there may just be a problem with there results.. lol good luck
" History is separate from science" is a wrong asumption. Archéologie, geologie, paléontologie, antropologie are all containing refutable evidences leading to a scientific consensus . Consensus mean heavy debate until scientists agreed to recognize a reality that anyone could challenge before being established... bible can t be challenged 😂. Evidence based never win against believer . They don t look to evidences always. The mind is locked 🔒 .
Dr. Harwood pointing out the difference between the scientific method (examination/evaluation of repeatable processes) and history (events that occurred in the past) makes. Also a person’s reference point. I agree in the infallibility of God’s word, hence my world view and reference points are bound to God’s word. Thank you Dr. Harwood.
Oh my gosh! This is SOOOO BAD. I don’t even know where to begin. This is why we loose so many young people after they begin to think for themselves. This is embarrassing as a Christian. This is so sad.
You can trust God's word. I had to ask myself ,23 years ago, " if I believe Jesus turned water into wine, raised the dead,has power over the weather, the miracles of Moses in Exodus; why don't I just trust that God made everything just as He said He did, until dogmaticly proven otherwise?" Stepping out in faith and researching as much information as I could find on the topic ,my faith has grown exponentially. Believing in the biblical account doesn't hurt anyone, really. It may be personally embarrassing to be ridiculed by people for your beliefs, but isn't that what Jesus said is actually part of being Christian? I suggest checking out what the men in the bible believe. Jesus, Paul, Peter, Moses, for example, all refer to Genesis as history. God bless.
@88Padilla Things change and do not die, but living organisms die, and according to the theory of evolution, species change into other species through succeeding generations - requiring death.
@@TrustinJesusChrist-John3.16 no, they change in the process of living through enviromental change, not dying. Those changes only become apparent in later generations, but the change has already happened internally. The environment affects and changes our DNA.
@@TrustinJesusChrist-John3.16Species don't 'change into' other species. That would be transform-o-lution, not evolution. One group of organisms splits into two groups, which decrease in their ability to interbreed. Morphology is also not suddenly poofing into existence out of the blue. Already existing features are being reused for a different purpose and are being refined for that new use.
@MrLogo73 I said that according to the theory of Evolution (which is a lie) species evolve into other species. It's called speciation, stated by scientists as "fact". There is only a certain degree of adaptation evident within any given species. Scientists won't accept that because they'd have to accept an intelligent Creator created the species to start with.
“We need to come humbly before the truth of his word and say, thank you Lord for what you say on your word, now I believe it.” Translation: “We fundamentalists are really, really threatened by anyone who thinks for themselves. This is a space where faith trumps reason, so check your brain at the door.”
When I was in Bible college, one of the professors taught evolution. Even then, being a young Christian and somewhat Biblical illiterate, I thought that was STRANGE!!!
@@Yamyatos Your comment deserves a simple response. Speaking so adamantly about an unprovable theory such as uniformitarianistism, you must be brainwashed
@@knightclan4 Earth is old. That is a fact. There is no debate, nor a reason for one. We *know* earth is at least 4.5 billion years old. We may be wrong with the exact date, but it cannot be younger. If it's just about disproving a young earth.. pretty much every other field of science does that unintentionally. There simply is no evidence for a young earth whatsoever. Quite the opposite. Any evidence we ever found that has any relation to the age of .. anything, really.. points to stuff being old. We have *living* organisms older than the proposed YEC age of earth. Trees 5000+ years of age, sponges 10.000 years of age, and a tree grove that is on the lower end at least 80.000 years of age, but may be well over a million. People who believe in a young earth are literally on the exact same level of denial as flat earthers. These two delusions belong in the same bucket. If you reject one, but not the other, the issue is you. If you accept both on the other hand.. i dont think there is hope for you. Same with other topics btw. We *know* there was never a global flood, for example. Not just because there is no evidence for it, and many that contradicts it.. the whole goddamn idea is debunked even by fields you wouldnt think about. Genetics for example. If a flood killed all but two of all species / "kind", we would see genetic bottlenecks matching in both time and severity for all living organisms. Needless to say.. we dont. Many species have a genetic bottleneck. Not down to 2 individuals, and not all at the same time tho.
@@knightclan4 Earth is old. That is a fact. There is no debate, nor a reason for one. We know earth is at least 4.5 billion years old. We may be wrong with the exact date, but it cannot be younger. If it's just about disproving a young earth.. pretty much every other field of science does that unintentionally. There simply is no evidence for a young earth whatsoever. Quite the opposite. Any evidence we ever found that has any relation to the age of .. anything, really.. points to stuff being old. People who believe in a young earth are literally on the exact same level of denial as flat earthers. These two delusions belong in the same bucket. If you reject one, but not the other, the issue is you. If you accept both on the other hand.. i dont think there is hope for you. Same with other topics btw. We know there was never a global flood, for example. Not just because there is no evidence for it, and many that contradicts it.. the whole goddamn idea is debunked even by fields you wouldnt think about. Genetics for example. If a flood killed all but two of all species / "kind", we would see genetic bottlenecks matching in both time and severity for all living organisms. Needless to say.. we dont. Many species have a genetic bottleneck. Not down to 2 individuals, and not all at the same time tho.
problem 1: if death preceded adams sin, there's no reason for Jesus. 7 physical days was believed by Jesus, if the sabbath was created for man, then the prior six were also created for our understanding. all of the circadian rythems are based on 24hrs/7days... why?
I like to ask, 'Which is older, evolution or the big bang'? Usually, the answer is the big bang, but the correct answer is evolution as it began in 1859 A.D., whereas the Big Bang exploded on to the scene in 1931 A.D..
What is the point you are trying to make as to whether evolution or the big bang is older? *Reply to:* _"I like to ask, 'Which is older, evolution or the big bang'? Usually, the answer is the big bang, but the correct answer is evolution as it began in 1859 A.D., whereas the Big Bang exploded on to the scene in 1931 A.D.."_
@@miyojewoltsnasonth2159 I find it somewhat amusing that there are people alive on the earth today that are older than the big bang. Also somewhat amusing is that God declares the end from the beginning, whereas man declares the beginning from the end. Indeed, His ways are not our ways and our ways are not His ways. It is possible to show that the big bang theory itself is fulfillment of Biblical prophecy. And thanks for the question, I had to spend time thinking about it.
*@glenngraham8513* Thank you for your reply, and I appreciate you took time to think about it. Much appreciated. If you believe evolution began in 1859 AD and the Big Bang began in 1931 AD, do you also believe gravity began in 1687 AD when Newton wrote about it in his _Principia?_ If gravity only began in 1687, why did the Ancient Romans need to use nails to hang Jesus Christ on the cross? Or did gravity exist when Jesus Christ was hung on the cross, even if the Ancient Romans didn't have a word for gravity? *Reply to:* _"I find it somewhat amusing that there are people alive on the earth today that are older than the big bang. Also somewhat amusing is that God declares the end from the beginning, whereas man declares the beginning from the end. Indeed, His ways are not our ways and our ways are not His ways. It is possible to show that the big bang theory itself is fulfillment of Biblical prophecy. And thanks for the question, I had to spend time thinking about it."_
*@glenngraham8513* Additionally, I am quite curious which prophet prophesied about the "big bang theory itself"? Do you have the biblical book and verse where this prophecy was made? Thank you in advance. *Reply to:* _"It is possible to show that the big bang theory itself is fulfillment of Biblical prophecy."_
I think there is also an understanding to acknowledge. In job, God allows the suffering, thus perhaps allowing it in His “will”. I think, whether we like it or not, God is in control and sometimes those sufferings are for a reason and that reason seems to be to point to and glorify him through suffering. Saying cancer was made by sin makes it seem like God had not control and that “sin” had the control. Can we accept that God did allow or even orchestrate the suffering? Suffering isn’t “evil” so we can’t say God allowed evil, but he does allow suffering. Gods answer to job has enormous weight and meaning.
@Vaughn-Alan-Jack My hypothesis of the true age of the Earth can be determined with simple answers. Meaning, that God created the Earth with old space debris suspended in the Universe. This space debris comprised of (rock and ice) can be in fact billions of years old. But God took that ancient space debris and created the Earth with it in six days. Therefore, the Earth elements would be in fact be billions of years old with carbon testing, but the actual construction of the Earth was done in six days making the Earth a young creation with ancient parts. A good example of this hypothesis would be a carpenter building a new house with ancient barnwood. The house is new, but the materials are ancient. God made the stars in heaven before He created the earth and the number of stars He created was compared to every grain of sand on the earth. And He named them all. Before the Earth was created God did mentioned that the Earth was without form and void in the midst of the deep waters.
These young Earthets are so embarrassing. Seeing dinosaurs inside the ark encounter had a lot of people laughing.. God gave us brains to think and reason and are commanded to do so
You didn't say WHY you though the idea of dinosaurs on the Ark was so silly? What, specifically, do you think defies reason/logic? P.S. We have written MUCH on this over decades. Please use the search bar on creation.com to see if we've already answered your objections. Our dinos Q&A page is a good starting place: creation.com/dinosaurs
Take the Bible literally. If you claim to be a Christian you MUST believe the Word of Yahuah. AIG picks and chooses what they believe from the Bible. Let Yahuah be true and every man a liar, that includes every scientist. I do appreciate this man’s literal age of the earth. Kudos for the approach to this topic.
I have a question. What is AIG? I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you. I don't have an opinion about the age of the earth. I don't pick and choose what I believe but I do try to learn about the type of literature I am reading, what the author intended to communicate, and any linguistic nuances that could alter my understanding.
Also iron, due to its propensity to rip oxygen ions off of other molecules, would cause tissue destruction. Any amount that would be considered "preservative", in other words it may prolong the decay of certain organic compounds, would increase the rate of destruction of tissue and cell structures (which are also preserved.)
I became saved at 12 mostly due to my circumstances in early life. Mature Christians showing me Jesus love through their own love. I can’t relate to people who come to Christianity through old earth vs new earth. I suppose it’s up to former atheists who understand. I would add that ice never been around an atheist who displays that kind of love.
respected speaker and moderator, I respect your msg, as a BIBLE beleiving Christian I understand that Genesis is true about happened around 6000 years before. But about the origin of Earth and heavens Bible says ‘In the beginning God....’ ; from that I what I understood is Earth can be 6000 to ----years BC old as it is not specified when was that. ‘And the Ruha of God was hovering over the waters‘ - for what period of time? Not known. But the first day of Gensis and creations in Earth happened around 6000 years as I could understand, but ofcourse I am none but a mere human to comment on this topic.
Jesus said, "If you don't believe the words written by Moses, how then will you believe in me..." Jesus knew the earth is young. Do you think all the greedy, grant hungry, arrogant academics know more than God? Were they right when they thought the earth was 75,000 years old, or a couple million years old, or hundreds of millions, or 4.7 billion, now 4.3 billion? Which one do you believe, and why would you believe people who are wrong, wrong again, and again and again....
on the subject of why the Earth and universe wasn't created all at once instantaneously, I believe God created in 7 days to establish the Sabbath, and give us as humans the structure of working for 6 days and resting for 1. Mark 2:27 “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.”
The creation myth in the bible does not mention years at all but says and only seven of them So why doesn’t he believe the universe is only seven days old I can’t believe he really believes what he is saying he doesn’t appear to be that stupid
If you don't believe there are people living in the caves and hunter-gatherering and using stone tools, then the age of earth is just 10,000 years. Farming and animal domestication only started 10,000 years ago. According to Bibles, Adam and sons were farmers and shepherds. Thus, they existed around 10,000 years ago. Who made those stone tools and drawing in caves?
Well after the tower of babel languages was scattered, people were scattered and migrated tribewise so they had to make do with crude tools and find shelter in caves as they wondered before reaching a place where they could settle and build civilization.
The young earth argument makes so much more sense to me. I have abandoned all old earth and evolution theories. I accept the Biblical account to be accurate and true.
6000 years is still very old. How is 6000 years considered young.
@travisshaffer552 well it's way younger than the accepted view of our worlds history.
@@travisshaffer552 When you compare billions of years as proposed by mainstream scientists, 6000 years is quite young. The billions of years paradigm is necessary for their fake evolution theory.
It is a mistake to treat the bible like a scientific text. It's not.
Also in the whole picture the 1000 yr Millennium reign of Christ ruling the Earth from his throne in Jerusalem brings the whole of the ages to a fulfillment at 7000yrs.
Then the new heavens and new earth to last for all of eternity.
The universe is under no obligation to make sense to humans.
That is one of the best comments I've seen from anyone, particularly in regards to the discussion of Earth's origins. It goes perfectly with Proverbs 3:5-6.
I'm not sure what to believe exactly when it comes to the age of the Earth, but I do believe one thing for sure - that our Father in Heaven created it - whether as a young Earth or as an event millions of years ago with evolution unfolding as a result... I believe without doubt that it was done by God in the manner in which He intended with His infinite wisdom, regardless of what we mere mortals think is the case.
Afterall, we humans don't have the best track record when it comes to getting things right. We should have some humility as a result. So thank God for His grace and mercy! ✝
yes He is. He put me here
@thomast626
Forgive me, but you seem to accept the 'possibility' of evolution.
God said, specifically, how He did it.
Evolution declares God to be a liar.
@@thomast626 The Bible clearly says ... follow & obey God not Man ... and the Universe as created over ... 4 x 24 hr days ....5994 years ago, before an ALL KNOWING God created the Sun & Solar system and put Earth into its orbit creating the day & night, morning & evening, and year.
The Universe is less than 6000 years old.
And if you actually understood the scientific method you would have easily figured out the evidence of Creation.
You can’t give human characteristics to an inanimate object. The “universe” can’t have “obligations “.
I have been a Christian for many years and could not even speak about evolution theory but it became too hard to just ignore it . Isn't it possible that God used the evolutionary process to make everything. The Bible has so many issues. The Ark for example can be torn apart extremely easily scientifically.
@@Jerlynvins my man. Let me ask you a question. Can a cat ever become a dog. Or can a pigeon ever become a shark ? Answer is clearly no. But one more thought for you is, how many times do you need to wash your clothes in the washer for them to be perfeclty folded inside ? In infinite amount of times that clothes can never be folded, ever. So in these 2 thought process you can cleary see that there is a creator. And believe me our God is great.
Even from a "scientific" perspective it wouldn't be possible to use evolution as the process for everything. There's a lot more evidence for a young Earth than old, most of it is either suppressed or ignored. Or in many cases dismissed through ad hominem attacks.
Spike Psarris has a great series that covers Astronomy.
Nathaniel Jeanson has an incredible series on human DNA and what it reveals.
Immanuel Velikovsky does a great job of dealing with historic accounts and their meaning.
There are many more, these are some of my favorites. You'll see a lot of attacks against their character and general dismissiveness of their findings but little detail and no hard evidence. Look into it for yourself and then make a more informed judgement on the matter.
If you think the Bible has "so many issues" you've not researched it enough. And the research on DNA has effectively proved Neo Darwinism totally false.
@@whoswho6641no offense but you make no sense here. The difference in DNA between a cat and dog is quite small. Furthermore I have no idea what you mean about washing clothes and what that has to do with evolution.
@@Doty6String my point is, there is a God. And His name is Jesus.
God bless
Cats make cats cats, dogs make dogs. There are NO EXCEPTIONS. SUPPOSEDLY crocodiles haven't changed in millions of years. Why? They were and always will be crocodiles.
@@haggismcbaggis9485 how do you know it was a "bear-dog"? It made more of its own kind just like everything else.
@@haggismcbaggis9485 That is your interpretation of the creature, but our observation of the creatures that aren't extinct is that they all produce after their own kinds.
Ah, the "cats make cats, dogs make dogs" argument, a favorite among creationists and opponents of evolution. It's a simple yet flawed understanding of genetics and evolutionary biology.
While it's true that species reproduce within their own kind, the concept of speciation and evolution goes far beyond that simplistic view. Evolutionary processes like genetic mutations, natural selection, and environmental pressures lead to the diversification of species over time.
As for crocodiles not changing in millions of years, that's not entirely accurate. Crocodiles, like all living organisms, have undergone evolutionary changes and adaptations to survive and thrive in different environments. While they may appear similar to their ancient ancestors, they have indeed evolved over time, just at a slower pace compared to some other species.
So, while it's catchy to say "cats make cats, dogs make dogs," the reality is much more nuanced and complex, showcasing the wonders of evolution and the diversity of life on Earth.
Do you really want to hear the error in your understanding of science, or are you just cheerleading?
@@FirstnameLastname-cx6go farmers rely on life producing after it's own kind.
Things change within their own pool. They do not skipper fish to other ponds over time. If you make that claim (which defies observation) you need to demonstrate, the cop out of Evolutionism is an appeal to time, that things Evolve so slow we can not observe. Unfalsifiable faith in that which has never been seen.
It matters when unsaved people are seeking answers.
As an ex-atheist, I 100% agree.
"God, if you are there, I need to know. I need to know what is true" I said as a teen and in my early 20s at least on three separate occasions.
In 1993 a friend tried to give the Gospel and he hit a wall. That wall came down we he shared with me a VHS on Mount Saint Helens, Evidence for Catastrophe. The ball was rolling toward a radical transformation.
People aren't saved just because they're Christians and believe the Bible wholly and unquestionably.
Science is entirely neutral when it comes to religion. It doesn't make decisions based on religion. It makes decisions based on facts and evidence. It has no preconceived notions. It follows the evidence where it leads. Religion has a preconceived notion. It only except evidence that it approves of and disregards evidence that it disapproves of. You will note that the top experts in their field, and many branches of science, for many different religions, can agree on the evidence. The only people who disagree or people who hold a fundamentalist religious view and they feel their view is threatened. Religion and science or two different things. Scientific discovery should not be biased by religious beliefs.
Yes, this is the problem with YEC. Hebrews 4:9-10 is clear. Have you entered into the 7th day as the Bible asks you to? In Genesis 2:4. The entire time span of God’s creative activity is called a “day”. So yes, Genesis tells us that the word day in Genesis is long time span. The events that happen on day 6 can not happen in 24 hours, too many events, must be a long time span.
@@djsarg7451 Exodus 20:11 For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. God did not rest for millions or billions of years on day seven as an example to man to rest one day out of seven. The six days of creation had a morning and evening. Adam was made on day six and sometime later he sinned and death entered the world. There was no death before Adam The Bible clearly provides the genealogy of Adam to Jesus the Christ. Based on this timeline in scriptures the Universe and all therein was created only about 6,000 years ago.
Well, when God created Adam, he wasn't a baby. He was fully grown. So, to us, the Earth is billions of years old, but God created it instantly and made it ready for our use. People need to stop putting limits on what God can do.
You may be interested to read our article:
→ God created with functional maturity, not ‘appearance of age’ - creation.com/is-apparent-age-biblical
What an interesting point , this way the earth can be both 6,000 years old and billions of years old. in other words, God made a new thing but He made it out of billions year old material.
Not putting limits on God with the exception that He cannot lie.
He said he flooded the earth recently and according to scripture, He created make and female in the beginning. So, it really does make a difference in order to not have blind Faith.
No sensible person believes the Adam and Eve story. You can believe that that God made incest OK but the rest of the world find it abhorrent
@@user-gx2yy1df6f No, He didn't. He created all things within 6 days a little over 6000 years ago. God Himself states this clearly in Exodus 20:11. And again in Exodus 31:17.
He makes clear even everything in Heaven was made in the 6 days. The beginning in Gen 1 is the beginning of all things. If there was material billions of years old, there would have to be another beginning to account for it, and thus God would have spoken in error in Gen 1:1; "In the beginning.......
The fact that these thick sedimentary layers also include many monoclines and synclines and folded rocks means all these layers had to be ductile in order to curve at the same time. Creationists have done microscopic analysis of these curved layers and have shown that they are no different than the horizontal layers of the same stratum. That blows away the whole idea of an evolutionary geological column. In addition, it blows away the validity of radiometric determinations in dating these rocks.
The stratigraphic column consists of different strata.
@@MrLogo73 with no transition layers ... just as there aren't any transitions forms proving Evolution.
Natural & Unnatural (breeding) Selection was known back in the 1850's ... to only cause variation or adaption within a species.
We know today mutations never creates new genes with new traits.
Because Universal Functions ... is the Hypothesis for Sir Issac Newton's Watchmaker Analogy over 300 years ago and all machine Analogies.
Evolution, Abiogenesis and Big Bang fail the scientific Method and should have been relegated to ... fantasy.
Whereas Universal Functions easily passes the scientific Method ... becasue space, time, Laws of Nature, matter & energy ... are clearly natural Funcitons ... with information like purpose, reason, rules, properties, processes & design ... which can only come from the Mind of an Intelligence.
Well said mate
No. Absolute lunacy. These frauds are trying to fit the moon through the eye of a needle.
@@MrLogo73 And?
As a Christian, I think this is the absolutely worst reasoning I've heard to try to explain the young earth creationist view.
@@JEREMIAH53031 I'd be interested, since you stated this is the worst, then what have seen that is better?
How would you explain the young earth creationist view?
Tell me ANY reasoning from ANY christian. When christianity is a forgery from the Hebrew Bible.
This is by far the best I have heard. It’s logical and simple. Evolutionists are only good at supposing and speculating.
@@Hsauzier Except that there's two things that are huge, major problems for the YE hypothesis: Look up the heat problem and the mud problem, especially if you also believe in the account of a global flood. AIG eventually acknowledged it's a big problem to where they concede they might have to abandon using science to prove YE and appeal to a miracle instead and other holdouts have attempted to perform damage control by making up ad-hoc counters that end up getting falsified, or try to downplay the problem and kick the can down the road, but as it stands now, it's a major problem for trying to use science to validate YE including the global flood.
I clicked this video so fast!!! Thank you CMI for opening my eyes to a world of creation!!
*@Baseball4lifer* What was the primary point that changed your mind from believing the earth is billions of years old to a position that the earth is 6000 years old?
*Reply to:* _"I clicked this video so fast!!! Thank you CMI for opening my eyes to a world of creation!!"_
who are these god squad speakers they keep wheeling in, and I'm being over polite when I call them speakers and I would only say one word to them, "DINOSAURS".
That is what normally happens to gullible people.
Opened your eyes to a world of peddling dishonest science, more like.
*@Baseball4lifer* What was the primary point that changed your mind from believing the earth is billions of years old to a position that the earth is 6000 years old?
*Reply to:* _"I clicked this video so fast!!! Thank you CMI for opening my eyes to a world of creation!!"_
*Note:* Just asking a second time in case my first attempt didn't make it through to you.
🎯 Key points for quick navigation:
00:00 *🌍 Earth's Age Determination*
- Science is about observation and repeatable experiments.
- When making pronouncements about the past, it is essential to consider the inability to observe the past directly.
- Our beliefs influence how we interpret evidence, especially when it comes to historical matters.
01:27 *🔬 Scientific Evidence Interpretation*
- Scientific evidence is interpreted in alignment with preexisting beliefs.
- Science is limited in illuminating historical events due to its focus on observable, repeatable processes.
- Assumptions and beliefs play a crucial role in interpreting the evidence presented.
05:15 *📜 Role of History in Understanding the Past*
- History often trumps science when it comes to addressing historical matters.
- Different belief systems and worldviews influence how individuals interpret scientific data.
- Understanding the history one believes in is critical when determining the age of something.
21:49 *🧭 Death and suffering as a result of rebellion against God*
- Death and suffering came from our rebellion against God, not from Him.
- God's love is shown through sending Jesus to pay the price for sin and suffering.
- Belief in a young Earth aligns with the hope for a new heaven and Earth without sin and death.
26:13 *🌍 Challenges to the old age of the Earth*
- Sedimentary layers and fossils do not align with the claimed vast periods of evolutionary time.
- Rapid sedimentation and fossilization contradict the slow processes of evolutionary timelines.
- Lack of evidence for elapsed time between layers supports rapid formation of sedimentary rocks.
33:40 *🕰 Issues with radiometric dating methods*
- Potassium-argon dating inaccuracies due to argon trapping in rocks skew results.
- Excess argon complicates accurate dating and calls the whole process into question.
- Cross-checking radiometric dates with other evidence is essential due to errors and assumptions.
43:59 *🦕 Soft tissue and DNA challenges*
- Soft tissue preservation challenges the idea of millions of years
- DNA decay analysis shows it doesn't support ancient age claims
- Recent burial in flood event likely explains soft tissue findings
47:20 *🧬 Carbon 14 in dinosaur bones*
- Carbon 14 in dinosaur bones contradicts millions of years timeline
- Scientific journal states radiocarbon dating in bones is inaccurate
- Efforts to defend against challenges to evolutionary theory
49:15 *✨ Evidence supporting biblical creation*
- Looking at the world through biblical eyes reveals design and purpose
- Clear evidence of a creator in the world around us
- Understanding the world through the Bible enhances the gospel message
Made with HARPA AI
@@PTHastings That's a handy tool. Do you find it to be accurate?
These AI answers are based on selective questioning and cherry-picking. For brevity's sake I'll limit the use the Carbon 14 measurement and the soft tissue fossil problem as examples of the data being misinterpreted, truncated, and misapplied:
If you look into the specifics on Carbon 14 dating, you'll find that it's not the only means of being able to measure the overall age of things on the earth. It's found to be reliable dating extinct organisms back to about 50,000 years, because carbon-14 has a half-life of about 5,730 years. But there's also a method called relative dating where carbon 14 dating is combined with radioactive dating in order to factor in the dates of radioactive decay in the substrates that the fossils are buried between. But let's say for the sake of argument that we'll grant the so-called problems that was also brought up by this poster about radiometric dating and just stick to Carbon 14 dating, and we find that the young earth model still has a problem, because the 50,000 year age limit with carbon 14 dating they accept and try to use to refute an old earth is still a long, long way off from the approx. 6,000 year limit that's being claimed as the age of the earth.
As to the soft tissues, YE creationists love to make a field day with it, but Paleontologist Mary Schwitzer who was the first scientist that discovered soft tissues on a dinosaur fossil rejects the creationist claim that this demonstrates that dinosaur remains are only a few thousands of years old. In fact, she has gone on record by saying there's no scientific consensus on how long it takes for soft tissue to actually decompose because there's many variables involved. Paleontologists discovered that there are many factors that can affect the decomposition rate of tissues, including the rate of speed the dead animal was buried, the environment in which it was buried, amount of oxygen in the atmosphere, how fast the sediments surrounding the dead animal cemented, how much exposure the fossils had to any bacteria or fungi as general examples; and as a specific example, evidence has been found that soft tissues preserved in environments with higher oxygen levels like those found in shallow marine limestones and in sandstones actually resist decomposition. Schwitzer herself also said that finding soft tissues in dinosaur fossils simply means "we don’t understand degradation at the molecular level."
So appealing to Carbon 14 dating and soft tissues in fossils hasn't it any way refuted the current scientific consensus that the earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old, sorry. And those are just two examples I used to refute out of all those other common YE claims.
Millions and billions of years calls Jesus a Liar. Jesus while in the flesh on Earth verified the truthfulness of the scriptures and God can not lie. I can recall as a teen buying into the whole gap theory and millions of years. We had a family friend who was a great preacher when it came to preaching Gospel but he had no answers for the beliefs I had accepted. He just told me I was wrong and left.
So a story you cannot prove varies scripture? That is some circular logic.
It matters! When I was on my journey to Christianity, I was having issues believing in the Bible as a God inspired book. On a fluke, I ended up at a little church in Savannah, Georgia, where I was visiting friends for the first time. That weekend they had a guest speaker, pastor Paul Viet, the dino pastor. He went through the Bible with a fine tooth scientific comb, explaining dinosaurs, fossil records and all the issues with evolution. He gave me exactly what I needed, when I needed it. That pushed me over the edge, and the whole improbability of that weekend blew my mind. That was back in 2007 and is one of my favorite memories of this path to believing.
Hi if there teaching were about dinosaurs in the ark. Then my brother i think you read the Bible your self and ask GOD for revelation.
@richardplaatjies7680 maybe you should actually read the bible more. they didn't start calling them dinosaurs until the 1900s. Look up Job 40:15-24. There's your dinosaur.
@@stevebone88 Hi it is good to know that you know what i am talking about, behemoth or dinosaurs it is the same thing. But this does not change the fact that this teacher is wrong in his teaching.
II Timothy 4: 03 - 04
Shalom
@@stevebone88oh wow, it just goes to show you. You can fool anyone that wants to be fooled
I love Dr. Hardwood's no compromise no negotiation stance on the Word of God - even if it doesn't make sense it's still the Word of God and it's our understanding that needs to be corrected. That's how believers are supposed to approach God's Word. His thoughts are far above our own. There must be an element of faith - accepting Him as True even if it doesn't make sense because we have experienced Him. That's what most skeptical believers need - an actual encounter with Jesus. When that happens you will believe the Word of God especially when it doesn't make sense 😅
Of course, it's easy to say something doesn't make sense, especially when no examples are provided. But you know what doesn't make sense? To believe that if we're all just the product of an accident, and all of our thoughts are just electro-chemical reactions that we should expect anything to make sense. The atheistic universe has no rational basis for logical thinking. For you to expect something to make sense is to borrow from the Christian worldview because only the Christian worldview can provide a rational basis for logic.
So even when it's wrong it's right because it's in the bible? Rather a silly argument. The earth is 4.5 billion years old. Science has proven this using many different methods. To simply deny it because it's not in the bible is ridiculous because the bible is not a science book.
It says in the Bible "The only way to God is through me (Jesus)" and yet the preacher says any faith will do contradicting the Bible. There are something like 3000 different Faith's....... any God capable of creating the Heavens and the Earth would surely be capable of communicating his instructions without relying on the scribings of relatively primitive men ? 🤷♀️
For millennia, it was people's "no compromise, no negotiation stance on the word of god" that killed so many innocent people by refusing to see that it is germs and not sin or miasma or evil spirits which cause illness. That is why thinking rational people reject that stance.
If something doesnt make sense, then either the author was an idiot, or incompetent at writing comprehensible statements. Not sure which is better. But ask yourself this.. you are an omniscient being.. why on earth do you write so much nonsensical stuff, if you, and only you, know exactly what words would convince everybody. Why are most people not convinced then? Further, why is so much of the stuff you wrote obviously wrong or contradicting? Maybe, just maybe.. it wasnt an omniscient being who wrote it, but desert dwelling, superstitious people.
I'm sure you've heard of the late Chuck Missler. He is a believer and asked his audience he was speaking to how many believed in a young universe and who believed in an old universe. The audience was mixed in their opinion. Chuck then said, "What if I told you it was both?"
But not even the strongest telescope looking out into the farthest reaches of the universe hold up the idea of an old universe. Even non creationist are unable to find evidence of an old universe.
I can imagine that God created an old universe/earth just like he created Adam and Eve in an adult mode or like Jesus made good wine that must be old to be good. Why not? Like you can build an earth that looks old in a computer game.
Mark Harwood: All of science is just based on wrong assumptions. Case closed. Lol. Give this man the Nobel Prize!
You're saying that as if though are innocent little truth seekers who have nothing but the best for humanity at heart when the exact opposite is true - they are mostly sinners who detest the very idea that they are responsible to a supreme moral arbiter. Being so shocked that they keep failing to find the Truth is like being shocked that a man who murdered his pregnant wife and two daughters fails to tell the cops the truth (see Christopher Lee Watts).
Ions decay from atoms of rocks and other sediments. This rate of decay can be measured using mathematics. These measurements have reached over 4.5 billion years. These are facts.
Hi there! See this article here: creation.com/how-carbon-dating-works
@@SheridanFalkenberry yeah that is total crap
Great article
@chrismartino3519 Yeah, creationist scientist is an oximoron because to be a scientist and try to prove God, then you must first denounce him. You can't assume a conclusion before you've even started. Now I can believe in God and know (to an extent) that the universe is bliions of years old. God exists outside of time and space so how's he gonna explain billions of years and complex chemical processes to people who haven't even developed toilet paper yet 😅
@@chrismartino3519 decay rates start with assumptions as to the quantity that was in the artefact when it started to decay. Those assumptions are incorrect and the other problem is the assumption that decay rates are always consistent. There are reasons to believe they are not at all consistent in the past.
You need to go and do some more research of the creationist literature to understand the argument.
I have autism and OCD, for me to u derstand something I have to take it apart in minute detail. So looking into this and other Christian things has made my faith deeper and strong as when I look it is like looking into the mind of God, in my humble option.
In the beginning God created the Heaven (freezing cold void) and the Earth (spherical ball of water)
In parentheses is what we see today
The verse 2 describes the only thing created so far ..other than the space to put it.. science is importance so verse 3 was extremely important because the light spectrum allows for freezing and Heating.
The next verse is where God places the atmosphere between the ice and the Seas.. the pressure formed by this process allowed the insects to grow huge and in fact because of the inverse Square law, that atmosphere was absolutely necessary for the size of fossils we have in the fossil record.
And finally, everything was Leviathan in those days, or huge... because of the atmosphere people and animals lived long and got real big.. but God was mad at man and removed the ice which in turn caused the flood..
when the ice was removed.. all of the vegetation and animals began receiving the radiation that is looked for by the age dating tests.
That's Peter's World standing inside and outside of water verse❤.
. That's what we will learn ..that's how he did it.😅
Mythtrekker610, You missed one small detail to take apart. Why can't anyone demonstrate a god even exists using ANY objective demonstrable evidence? Why are people relegated to trying to define an imaginary being into existence?
I just saw the top of a very tall Mountain in BC and the ridge line was so narrow it was skinnier than a balance beam with a shear drop off on both sides near vertical, as soon as I saw it I thought, how can this not be warn down? I would say all pegmatite veins and mountains are the same age as my trees, 4200 yrs +/- 100 yrs
Hahahaha, thats hilarious 😂
AT 27:31, A sediment layer does NOT = 1 year. It could represent 10K 0r 100K years. BTw, How long do you think it took to make the Grand canyon?
A few days as is obvious from the absolute lack of erosion between the mostly perfectly flat layers.
I watched an interview years ago with an expert of some kind, I can't remember if they were a geologist, but it was some very credible and experienced professional, who said exactly this. He was explaining how time lines could not be relied on, because after the big bang of creation, time was expediently faster than it is now. It slows as it expands. It makes a lot of sense. When I heard the first interview here, it concurred with his timeline also. He said modern man doesn't take the fact that time was so much faster when they account for timing in carbon dating etc. He was coming from a purely scientific point, not a Christian one btw..
I believe I was saved before I became a young earth creationist but the Holy Spirit brought me to a love of the truth and I was overjoyed to find Ken hams ministry in lockdown. Fast forward to today and I’m reading through John with my atheist friend whose main objection is the scientifically held age of the earth and its contradiction with Gods word. It’s important work that you’re doing, God bless you.
That's great that he is willing to engage with you! Prayers for you and your friend
@@SheridanFalkenberry thank you, your prayers are very much appreciated. She was in a coma a couple of years ago and we were told she wasn’t going to make it. We prayed for her and she miraculously woke up and recovered, now she’s seeking God. one of her stumbling blocks is the age of the earth and evolution. I think people find it hard to accept they’re whole world view is not true but we keep praying and presenting her with the truth.
@@caronbryan9612 Patient endurance in effect. Keep teaching your friend the truth. God is able to overcome the programming we received in state run institutions.
Kent hovind is another great one
What does any of this have to do with anything?
4:53 the book of Genesis is A. Not a history book. And B. Not an eye witness account. 🤦🏼♂️
The Gospels actually are eye witness accounts...
Wrong on both counts.
@@elizabeth84266 - the gospels are an eye witness account yes.
The book of Genesis is not. It is also not a history book as the original comment stated. It is a book of origins.
@@TheRubberDuck01 it is an eyewitness account, it has multiple authors, the first being God, the second being Adam..
@@RJ-s41ty How do you come to the conclusion that Genesis is an eyewitness account? It is impossible to be one when it covers what happened across 1500 years... Your position is flawed mate. Sorry.
Most Scholars think it was Moses who wrote it. He would've been inspired by God to write about it, plus would've collated other writings together to make it a complete work.
Not an eyewitness account dude.
Ive debated many on the subject. I wont mention God or the Bible, just scientific facts. The other person though will eventaully get mad, lash out, and bring God into the conversation 90% of the time.
@@stephentucker2714 the trouble with young earth is that the genealogies given in different books of the bible skip generations. And the early parts of genesis were god telling us about his creation, his love for us, and our disobedience. Yet despite all our disobedience god still loves us and allows us freedom still to choose.
What it is not, is a scientific explanation from the universe. It talks about seperation of the water exposing the land. But doesn't bother explaining evaporation, air and clouds having huge amounts of water and that is the rain. Or Moses told to keep sick people seperate from the rest of the community, thousands of years before understanding germs. God didn't tell them about viruses and how these invisible things can make you sick. It's not a scientific text. It is a bunch of history showing us God's love and power.
@chrisoakey9841 absolutely! I personally believe in the young earth but, have heard many Christians explain why they don't. I don't see a problem with it as far as salvation goes at all despite how much many atheist want it to be a problem. I've been saying that for years! It's not meant to be a science book, but instructions for salvation and why we need it. I don't read a cook book to learn about physics, that doesn't mean physics doesn't exist based on the cook book.
@@stephentucker2714 if God can make the universe, he can make it look like it is at any stage of development he likes. But that is not the goal of the bible. Thanks for the comment.
These people who say "Why does it matter?" are two types of people.
One type, are those who struggle with science and want an excuse to not educate themselves.
The other type are those who have idolitry in their heart. They want to be accepted by the world and the secular science community and don't want to put God's Word above man's.
I had one guy tell me that if believing in Christ required him to believe in the Genesis account of 6 literal days, then he would not be a Christian because the Bible is then wrong. His way of believing in Christ was that the Bible didn't violate his belief in an old earth. So, his belief in secular science is above his belief in Christ and the Word of God. That's idolatry.
But, these people don't admit they have idolatry in their hearts or that they have trouble following scientific concepts, so they pridefully dismiss the ministry of creation research. There are many who are following God's calling on their life to show how the world around us backs the Bible, but these types attack or arrogantly dismiss these callings.
And MANY of the people I know who had fallen away from Christ used science as one of the excuses.
One of the dangers of holding onto ancient beliefs is that when they are shown to be incorrect, that throws your faith into question. Many Christians accept the Earth is old and that life changed over time and they believe that God is in charge of all of that. Many Christians have accepted that the Earth is not 6000 years old. You can believe in modern science and still believe in God. Science does not attack religion. It just reveals the truth of how the world works. Galileo was thrown in prison and forced to recant his scientific discoveries because the church felt threatened. Science is not idolatry. It's an open-minded acceptance of the truth, and a realization that ancient texts are to be taken for the lessons they are teaching but not necessarily to be taken literally. If religion accepts science then you will see fewer people leaving religion. If it's a choice between reality or mythology, you're going to be losing believers. Probably better to accept scientific knowledge as understanding the truth of God's universe rather than rejecting data and evidence. If you're going to be like the people who forced Galileo to recant his discovery because you feel threatened, you're going to wind up losing believers.
On April 12, 1633, chief inquisitor Father Vincenzo Maculani da Firenzuola, appointed by Pope Urban VIII, begins the inquisition of physicist and astronomer Galileo Galilei. Galileo was ordered to turn himself in to the Holy Office to begin trial for holding the belief that the Earth revolves around the sun, which was deemed heretical by the Catholic Church. Standard practice demanded that the accused be imprisoned and secluded during the trial.
This was the second time that Galileo was in the hot seat for refusing to accept Church orthodoxy that the Earth was the immovable center of the universe: In 1616, he had been forbidden from holding or defending his beliefs. In the 1633 interrogation, Galileo denied that he “held” belief in the Copernican view but continued to write about the issue and evidence as a means of “discussion” rather than belief. The Church had decided the idea that the sun moved around the Earth was an absolute fact of scripture that could not be disputed, despite the fact that scientists had known for centuries that the Earth was not the center of the universe.
This time, Galileo’s technical argument didn’t win the day. On June 22, 1633, the Church handed down the following order: “We pronounce, judge, and declare, that you, the said Galileo… have rendered yourself vehemently suspected by this Holy Office of heresy, that is, of having believed and held the doctrine (which is false and contrary to the Holy and Divine Scriptures) that the sun is the center of the world, and that it does not move from east to west, and that the earth does move, and is not the center of the world.”
Along with the order came the following penalty: “We order that by a public edict the book of Dialogues of Galileo Galilei be prohibited, and We condemn thee to the prison of this Holy Office during Our will and pleasure; and as a salutary penance We enjoin on thee that for the space of three years thou shalt recite once a week the Seven Penitential Psalms.”
Galileo agreed not to teach the heresy anymore and spent the rest of his life under house arrest. It took more than 300 years for the Church to admit that Galileo was right and to clear his name of heresy.
As someone who went through the pain of aquiring a masters degree, i can proudly claim that i do not have trouble following scientific concepts. As such i know that a young earth is simply impossible. Young earth creationism is absolutely on the same level as people claiming the earth is flat. Both parties managed to convince themselves that all the evidence that doesnt support their opinion must be wrong, and jump at every little crum they think is evidence for their case. In reality, both are delusional.
@@Yamyatos the one (fake) ace they have up their sleeve is relying on miracles (magic). Anything at all is possible if you give credence to miracles.
I don't believe in 6 literal days, who are you to say I'm not a Christian? How do we know that a day to us is the same as a day to the Lord? Doesn't it say that a day to us is like a thousand to the Lord in scripture? How do we know that eons didn't pass before each stage *day* of creation? Why is it that 6th day man was created before Adam, and differently like the animals? How long was it after the 6th day when Adam was created?
Yall are the front lines…🙏🏻 wer with u in prayer
If such a flood had happened 4500 years ago when the pyramids were being built, the Egyptian wouldve been wiped out and history would be very different.
@@PaulDormody you are under the assumption that the pyramids weren’t built yesterday and made to look 4500 years old. See, the problem is your assumptions are wrong 😁
When I realised this truth 5 years ago. My life changed, thankyou Holy Spirit
A very important point on why it matters:
Does it matter - if you claim a witness is a liar?
Because that's what they are attempting to do. They are attempting to discredit God's character, so they have an excuse why they don't need to listen to Him.
God bless you CMI 🙏🙏🙏✝️ We know that God's word is true and we also know Genesis 1 was written historically. Not metaphorically. Jesus also took the OT as literal. No reason for us to do any different today.
'Jesus also took the OT as literal. No reason for us to do any different today'. Really? Evidence please.
I like your choice of words: "no reason" to do any differently today. Those of us who choose to use our ability to reason have found good reasons to do differently. One reason, our explanations for natural phenomena actually explain. Another reason, our findings are backed up by tangible observable and verifiable evidence.
''We know that God's word is true'' No. You believe without evidence and AGAINST the evidence. In other words, you started with a conclusion that must be true no matter what while denying science.
@@razark9 Hurray!
No, its a copy of real Summer texts 😂
Not all that say to me in that day…..Lord, Lord…..
If you don’t believe what the Bible says you don’t believe God….
@@adelinomorte7421 if you believe in evolution then best of luck with your god materialism….
Because you sure don’t believe in God if you believe in evolution….
@@stevenwhite8937 people do actually exist who believe in God and accept evolutionary theory. Thus, your statement is demonstrably false.
@@Skovyd They don’t believe God in the least. The Bible says sin started with Adam and death through sin. Yet if evolution is true then death existed millions of years before Adam. Jesus came to redeem people of the curse brought upon by Adam, so they make Jesus irrelevant without even realizing they do so.
Besides, it’s the worst theory in existence with exactly zero evidence supporting it….
@@Skovyd Evolutionists believe that God was not the founder of the earth, instead it was a natural phenomenon, beginning with inorganic molecules evolving into today's modern person. Evolutionists also believe that modern human evolved from an ancient form of Primate, and that primate evolved from single cell organisms called Eucaryotes. Evolution is thus 100% contradictory to the existence of a God. Unless you are a Pantheist who believe that the Universe itself is God.
@@adelinomorte7421 how do you know anything about God?
Newsflash.. science can perform tests on the past. For example when plate tectonics was first proposed, we predicted we would find similar fossils on different continents, since those populations were once in one location and were split apart when the continents split apart. Also we predicted we would find Tiktaalik, the fish that was first to be able to venture onto land.
Science CAN measure the age of the Earth, they have done it. By study and experiment they have worked out it is 4.5 BILLION! years old. They haven’t just believed it from Religious books that the Earth is thousands of years old and took it as the TRUTH! They’ve questioned it, that’s how Science works. To say the Earth is only 6,000 years old is RIDICULOUS! LAUGHABLE! HILARIOUS! NONSENSE! 😂🤣😂🤣😂
Well don't you worry your head. God isn't going to force you to believe in or follow him. You won't be forced into Heaven against your will. Everyone that ends up in Hell chooses to go there of their own free will and you it appears unfortunately for you seem to have already decided that is where you wish to go upon death. That should please you. You get your own way . Live how you want now , do what you want now, answering to no one while here now becuase there is nothing after death according to evolution. You sadly will have a rude and terrfying awakening upon death.
If you want to believe the religion of evolutionism have at it. It's your loss. A religion btw is any "cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith." Evolution is by defintion a religon because it is believed on by faith not scientific fact as there is no actual evidence of abiogenisis or macroevolution in the fossel record and aboigenisis is simply impossible scientifically. Evolution therefore is dead at the start because abiogenisis the cornerstone of evolution is impossible. No beginning for your storytelling. You would do well to read the actual papers of the evolutionary scientists The dispare of ever fining a first cause or a way to allow one organism to change into another. What they say is very different from the popular presentation on TV, in movies and purposely used in the schools to program and indocrinate the kids. Aliens won't save you either because your supposed aliens need an origin as well and if you assume aliens made the aliens who made the aliens, etc who made the life on Earth ,you will rapidly run out of time even with 14 billon years. Eventurally you have to have a first cause for the first aliens.😉
If you ever change your mind which I hope you do, know that God loves us so much, sinful and fallen though we are, that he came to Earth as Jesus a human being, lived a perfect life while being temped in every way just like we are and then died in our place to pay for our sins that must be punished. When you accept and follow Jesus he forgives all your sins and you can then enter into the presence of God. Without Jesus you will spent all eternity paying for your own sins against a infinite God and never be able to accomplish it.
Science uses false evidence to try to make everyone believe there is no Creator, no God. You're free to believe in the Devil's lies.
How old was Adam when he was created? He was 0 years old. How old did Adam look? Probably about 30 or 40 years old. How old was the universe when God created it. It was zero years old. How old did the universe look when it was created? It was as old as God needed it to look to function.
Ah, the timeless conundrum of divine age manipulation. It's a fascinating concept that requires some impressive mental gymnastics to reconcile with scientific realities.
So, if I understand correctly, Adam was created as a full-grown adult but with zero years of existence under his belt, and the universe was created with the appearance of age but with a birth certificate that reads "Day 1." It's like the ultimate cosmic magic trick, where God says, "Let there be light... and a fully formed universe with all the bells and whistles!"
But hey, who needs consistent laws of nature and observable phenomena when you've got divine intervention? I guess when you're the author of reality, you get to bend the rules however you see fit. Just remember, when you start blurring the lines between appearance and reality, it can make for some interesting philosophical debates, if nothing else.
@@FirstnameLastname-cx6go If you believe the first line in the bible you will have no problem with the rest. God bless
@@lawrencehalpin6611 Why would I believe the first line in the Bible?
@@FirstnameLastname-cx6go Because if I am wrong, not a problem. I have a better life. If you are wrong. Well that would not be good for you.
@@lawrencehalpin6611 First of all, that has no bearing on whether or not you are right. Second, if some OTHER religion is wrong then "well that would not be good for you.", so that doesn't save you anyway. And finally, NO you do NOT have a better life. You have a lie that you have CHEAPENED by believing that all of this planet is just a place to wipe your feet before you go to your heaven, and people like me suffer for all eternity, and YOU BELIEVE I DESERVE IT. Right?
Obviously the creation week was supernatural. It had to be for God to create everything that fast. Therefore science is never going to get it right. Only the bible explains what science cannot.
You are correct, but the presentation they gave could also be flawed. He's taking the 7 human days literally which is directly contradicting the Bible. 2 Peter chapter 3 verse 8 States Gods day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as a day. Taking this scripture literally would mean that at the end of creation, 7 thousand years would have already past. However this scripture only tells us that what man thinks is a long time is only a blink of the eye to God. It also guarantees us that we don't know what time period a day is to God. A thousand years, a billion years but definitely not 24 hours.
@@justthinking4628The verse in 2nd Peter is obviously saying God is outside of time. Not comparing the days of creation. A common misunderstanding.
@@justthinking4628also you misquoted that verse anyways. It says a day is LIKE a thousand years and a thousand years is LIKE a day to God.
2 Peter 3:8 But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.
@@justthinking4628at least get the verse right if you are going to try and refute it.
To beleve in evolution over creation is to say God is not all powerful and basically you take God completely out of the picture. Satan didn't cause Adam and eve to comit some horrible act, he simply got the to question Gods word. God is all powerful and he created us in his image. Thank you for doing these videos.
We take god out of the picture because he doesn't exist
Satan is the morally virtuous character in the Christian story and god is the maniac.
Satan never lied in the bible and was always honest.
God in the bible lies, order mass murder, committs mass murder and condones slavery.
Have you ever considered that history (in this case the bible) is written by the victors and that the character you call god is actually the evil victor and that satan is the ally of mankind?
Thanks guys. I love these chats. It confirms my belief in a young earth and gives me knowledge to share with my unbeleiving friends. It just makes so much sense 😊
Occam's Razor is the truth. The dating methods has been so much changed it is impossible to tell and each time before it changed it was said it was spot on.
People who believe in Genesis literally like this are extremely deluded. The standard yec arguments about assumptions with radiometric dating etc don't hold water given that different methods corroborate . Funny how they skip past their own massive assumptions based purely on faith that firstly their god actually exists and secondly that the Bible is inerrant and six days is God's word and not just the musings of whoever wrote it.
Deluded how? Name some legit assumptions. Maybe i can help you with those or give me some strong argument against the bible which could point out that it isnt accurate.
@@TheSnoopi8 I stated the assumptions in my post. Of course the Bible isn't accurate in a literal sense. For example no sane adult can take the noahs ark story as anything but a myth.
@@kernow343 Why do you think the ark story is myth?
It is a known fact that the elements of the periodic table took millions if not billions of years to be created. They were created in the stars, and the stars took millions of years to be formed so, to think the universe is only a few thousands of years old is totally out of the question. The Bible does not give any time frame for the creation of the universe, it only says, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”, from here on in Genesis, the attention is placed on the formation of the earth and the emergence of biological life, which took also billions of years.
Billions of years is a heart and worldview issue.
@@thartwig26 If you have an issue with "reality" as a world view, or "caring about believing as many true things as possible and as few false things as possible", then sure it's an issue.
KJV Genesis 1:5 , 1:8 , 1:13 , 1:19 , 1:23 , 1:31 , 2:2 .
@@RoboJut Harry potter is a book too! :)
@@Yamyatos And?
You were the inspiration for a sermon I gave.
As a Christian we need to understand Genesis as we understand John 3:16.
As in Mathew 5:12 we are to be the salt... How are we to explain the good news to the world when they don't understand the bad news (the fall of man).
You also inspired me to study science more indebtly.
"As a Christian we need to understand Genesis"
WRONG, you as a christian, Genesis account would make you a plagiarist of the Hebrew Bible. Does, the genesis story first come to any christians???
The 6-day creation forms the basis for one of the Ten Commandments, which is the law that defines sin, from which we need to be saved. So don't tell me that this isn't a salvation issue!
Evolution did not disprove God it's just trying to find out how he did it
It absolutely attempts to disprove God while simultaneously trying to go innocently under the radar which is the truest form of Satanism.
That is entirely wrong. Evolution starts with the presumption that there is no Creator God. It was a scheme to show it was plausible that the universe created itself. It is not plausible, in fact. Yet those who were willing to believe it latched onto it so they could avoid dealing with the God of the Bible.
I Believe Also That The Earth Is Not That Old And Their Is More History To Discover, The Powers Have Deterred Discovery And claimed It Themselves!
They will not and can not allow old earth to die, because it also ends the evolution fairy tale and they then left with creation and God. Some might say aliens seeding life, without the sense enough to ask how the aliens came to be.
@@buckjones4901the main point of that would be that the God of the Bible doesn't exist. Christians don't have a monopoly on God.
The measured data show, that the earth is at least 4.4 B years old.
Wilde, S. A.; Valley, J. W.; Peck, W. H.; Graham C. M. (2001-01-11). "Evidence from detrital zircons for the existence of continental crust and oceans on the Earth 4.4 Gyr ago". Nature. 409 (6817): 175-178.
Wyche, S.; Nelson, D. R.; Riganti, A. (2004). "4350-3130 Ma detrital zircons in the Southern Cross Granite-Greenstone Terrane, Western Australia: implications for the early evolution of the Yilgarn Craton". Australian Journal of Earth Sciences. 51 (1): 31-45.
The scientific Method (Function) developed mostly by Christians( intelligence) relies on fixed laws of Nature (functions) to explain natural phenomena (Functions) and is simply:
1. Observe
2. Hypothesis
3. Test & predict
4 Conclude
Evolution, Big Bang fail the scientific Method.
However Universal Functions from Machine Analogies ... easily passes the scientific Method.
As a Christian who bases their faith on evidence, I would have to disagree with him on the one fundamental issue that there are always presuppositions to observation. That totally disregards agnosticism because if what he says is true, there is no such thing as agnosticism which I think is false because I was an agnostic for a few years and was looking for evidence that leads or strays from Gods existence and I can say that I did not have any presuppositions because I was strictly looking for the truth. If there are always presuppositions there can be no pursuit of real absolute truth; that pursuit does not exist because it will always be fallible. In a nutshell, I have found morality to not be relative for a number of reasons and there had to be someone to set those morals and everything doesn’t come from nothing, and life doesn’t come from non-life that’s too large of a leap of faith for me to believe. However, my decision on those issues did not arise from presuppositions that I had prior to my search for truth.
Hi Jesse as a Christian we should all believe by FAITH. BUT there are things in the Bible that we would like to know and understand . Like the age of the earth, No one knows but all i can tell you that the earth is more than 6000 years old. We have a time of human ( Adam) and the time of the dinosaurs and (?) before Adam. Were there life before that no one knows. This was a one way discussion, and i believe that this teacher is wrong. Most of these teachers will teach that the dinosaurs were in the ark but it is not so. That is what they get fed and with science the majority rule even in so called Christian teaching. The answer on dinosaurs are always that Noah let the babies on the ark. Just to think Noah went all over the earth to look for the babies. But GOD guided all animals to the ark.
See with those groups if you do not stand with the leader you are out.Then is this teacher wrong YES he is.
Talks about interpreting based on what you believe, then goes on to say the Bible that was written over a few hundred years, and by different authors, and translated numerous times, is right. SUUUUURE thing buddy W ⚓️
So glad you did this follow up!!!
Gee it was good, very good.
My uncle is a devout Christian a professor and a worldwide expert in nuclear fission track dating. He says it’s impossible for the world to be 6000 years old. The evidence against is overwhelming.
Your uncle is entitled to his opinion ❤️
Amen.
He's right. About one thing anyway. (Impossible for the world to be 6,000 years old).
@@MrShnazer Fortunately, with solid science, it is not simply an opinion but established fact.
All wisdom only comes from the bible, we can have expertise in extrabiblical matters and still be a fool. To be clear, I'm not at all calling your uncle a fool, just stating plainly that one's accolades outside of biblical truth are meaningless and not a marker of wisdom at all.
I think the biggest reason the discussion of evolution, and the fact that it's not a fact, is important is because when young people are taught that it is a fact, it gives them an intellectual reason to deny the truth in the Bible.
But Chris...it is a fact!
Maybe take a biology r chemistry class in your high-school.
He said there is none stated in the Bible support his theory but those who believe in the same faith he is believing are guided by it. Is that what he said?
There is star light coming from billions of light years away. Some of the galaxies we still see star light from don't even exist anymore. That proves that the universe is billions of years old.
Please see this article here! creation.com/distant-starlight-and-the-biblical-timeframe
Shhh, don’t tell them that, it questions what they “know” for a fact.
@@SheridanFalkenberry I read it. It throws around vague concepts and a few buzz words from physics, but doesn't really answer the question.
The center of the Milky Way has a black hole around which stars otbit in a very peculiar way consistent with the way predicted by general relativity. If God fabricated this light and directed it at us, then he falsified a detailed historical record and thus, is guilty of lying.
There's just no wiggling out of this. The Bible is a collection of lies, just like all of the other religions. We evolved from ape-like creatures, and when we die, we're going to stay dead. It sucks, but that's just the way it is.
That's how far it is away from us not the starting point.
@@whitney9844 It was the starting point of the light when it was emitted billions of years ago. Thus, the universe is vastly older than 6000 years, thus, the Bible is dead wrong.
How old did the earth appear to be when God created it? I assume Adam looked a lot older than 0 seconds old when his life began. In other words, God can create things that have characteristics which make them appear to be older than they actually are.
He created trees bearing fruit, so...
Adam was created as a "fully grown" man, Eve, as a "fully grown" woman!
So yeah, you're right.
Edit: Picture in your mind a freshly landscaped yard.
Makes the yard look 'brand new', doesn't it?
So, apparent age is relative.
Do you believe in maaagic...
could write a song about that.
I hate that I have never heard Mark Harwood before. He does such a brilliant job of speaking to meaning and evidence in a clear way. ❤️❤️
Someone said "There is starlight coming from billions of light years away. Some galaxies we still see star light from don't exist anymore. That proves that the universe is billions of years old." But if the universe expanded from a single point, whether that starting point was God or the Big Bang, it stands to reason that the light from those objects also started from that same point. So even if those objects are millions of lightyears away now, when they were created they were much closer. Perhaps very close. So even if those stars are only a few thousand years old we would see them today
The premise of Dr. Harwood's main argument is correct. Our assumptions drive our interpretations of data. Data does not "speak for itself." Data is interpreted to create information. Those interpretations are made based on the assumptions, even in experimentation (ie HYPOTHESIS/assumption comes before the actual experiment). This is not a criticism; just a statement of how science works (vastly oversimplified of course).
I like Dr. Harwood's approach to the explanations. What I find to be so incredible about all the "debates" of God's existence (Hitchens, Dawkins, et al) is that they attempt to use data as information itself, all the while injecting their assumptions into the interpretation of that data.
To believe God exists or does not exist, in both cases, is based on faith. "Science" does not excuse anyone from having faith, but it does blind people into believing they have "facts," and that those "facts" can only drive to one conclusion.
I disagree
Data can speak for itself
Look at basic statistics
I can build empirical models with with high statistic probably and know nothing about about this underlying background of the data.
In fact this is how machine learning and “AI” is so powerful. Because you can run the statistic in a data set with out biased human interpretation
I approach your point but again I would look into statistics
It’s amazing stuff
You don’t know the difference between data and information. There is nothing to disagree with if you know science (and data analysis).
@@Smaddx Perhaps I don't understand. but modern semiconductor and drug industries for example arnt just a human reviewing a scatterplot in excel... There are large predictive and empirical models that use hypothesis testing to literally take the human element out of it.
@@ndjarnag actually that is incorrect. AI is a conglomeration of computers and programs written by whom?
How can science stand alone without interpretation? your model is like a tree falling in the forest with no audience; Does it make a sound?
I don't care what you believe, I care about something you can demonstrate that is true to reality.
@Jeff.Paborada what changed in humans from 6000 years ago that caused them to start writing? That makes no sense. In an evolutionary standpoint, humans from 6000 years ago would be identical to today's humans.
The assumption made is that the "good book" is actuall history.
There is archaeological and historical ( both from Christian and secular sources) evidence for the veracity of the Old and New Testaments .
Is there something you are having trouble believing Felupe?
Thank you very, very much guys for making this video! Extremely encouraging. God bless you all.
Carbon dating contradicts the actual measurements of time. God can be able to make a grown tree overnight ( see the stories of Jonah). Earth is not that billion years old.
I remember when they dated Mt St Helen’s as having erupted 2.3M years ago?!
The models are obviously very wrong.
Mark is an absolute gem. 💎 Legend.
If you read the beginning of the Bible it only takes a few verses before God says, Let there be light, on day one. You'll notice the Earth is already there, so was water. Before light.
Oh, it is true because the claim says so. Great logic from a christian
@@LookOutForNumberOne There is no difference on your side either. You make assumptions and then want to convert them to solid, verified proof out of thin air. You need to freshen up on your logical fallacies.
God contacted me and told me that the world was created 5 minutes ago. Not just the world but the entire universe and everything in it. The things underground, the things in the air, the planets orbiting the sun and the thoughts in your head including your memories. This was the word of God and I am the witness. Since I observed this, nothing that you see or believe can possibly be the truth because you came along later and are not a witness to the events. You are just making things up to fit whatever narrative you chose to believe before you read this.
Such a god would be a liar and thus wouldn't be much of a god wouldn't he?
@@vlatkosurlan545 exactly correct. Now just change the time from 5 min. to 6000 yrs.
When God made Adam he was a grown man not a baby god made the earth the same way
Yep.
None of that ever happened. Prove it did.
A long time is not necessary when God made the universe ex nihilo (out of nothing). Everything was made for mankind to have dominion over and mankind appeared 6,000 yrs ago ...so bingo.
Actually the oldest human bones discovered were over 300000 years old. Discovered in Morocco.
@@TrustinJesusChrist-John3.16 not by 294000 years though. 20% margin of error is allowed for. The earth is not young. Science has proven it time after time. The bible is not an accurate history of time no matter how often creationists try to change the data to suit their narrative
You believe everything came from nothing?
@@FirstnameLastname-cx6go Just the flick of a finger for an almighty God.
Carbon radiometric dating is proven to be flawed. You won't hear that in the news but it's true.
The question about Victorian geologists was not answered. Dr Harwood misunderstood the very simple question. See 26:18 and listen at least reasonably carefully.
If someone is a Christian, then how can they believe evolution as billions of years of death before homo sapiens appeared? It's written that sin and therefore death began to be only after Adam and Eve sinned in the garden of Eden.
If the daughter product was dated it would just be younger than the parent isotope so the earth could be even older further disproving a young earth. 4:45 also, the energy industry actually relies on radiometric dating to locate where gas and oil is trapped underground by creating a “basin model”. If radiometric dating was inaccurate the energy supple would crumble.
Both things you said are not true. Radiometric dating, at best, can give you and upper limit for the age of a sample. Second, oil companies aren't dating rock samples to find oil. They are surveying the surface and subsurface looking for specific geologic features and patterns that are common where oil is found. Then they literally drill and look. Oil exploration is a very here and now discipline.
@@TheAaronYostno, they also use age of rocks to help know where they are trapped
@@Natspats They do not date rocks in order to find oil.
@TheAaronYost but they most definitely do lol.. "....microscopically examine drill debris to determine if they are in the target formation , typically coral/marine shells. This is not done for all wells but for exploratory and step-out wells ( expanding a field). Primary interests are gas/oil ratio, hydrocarbon/water ratio, sulfur level. Age is only of interest as it gives information of the other properties."
@@bryancollier704 Actually there's a simpler way to dismantle the stupidity of this argument that belief in a young earth means you can't find fossil fuels. Geologic age estimates are based on assumptions about the past and conclusions drawn from observable data. As long as you make consistent assumptions and draw consistent conclusions the actual age of the earth is completely irrelevant. If I consistently make the same assumptions and consistently draw the same conclusions based on the data, I will consistently find oil in the same places another person, making different, but consistent, assumptions and conclusions will, even if one of us is using incorrect assumptions and drawing incorrect conclusions.
Thank you for these episodes, they really close the deal of a God, who through his love has shown his mercy and grace through his only begotten son, the Lord Jesus Christ the Righteous. The Good News will make an Episcopalian jump and shout !!!
I get the feeling this fellow isn’t a geologist. 🤔🙃🤣 and he’s really not exactly being challenged by the interviewer who is completely supportive of his position.
If God put water under the earth, why can't God put oil under the earth ?
Whereas I repented from 6,000 year old creationism, evidence of “creation”, abounds. For example, there is far too much fossil fuels under ground to have been made by natural processes over billions if not trillions of years.
Yeah, if Darwin's model of macro evolution is correct, then it not only negates the book of Genesis, but it guts the very plan of salvation. Romans 5 suddenly becomes gibberish, specifically, and much of the Scriptures must then be reinterpreted or striken out altogether. If by one man sin did NOT enter the world, nor death by sin, then how does one man, Jesus, take our sin away and save us from it? The beautiful logic of it all is just trashed, and I believe that such was indeed the intent behind those who, before Darwin, began promoting the idea of billions of years and of macro-evolution.
Bingo!!!!!
Science is entirely neutral when it comes to religion. It doesn't make decisions based on religion. It makes decisions based on facts and evidence. It has no preconceived notions. It follows the evidence where it leads. Religion has a preconceived notion. It only except evidence that it approves of and disregards evidence that it disapproves of. You will note that the top experts in their field, and many branches of science, for many different religions, can agree on the evidence. The only people who disagree or people who hold a fundamentalist religious view and they feel their view is threatened. Religion and science or two different things. Scientific discovery should not be biased by religious beliefs.
Addressing those who mock The Word is one of my favorite pasttimes.
You don’t have to discredit the Bible. The Bible does that for itself. Just read it.
What part(s) of the Bible discredits itself Mark?
Praise GOD for what CMI is doing. Thank God for leading us through Answers in Genesis and then through CMI, you set our faith on a firm foundation that cannot be moved. We study or record history because they cannot be repeated. In the same way the Bible give us an accurate history of HIS Story for our faith. If people want to talk about Long age, they will find it when Jesus Christ come again and HE set up HIS eternal age
Makes a whole lot more sense than what they taught us in school ! Problem is they will not present an opposing view . They want everyone dumbed down !
The dumbing down was intentional. I got a degree in education and I was one of the few people who would ask questions. I went down the rabbit hole of the history of education and learned that there was a few wealthy people who had a lot to gain by making it the way it is today.
Arguments from ignorance make sense to you?
@@MrLogo73 typical liberal mindset ..attack the person and bring nothing to debate .
@@MrLogo73 - Here’s a fun little fact. You can have an illogical argument about something that is still true even if it’s not a good argument. It’s just not good evidence for the truth claim but it doesn’t make the truth claim itself less true.
@@boxelder9167 You're right about the illogical argument. But the one, who makes the claim, has to demonstrate, that it's true. He can not just assert, that it is.
Even more so, the original comment on top wrote: "Problem is they will not present an opposing view . They want everyone dumbed down .."
That is a conspiracy. And creationism, is not an opposing view. It's a conspiracy, nothing more.
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE debate an old earth evolutionary geologist or paleontologist on the trustworthiness of radiometric dating.
Your arguments sound powerful when unchallenged, but they could be devastating if they stand up against a critic.
there is evolutionist who turned to young earth theory by their observations and scientific work turned based on that to belive that there is The God. Everything is assumptions what carbon dating is doing. Labs have done fossils within days with molecular picture within 100% similarity.
I would tune in to that.
A 3rd grader would laugh at this guy
Why don't you look into Ukrainian labs z-pinch experiments? They did that on SFT and it's really interesting. 1st when the use plasma and make heavy radioactive isotopes the parent daughter ratios fall out like we see around us today. It is one of the better bits of evidence against radiometric dating. There are others who did comparisons of radiometric dating and found out no they don't always agree. That testing heavier elements gives you far older ages and the lighter ones give you far younger ages. Take all that and compare it to soft tissue in fossils? They have had well over 200 finds now in supposed strata that dated from 65 million to 500 million years old. Yet there have been so many tests in forensics showing those protiens can't last a million years. Yet they will swear up and down some Dino from this strata is dated at over 65 million years. Yet soft tissue absolutely disproves that and puts a cap on of less the 10k years. Ultimately there is all the proof you need out there to prove radiometric dating is flawed. You just have to look. The guys getting paid to date that rock are not going to tell you there may just be a problem with there results.. lol good luck
They won't do it as they run away scared from real scientists
" History is separate from science" is a wrong asumption. Archéologie, geologie, paléontologie, antropologie are all containing refutable evidences leading to a scientific consensus . Consensus mean heavy debate until scientists agreed to recognize a reality that anyone could challenge before being established... bible can t be challenged 😂. Evidence based never win against believer . They don t look to evidences always. The mind is locked 🔒 .
Dr. Harwood pointing out the difference between the scientific method (examination/evaluation of repeatable processes) and history (events that occurred in the past) makes. Also a person’s reference point. I agree in the infallibility of God’s word, hence my world view and reference points are bound to God’s word. Thank you Dr. Harwood.
Oh my gosh! This is SOOOO BAD. I don’t even know where to begin. This is why we loose so many young people after they begin to think for themselves. This is embarrassing as a Christian.
This is so sad.
You can trust God's word. I had to ask myself ,23 years ago, " if I believe Jesus turned water into wine, raised the dead,has power over the weather, the miracles of Moses in Exodus; why don't I just trust that God made everything just as He said He did, until dogmaticly proven otherwise?" Stepping out in faith and researching as much information as I could find on the topic ,my faith has grown exponentially.
Believing in the biblical account doesn't hurt anyone, really. It may be personally embarrassing to be ridiculed by people for your beliefs, but isn't that what Jesus said is actually part of being Christian? I suggest checking out what the men in the bible believe. Jesus, Paul, Peter, Moses, for example, all refer to Genesis as history. God bless.
Agreed. Especially when young people actually think that this represents the majority view among all Christians. It most certainly does not.
Also, nothing could die before the curse of the fall of mankind (bringing death).. and death is necessary for so called evolution. Bingo again.
Death is not necessary for evolution. Change is, and change is the only constant in the universe. Everything changes form, grows old, dies, etc.
@88Padilla Things change and do not die, but living organisms die, and according to the theory of evolution, species change into other species through succeeding generations - requiring death.
@@TrustinJesusChrist-John3.16 no, they change in the process of living through enviromental change, not dying. Those changes only become apparent in later generations, but the change has already happened internally. The environment affects and changes our DNA.
@@TrustinJesusChrist-John3.16Species don't 'change into' other species. That would be transform-o-lution, not evolution. One group of organisms splits into two groups, which decrease in their ability to interbreed. Morphology is also not suddenly poofing into existence out of the blue. Already existing features are being reused for a different purpose and are being refined for that new use.
@MrLogo73 I said that according to the theory of Evolution (which is a lie) species evolve into other species. It's called speciation, stated by scientists as "fact". There is only a certain degree of adaptation evident within any given species. Scientists won't accept that because they'd have to accept an intelligent Creator created the species to start with.
“We need to come humbly before the truth of his word and say, thank you Lord for what you say on your word, now I believe it.”
Translation: “We fundamentalists are really, really threatened by anyone who thinks for themselves. This is a space where faith trumps reason, so check your brain at the door.”
When I was in Bible college, one of the professors taught evolution. Even then, being a young Christian and somewhat Biblical illiterate, I thought that was STRANGE!!!
Dr Harwood speaks so clearly and down to earth. I will definitely download this video and share it with my skeptical friends
after what we just went thru I wouldnt waste my time on 80 % of them .
Any friend willing to watch 2 hours of this nonsense is a true friend.. make sure you treat them well.
@@Yamyatos
Your comment deserves a simple response.
Speaking so adamantly about an unprovable theory such as uniformitarianistism, you must be brainwashed
@@knightclan4 Earth is old. That is a fact. There is no debate, nor a reason for one. We *know* earth is at least 4.5 billion years old. We may be wrong with the exact date, but it cannot be younger. If it's just about disproving a young earth.. pretty much every other field of science does that unintentionally. There simply is no evidence for a young earth whatsoever. Quite the opposite. Any evidence we ever found that has any relation to the age of .. anything, really.. points to stuff being old. We have *living* organisms older than the proposed YEC age of earth. Trees 5000+ years of age, sponges 10.000 years of age, and a tree grove that is on the lower end at least 80.000 years of age, but may be well over a million. People who believe in a young earth are literally on the exact same level of denial as flat earthers. These two delusions belong in the same bucket. If you reject one, but not the other, the issue is you. If you accept both on the other hand.. i dont think there is hope for you.
Same with other topics btw. We *know* there was never a global flood, for example. Not just because there is no evidence for it, and many that contradicts it.. the whole goddamn idea is debunked even by fields you wouldnt think about. Genetics for example. If a flood killed all but two of all species / "kind", we would see genetic bottlenecks matching in both time and severity for all living organisms. Needless to say.. we dont. Many species have a genetic bottleneck. Not down to 2 individuals, and not all at the same time tho.
@@knightclan4 Earth is old. That is a fact. There is no debate, nor a reason for one. We know earth is at least 4.5 billion years old. We may be wrong with the exact date, but it cannot be younger. If it's just about disproving a young earth.. pretty much every other field of science does that unintentionally. There simply is no evidence for a young earth whatsoever. Quite the opposite. Any evidence we ever found that has any relation to the age of .. anything, really.. points to stuff being old. People who believe in a young earth are literally on the exact same level of denial as flat earthers. These two delusions belong in the same bucket. If you reject one, but not the other, the issue is you. If you accept both on the other hand.. i dont think there is hope for you.
Same with other topics btw. We know there was never a global flood, for example. Not just because there is no evidence for it, and many that contradicts it.. the whole goddamn idea is debunked even by fields you wouldnt think about. Genetics for example. If a flood killed all but two of all species / "kind", we would see genetic bottlenecks matching in both time and severity for all living organisms. Needless to say.. we dont. Many species have a genetic bottleneck. Not down to 2 individuals, and not all at the same time tho.
Doesn't the BIBLE say we'll be accountable for every idle word
Meaning if we lie about GOD'S creation we lie to unbelievers
How can anyone claim to be a Christian but don't believe God and question his words?
problem 1: if death preceded adams sin, there's no reason for Jesus. 7 physical days was believed by Jesus, if the sabbath was created for man, then the prior six were also created for our understanding. all of the circadian rythems are based on 24hrs/7days... why?
I like to ask, 'Which is older, evolution or the big bang'? Usually, the answer is the big bang, but the correct answer is evolution as it began in 1859 A.D., whereas the Big Bang exploded on to the scene in 1931 A.D..
What is the point you are trying to make as to whether evolution or the big bang is older?
*Reply to:* _"I like to ask, 'Which is older, evolution or the big bang'? Usually, the answer is the big bang, but the correct answer is evolution as it began in 1859 A.D., whereas the Big Bang exploded on to the scene in 1931 A.D.."_
@@miyojewoltsnasonth2159 that it was an idea before existing in the minds of men, whether it be true, or not. The idea had to come first to us.
@@miyojewoltsnasonth2159
I find it somewhat amusing that there are people alive on the earth today that are older than the big bang.
Also somewhat amusing is that God declares the end from the beginning, whereas man declares the beginning from the end.
Indeed, His ways are not our ways and our ways are not His ways.
It is possible to show that the big bang theory itself is fulfillment of Biblical prophecy.
And thanks for the question, I had to spend time thinking about it.
*@glenngraham8513* Thank you for your reply, and I appreciate you took time to think about it. Much appreciated.
If you believe evolution began in 1859 AD and the Big Bang began in 1931 AD, do you also believe gravity began in 1687 AD when Newton wrote about it in his _Principia?_
If gravity only began in 1687, why did the Ancient Romans need to use nails to hang Jesus Christ on the cross?
Or did gravity exist when Jesus Christ was hung on the cross, even if the Ancient Romans didn't have a word for gravity?
*Reply to:* _"I find it somewhat amusing that there are people alive on the earth today that are older than the big bang. Also somewhat amusing is that God declares the end from the beginning, whereas man declares the beginning from the end. Indeed, His ways are not our ways and our ways are not His ways. It is possible to show that the big bang theory itself is fulfillment of Biblical prophecy. And thanks for the question, I had to spend time thinking about it."_
*@glenngraham8513* Additionally, I am quite curious which prophet prophesied about the "big bang theory itself"?
Do you have the biblical book and verse where this prophecy was made?
Thank you in advance.
*Reply to:* _"It is possible to show that the big bang theory itself is fulfillment of Biblical prophecy."_
Very good.
I think there is also an understanding to acknowledge. In job, God allows the suffering, thus perhaps allowing it in His “will”. I think, whether we like it or not, God is in control and sometimes those sufferings are for a reason and that reason seems to be to point to and glorify him through suffering. Saying cancer was made by sin makes it seem like God had not control and that “sin” had the control. Can we accept that God did allow or even orchestrate the suffering? Suffering isn’t “evil” so we can’t say God allowed evil, but he does allow suffering. Gods answer to job has enormous weight and meaning.
I'm fascinated how willing ignorant people are when truth crushes evolution.
What truth?
@Vaughn-Alan-Jack
My hypothesis of the true age of the Earth can be determined with simple answers. Meaning, that God created the Earth with old space debris suspended in the Universe. This space debris comprised of (rock and ice) can be in fact billions of years old. But God took that ancient space debris and created the Earth with it in six days. Therefore, the Earth elements would be in fact be billions of years old with carbon testing, but the actual construction of the Earth was done in six days making the Earth a young creation with ancient parts. A good example of this hypothesis would be a carpenter building a new house with ancient barnwood. The house is new, but the materials are ancient. God made the stars in heaven before He created the earth and the number of stars He created was compared to every grain of sand on the earth. And He named them all. Before the Earth was created God did mentioned that the Earth was without form and void in the midst of the deep waters.
These young Earthets are so embarrassing. Seeing dinosaurs inside the ark encounter had a lot of people laughing.. God gave us brains to think and reason and are commanded to do so
You didn't say WHY you though the idea of dinosaurs on the Ark was so silly? What, specifically, do you think defies reason/logic?
P.S. We have written MUCH on this over decades. Please use the search bar on creation.com to see if we've already answered your objections. Our dinos Q&A page is a good starting place: creation.com/dinosaurs
Take the Bible literally. If you claim to be a Christian you MUST believe the Word of Yahuah. AIG picks and chooses what they believe from the Bible. Let Yahuah be true and every man a liar, that includes every scientist. I do appreciate this man’s literal age of the earth. Kudos for the approach to this topic.
I have a question. What is AIG? I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you. I don't have an opinion about the age of the earth. I don't pick and choose what I believe but I do try to learn about the type of literature I am reading, what the author intended to communicate, and any linguistic nuances that could alter my understanding.
Why would I take the Bible
Literally if all the Bible
Is
Not
Literal
Indeed, we've observed floods where sediment was laid down in striations (layers) immediately and quite quickly solidified into rock.
Also iron, due to its propensity to rip oxygen ions off of other molecules, would cause tissue destruction. Any amount that would be considered "preservative", in other words it may prolong the decay of certain organic compounds, would increase the rate of destruction of tissue and cell structures (which are also preserved.)
God is eternal. "God moved over the face of the deep. And all was without form and void." Until God said, "Let there be light."
Evolution and the Bible cannot be simultaneously believed. Like all things, you can believe God or you can believe man.
Very many people manage to do exactly that. Their opinions are just as valid as yours.
Forensic evidence is better than eye witnesses
Not when God is the eye witness and not when people are actively trying to keep God out of the picture.
I became saved at 12 mostly due to my circumstances in early life. Mature Christians showing me Jesus love through their own love. I can’t relate to people who come to Christianity through old earth vs new earth. I suppose it’s up to former atheists who understand. I would add that ice never been around an atheist who displays that kind of love.
respected speaker and moderator,
I respect your msg, as a BIBLE beleiving Christian I understand that Genesis is true about happened around 6000 years before. But about the origin of Earth and heavens Bible says ‘In the beginning God....’ ; from that I what I understood is Earth can be 6000 to ----years BC old as it is not specified when was that. ‘And the Ruha of God was hovering over the waters‘ - for what period of time? Not known. But the first day of Gensis and creations in Earth happened around 6000 years as I could understand, but ofcourse I am none but a mere human to comment on this topic.
Jesus said, "If you don't believe the words written by Moses, how then will you believe in me..." Jesus knew the earth is young. Do you think all the greedy, grant hungry, arrogant academics know more than God? Were they right when they thought the earth was 75,000 years old, or a couple million years old, or hundreds of millions, or 4.7 billion, now 4.3 billion? Which one do you believe, and why would you believe people who are wrong, wrong again, and again and again....
on the subject of why the Earth and universe wasn't created all at once instantaneously, I believe God created in 7 days to establish the Sabbath, and give us as humans the structure of working for 6 days and resting for 1. Mark 2:27 “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.”
The creation myth in the bible does not mention years at all but says and only seven of them
So why doesn’t he believe the universe is only seven days old
I can’t believe he really believes what he is saying he doesn’t appear to be that stupid
If you don't believe there are people living in the caves and hunter-gatherering and using stone tools, then the age of earth is just 10,000 years.
Farming and animal domestication only started 10,000 years ago.
According to Bibles, Adam and sons were farmers and shepherds. Thus, they existed around 10,000 years ago.
Who made those stone tools and drawing in caves?
Well after the tower of babel languages was scattered, people were scattered and migrated tribewise so they had to make do with crude tools and find shelter in caves as they wondered before reaching a place where they could settle and build civilization.