I had a 100 year old friend and I asked her "Do you believe in a young earth or old earth creation?" She said "I believe it was created.". That was it. Love it.
There is a book titled "In six days: Why 50 Scientists choose to believe in Creation." I found this book to be very helpful. It is written by scientists who have their PhDs in Physics, Botany, Genetics, Biology, Geology, etc.
If you do not accept literal 6-day creation, you are implynig that God LIED in the Fourth Commandment (Exodus 20:11). And that instantly makes your a blasphemer. That settles it for me.
This has to be one of the best thought out and respectful responses I've ever seen on this topic. Thank you for handling this valuable subject with the insight it deserves!
I wrestled with this topic for some time and I basically came out with the approach of Mr. Wallace. If I come before Jesus and my interpretation was wrong I’m not going to lecture God on how he could have made it more distinguishable. I will be forced to do as I always do, and just marvel over his wisdom to craft something so miraculous. We are broken. It’s like trying to read instructions for baking a cake with shattered reading glasses. You might nail down a few ingredients but I’d bet my money the end result will be a little off. I’m happy to let the author of the book explain to me how it all comes together at his book signing. Nice video.
This is Awesome! I came to Christ late in life. The creation account always puzzled me. I was one that first took it at face value. 6 days. We're good. Then I started to think about it more and more. Then I started to believe that a day is equal to a thousand years, so it must have taken much, much longer than 6 days. Then I finally threw my hands in the air and said to myself. It doesn't matter! What matters i that Jesus died for my sins. That we are directed to love one another. That's what matters.
Don't be discouraged, you'll find that the age of the universe is based on assumptions, we don't KNOW without a doubt how old the earth and universe are, so 6 days certainly fits with the observable universe as we know it. Just as an example we don't know the one-way speed of light, we know the reflected speed of light and have assumed they are the same speed even though if measured point A to B light travels backwards in time and is therefore instantaneous, that would completely change the lightyear conversation and observing the past when looking to distant reaches of space.
Very much agree, this issue (though important) should not be what becomes between people especially believers. The enemy is very cunning and could use it to create division and destruction. Salvation is not determined by our understanding of creation. I've really enjoyed your podcasts, and videos!
@@alanpfeiffer9686garden of Eden. Why? That’s not an creation age issue. And we don’t know on what day after man’s creation that happened. Nor did the great deceiver use creation account to deceive them with.
@@johnglad5not true. Even if you believe in macro evolution (which I don’t) God would still be the Creator. In any case, we still have a legitimate Creation Account. But in all this bupkis I am reminded of one Christian Scientist named Galileo…turns out he was right didn’t he? Did the Christian faith come crashing down? No. I have studied the very early church fathers who also struggled with Genesis and speaking truth for myself-reading Genesis from a child on…always seemed weird to what I was told. I plainly could see an historical poetic writing in a “mythological” (which does not actually mean not true) style of origins which never shook my faith. I had a very high reading comprehension beyond my age. It’s a collection of literature with many literary styles. Although the Kai poem format uses “day” in a 24 hour period sense, it is still a poem. The first use of “day” is not even a 24 hour day and is actually used to NAME light. It can be taken at most as 12 hours (1/2) day. It’s first usage after the creation “week”, “day” means a longer period of time-at minimum it could be 8 days but more likely a long period of time because it refers back to the beginning of all creation as a whole-as in “that day”. The NT tells us we are still living in the 7Th day! How can that be? The first sentence in the Bible refers to the creation of the universe period, THEN God comes to the earth at some stage of it’s development to begin the rest of it. Who know’s but God that timeframe?! And let’s not forget that numbers and genealogies in those times and throughout the Bible are usually symbolic…especially the number 7. Some are worried about “death” entering post sin being lost. It’s not. Death for mankind that was specially created in the Image of God occurred post their sins. That is not lost. And the whole of creation does groan because of our sin and our utter failure to properly manage it there after. Death did occur before the fall actually. Everything that lives, including plants, has life. God did give permission to kill and eat it-bottom of the food chain. I have not yet studied the word more commonly translated for “food”. I’m pretty sure I will find an interesting answer as I always do. Why do I mention that word? The KJV translates it as “meat”. Why? Is the word actually “meat”? Words have meaning…we all know what “meat” means. Why that special command? Was Adam & Eve a special created man/woman apart from meat eating mankind in the wild? Why after the fall did God kill an animal(s) to clothe them so fast when plants did just fine? Why did they immediately start killing animals and burning the best parts to God? Why begin a slaughter of all living things so soon after the fall? God didn’t want that for them. Could it be there WAS death and dying and meat eating before them? All kinds of questions-especially when you view this special event after creation of mankind in chapter 1 in chapter 2. The problem isn’t with a legitimate form of Evolution like: Adaptation, the instantaneously abrupt appearance’s of life (as basically shown in Genesis), the kinds “evolving” within kinds more like blades of grass than all life in a tree from an most improbable single cell Abiogenesis-which was proven impossible to happen by science in the 1800’s (life cannot come from non life), Irreducible complexity, DNA and ID, etc.. Why science chases Abiogenesis and the scientific religion of Darwinian Evolution (both proven wrong) isn’t because of legit lack of awesome scientists who are screaming for a more realistic theory…it’s because of the atheist gatekeepers of current modern science. Methods used for dating are problematic and both YEC and OEC assumes many things for dating. Dating is useful and I take it with a grain of salt realizing that the age of the world and universe isn’t a real issue and we need some kind of measuring stick to use. Besides…I don’t think God wants us to know exacting time…that’s only for Him so we can’t predict certain things like His second coming… Have a blessed day my new friend. Don’t blame science, blame the scientists and their lack of faith in God that blinds them to tell the truth in their philosophy of the evidence.
This is the best explanation of the issue of creation I have ever heard or seen. It is well thought out and presented as well as respectful to all sides. Great job! Thank you!
I found it helpful when I pondered John’s comment at the end of his gospel account where he said that these were only some of the things Jesus did during his ministry. He actually did much more but if one were to write it all down, there wouldn’t be enough books in the world to contain it all. We can speculate from this that God has been extraordinarily busy and, therefore, while the Bible covers the entirety of history, it doesn’t actually chronicle it. God’s Word is intended for us to know Him, not necessarily everything He ever said or did. We would not be the first Christians to have some misunderstanding of the Old Testament, since even Jesus’s closest disciples were not expecting the kind of messiah he turned out to be and needed constant clarification from him.
Should we also suppose that God meant to say that trees clap their hands? Or that he uplifts by his right arm? Of course he did. But that doesn’t mean that he means it in a literal sense as opposed to trying to convey an understanding of a certain concept.
Suppose God wanted us to know that His days are not like our days, could He have explained that anywhere in scripture to show that to us? Could He have included it in one of the psalms, perhaps, that specifically talks about the creation. That would have helped.
You do know that part of understanding the Bible-that was not actually written to us-is to also understand the culture, etc., of the people it was written to? Let us then suppose, for a moment, the peculiar time and circumstances in which Elohim (plural common name of all the gods which God used like over 2000 times) did cause this true Mythos to be written and is so peculiarly like the false patterned Mythos written in that time and before-that Elohim meant to say “7 days” figuratively-using a special symbolic number (7). Then Elohim made it pretty clear that He is the true Elohim who creates, names and patterns everything and His people have a good 7 day patterned week to follow in their measly short lives. Then Jesus comes later and say’s, “Yo! Keep Following the pattern and remember who your creator is!” Seems really plain and clear to me!
COME ON man! Thats like saying "I am the door" implies that Jesus is a door on hinges. Seriously! Or that thunder claps its literal hands - ridiculous. The Bible was written in historical facts and also poetic forms for people with limited understanding of science. However, its amazing how much science confirms the Bible, like quarantine sick people, roundness of the Earth and hanging upon nothing, as well as the universe having a beginning.
I would highly recommend looking into Answers in Genesis and brining him some people from there to talk about this topic, would be great! Part of the misconception is assuming that "the science" that humans do is perfect - it isn't and is awfully bias at times. The biggest crux of this issue is that if evolution is true this means death was in creation before the fall and that is NOT what scripture CLEARLY teaches and is constant with. Death came through sin and sin through Adam and Eve, which is the entire foundation for the reason God had to become a MAN, Jesus, as the second Adam, and died was buried and resurrected. All of scripture is consistent with this, especially the New Testament, the words that Jesus says and his disciples. If evolution is true then the rest of the Bible is absolutely meaningless, Jesus died for nothing and the resurection wouldnt have happened because it wouldn't have met the qualifications of God's covenant, His laws. God has a nature, moral, RULES even. He does not lie - cannot sin because that is not who He is. He can't just do things because "He's God He can do whatever". It's either God is telling the truth about our origins and it had to happen the way he said it did or he's a liar. We cannot have an origin story that is both creation and evolution at the same time. Sure it may not necessarily matter to an individual so much but the truth is if you look at the big picture over time and generations its clear that this confused topic is taking its toll. Because we all are taught "the science says" we push God out of everything. This is what Satan wants.
Nice to hear a clear statement. Those are important aspects. I also think that as long as we ask man to describe past we have speculation. But if we ask God we have truth. We cannot and shall not mix that. We cannot even compare speculation to truth. Here we see the weekness when reading scripture through the lense (dogma) of criminal observation. What has a crime to do with creation? Not much. We cannot say that we can observe what we have not seen but when there is an eyewitness we shall not speculate but our role is to trust the truth! Thank you for the remembrance! 😊
I have reevaluated things and am now a young earth creationist. I have watched some of Ken Hams videos, and people should be open minded to watch them. I trust Bible more than science.
If a computer came to be by random, then it cant be trusted to be reliable and consistent, to calculate accurately, and get accurate consistent reliable results. The same it is with the brain, if by random, thoughts cant be trusted, and mind/brain cant be trusted to do science. But if orderly origin (God) it can be trusted. Modern science (started by theists expecting to find order) can take things apart, see how they work, but lack ability to put together, to tell reason and purpose. *I bake a cake* and ask you to find out with science, the reason and purpose why I baked the cake. Impossible, only when I tell the reason is the purpose known.
I keep this note on my phone and add to it when I can. So we know God can perform miracles. The way it describes Adam and Eve right after creation is as if they are young adults. I see no reason God couldn't have made an earth that looked older. God created natural processes to govern the universe and so for future people to reach the stature Adam and Eve were created with, they would have to grow up normally and not be instantly created by God. Now that said I believe the Earth is the same way. If a new planet was to start to be formed it might take billions of years to do so if that's how the natural laws God set up require it to go. But at the beginning God performed miracles and made everything so it may look older than it is, but just like Adam and Eve, I believe the universe younger than it looks. Most if not all other miracles break the laws of physics so I see no reason God creating the universe would be any different. In the New Testament when Jesus heals people, did he make medice and then take them through the process of treatment and only use normal physical means to heal said people? No, he instantly healed people. I am sure if a doctor who was an unbeliever had looked at them before and then after they would try to come up with an explaination as to how they were healed and that it wasn’t instant but that is not how he was healed so while the physical "evidence" may point to the long process of medical treatment [simply by ruling out an instantaneous healing miracle would lead to this] in fact the person was just healed instantly. So why can these miracles be instantaneous but creation can't? This combined with how many Bible verses in both the Old and New Testaments talk about the lineages as if they are literal shows support for YEC. Also Jesus being able to be traced back to Adam is important. If you try to say the super old people in the lineages are given those massive age number for honorary reasons or those are just metaphical and stand for months not years, how can you split the ages into metaphical and real when the genealogies just list them all there together and it suggests they are literal? If you try to say that Adam is a metaphor for all mankind and just a representative then why does the Bible say sin came through one man i.e. Adam and then the lineages treat Adam as an individual? I would say Adam was humanity's representative but also a real individual just like modern day republic government officials are. They are elected to represent a group of people but also are individuals themselves. Also the word day I am pretty sure usually means a literal day in Genesis and even if it didn't always mean a literal day, the word day combined with the phrase "there was evening then morning, the next day" definitely suggests literal days. Not only that but the Bible tells us God made the birds before the land animals, and that just goes counter to evolution. The argument that "the sun and moon were created on the 3rd day so the word day can't mean an actual day" is very weak. There are a couple of easier options than reading millions of years into the Bible: 1) God knew how long He was going to make a day. So He just did all the work within those time periods to begin with. 2) God could have come up with the word day after making the sun and moon and before relaying Genesis to Moses. God could have decided to make the rotation of the earth and thus the days line up with the time he had already spent on the first 2 days of creation. This is like someone doing some work over consecutive time intervals that happen to be of the same length. Then later, they give that time period a name and tell others how long it took after the fact using the new time period in the retelling of the story. In either case, it seems God was not pressed on time. He finished before evening and then starts the next morning, so He was not working around the clock. God can create infinitely more than we can imagine and simultaneously because He is all powerful. The verses talking about a day being a thousand years and a thousand years being like a day to God is not meant to give us more context for Genesis. It is simply stating that God is outside time. Not only that but finding soft tissue and blood sample on creatures that supposedly died hundreds of thousands to millions of years ago is harder to believe than God made the earth and there was a global flood. We also have paintings/drawings from ancient people depicting dinosaurs. How is this possible if humans and dinosaurs didn’t live together since only somewhat recently have humans begun to dig up fossils and recognize what they are? [I have links below of this, some items may be fake but even if all were fake/misunderstood this is really only a minor point in my arguments] Behomoth's description is much closer to a sauropod dinosaur. The world's oldest trees are also younger than a YEC view of the world. This suggest that the earth is younger than millions of years old as well. [Again linked below for those curious] Are we to believe God didn't care about who knows how many barely-not-humans before he revealed Himself to Adam? I don't think so. I also don't believe that it was only human death that came through Adam but all death. Population charts also indicate its very possible to get today's population from Noah's family. I would argue they also suggest that if a global flood didn’t happen then today's population should be much higher. [Again linked below for those curious] Also people saying the earth is billions of years old: How do you know the starting conditions of the universe? While we might know the decay rates of certain materials we have no idea of the starting conditions so you can't use any of those dating methods without some blind faith that you know the starting conditions. As for the Flood. I see Genesis as suggesting it is global and not local. Here are a few points: 1) Noah's ark is extremely oversized for a local flood. He would not need that many animals just for a localized flood. 2) If it was just local Noah could have just moved away in the 120 years God gave him instead of building the ark. 3) Are we to believe all of humanity could be killed by a local flood? The whole point of the flood was to kill all of humanity except for Noah and his family because of humanity's sin. 4) The bird Noah sent out would have been able to easily find land to make a new home at with a localized flood so the bird returning because it can't find land doesn't really make sense. 5) The duration of the flood is unbelievably long for just a local flood. *I won't ever say that someone isn't saved if they believe in an older earth, I just disagree on that point www.genesispark.com/exhibits/evidence/historical/ancient/dinosaur/ www.icr.org/article/why-arent-earths-oldest-trees-older creation.com/biblical-human-population-growth-model answersingenesis.org/evidence-for-creation/six-evidences-of-young-earth/
Thank you so much for taking the time to explain so well everything I believe in too. God reveals what we need to know and humans reject, change or misuse that information sometimes in the light of what other humans think. Jesus is the way, the truth and the life and no one comes to the Father but by him. God bless everyone 🙏 🛐✝️.
I would like to add some resources here. Genesis Apologetics on RUclips, Dr. Jason Lisle (love this guy), and Kent Hovind if you enjoy corny dad jokes.
It is not that the Holy Creator God (Father, Son and holy Spirit) made the earth and universe look older but that they were created complete. This is a very significant difference. What it effects is our interpretation of that completeness. If we assume that the completeness requires long periods of time for [evolutionary processes], we then get interpretations that are wrong in some way. But we can also get wrong interpretations if we make other assumptions about how He created things if we assume He made them to appear old. The Awesome Holy Creator God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) is God and He holds the prerogative to create His universe in any way He likes without regard to how we assume He made it. If you look at each and every miracle described in the pages of the bible from the smallest to the greatest, one begins to understand the finesse, control and power of our Glorious Holy Creator God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) especially in regards to the required engineering involved. We only dream of the technological wonders of what we could do like the replicators of Star Trek to the building of world destroying machine of Star Wars to all the other marvels we put in science fiction stories. Yet we see marvels in the pages of the bible of the reality that our Holy God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) is doing and has done, from the raining of the axe head to the feeding of the 500 thousand to the extending of the day for the battle of Israelites. Study these things as an engineer and technologist and you have to stand in absolute wonder of what He can do.
7 days isn’t complete at one single time. We also still live in the 7th day according to the NT. We notice that God did NOT complete that “day”…you have a mighty mountain to overcome with that. And why stop at 7 days? Were we supposed to live and relive 7 days over and over and over again? No…God said, “…for day’s, month’s, years…”, so why the pattern of 7 days so important-besides the pattern for exodus to follow so that mankind will take time out of his busy schedule and remember God their Creator and Savior, etc.,? And I do recall Jesus and the disciples breaking the Sabbath so… Have you ever traversed even a small ocean in a small boat? Did you know that very large ships travel small oceans? “World” is translated many ways in the Bible. It COULD have been a MASSIVE area flood of great devastation. Mankind had not yet even scattered across the earth. The “world” in which mankind lived may also have had every species of animal in it as well. Doves are not long range birds that you think they are. They just didn’t find life on the exposed earth in the area yet. Since man had not yet scattered across the earth and God only needed to wipe mankind out…why would He need to flood the entire earth to do so? The early Christians thought they had spread the gospel over the entire world…imagine their surprise when Columbus sailed the sea’s. 40 day’s and 40 nights is symbolic just as much as Jonah spent “3 days” in the belly of a whale. The story of Noah is not lost or bothered-just the interpretation of it is much more clear now. The Christians of Galileo’s day had to reinterpret and “get over it and move on” as well just as much as those in Columbus’s day. Imagine how much the flat earth teaching of the Bible had to be reinterpreted. Time for the clearer understanding of our times. No…I don’t believe in Evolution like the Darwinian’s and the Abiogenesis gatekeeper atheists and many Christians and other religions do. I also take any time/dating methods with a grain of salt…includes YEC and OEC.
Yeah…Genesis 1 is not a hill that Christ was crucified on…it matters in many ways, but it’s not clear dogma as the very early church fathers declared. But it did lead to a persecution of perhaps one of the best all time church fathers, Origen and yet no one touched the others before or after him. Look what happened to Galileo for simply discovering the earth revolves around the sun and not the other way around and when we had to adjust from flat earth dogma’s. Let’s not let this happen to us. We are divided enough. Everything about us is ruining the salvation of souls in the West. It’s really bad.
Amazing explanation. Thank God for you, my brother. I will be able to point my friends to this video to best explain my thoughts and feelings, but in an articulate manner. My God bless you and your family.
There is an additional theory that was not touched on, and that is the idea that God created order out of and already existing but disordered world. (Not gap theory). Check out dr Josh Swamidass and dr dr Michael Heiser's ideas.
I read the theories of Dr. Gerald Schroeder in "Genesis and the Big Bang", and other books. To me, he made a very convincing case of the "days" of Genesis being dependent on the observer's viewpoint, Creation is from God's viewpoint, so the "days" of Creation are on a different scale from earthly days. Recommend his books.
This is a really touchy subject. I think I mostly fall on the side of the person who wrote the letter. and I have been accused of not being saved because I don't hold to the young creationist ideals. I just wanted to say thank you very much for tackling it and I think you did a wonderful job!
Well, yes, you are saved. The average Christian will think that's the main point of Christianity but really it's not. I'm being sidetracked here. But I'll finish this and get to the main point quickly. It's good that you are saved but Jesus Christ did not really command his disciples to simply get other people to heaven. But being simply saved is not really the point of Christianity. Here is what Christianity really is according to Matthew 28:18-20: 18 And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age." (Matthew 28:18-20, ESV) We are to be disciples and make disciples of Jesus Christ. And we must observe all things that Jesus Christ commanded us to. And do you know one of the things that Jesus commanded us to observe? A literal 6 days creation with 1 day of rest. Don't believe me? Read Exodus 20:8-11- 8 "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy. (Exodus 20:8-11, ESV) We follow the similar 7 day week format in our work day schedule. 6 working days and 1 rest day. If this doesn't convince you that biblical creation is extremely clear that God created the Earth in 6 literal days and took rest on the 7th literal day, I'm not sure what biblical verse does. Also coming to (Natural) Science with regards to the age of the Earth and the Universe, (Natural) science has really no business in telling us what happened in the past or how old the Earth and the universe is. That business belongs to the Historical sciences NOT natural science. Natural science can only observe the present day physical processes. The problem is Academia and the legal system in the US have abused and misused Natural science and they have ruined science and they have plagued the real sciences with pseudoscience such as Uniformitarian geology and Cosmology by adding in the unfalsifiable assumption that "the present is key to the past". That ultimate principle on which our current pseudoscientific historic model of the Earth and the universe (universe is 27.4 billion years old) is a completely unfalsifiable principle. The fact is real Natural science is agnostic about the age of the universe. It is the job of the historical sciences such as History, Archaeology, Genetics, Anthropology etc to tell us what happened in the past and how and when the Earth and the Universe came into existence. The correct philosophical decision we should take is to rely on historical sciences (including the Bible) over the naturalistic pseudoscience that is Uniformitarianism and Cosmology. Also another thing. The peer review process is an extremely broken system at the heart of academia. One of the massive unintended consequences of peer review is that when new science and new knowledge emerges, new science can never be peer reviewed. Peer review is really just group think. There is no open mindedness at all. There are also so many other problems with peer review which I might point out later.
Genesis is foundation, if death before sin, then payment for sin is redundant, and there is no foundation. A fossil is by quick burial, preserving carcass from decay and predators, under immense pressure. What was added to the rock, what was in the rock, what was removed from the rock, we don't know. Tap is dripping, you did not see when it was turned on, the rate of it, nor previous amount in the sink. If a computer (brain) came to be by random, then it cant be trusted to be reliable and consistent. The age of earth, is based on guesses, pressumptions, and assumptions, that presupposes old age. Besides historical observed age, there is no way of knowing accurate true age, any guesses are false. You know your age, I know my age, because it is observed, written down, but rocks have no label on them. It is assumed content of rock is the same and nothing were added or removed, decay rate is assumed constant. Earth had a different climate, different climate, different amount of sunlight entering, different decay rate. The radiometric dating method, does not get historic age correct, and so cant be trusted on unknown ages. God is the only witness, the only historical record of age we have, is The Bible, geneology back to Adam. Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. John 1:1 In the beginning was the word, the word was with God, and the word was God.
@@BhikPersonalif we are to follow the same literal 7 day pattern (which is simply a pattern to follow-plainly clear) then only the Jews, maybe Muslims, and 7th Day Adventist’s are only strictly following it. Also, we are in the 7th day still so explain that one. If we never left the 7th day then how can we go back to days 1-7? We can’t. So it’s a pattern-not a literal 7 day creation week, but a PATTERN to follow. Also, Christian’s were given liberty of things. We worship on Sunday’s and everyday we choose. The main thing God and Jesus are concerned with is that we do take time out of our busy lives and worship Him. Oh yeah…Jesus broke the Sabbath day a number of untold times. So there is that as well.
When I read the verse "one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years is like one day" in 2 Peter 3:8, I interpret it as God saying he lives outside our spacetime, much like a computer programmer doesn't live inside the computer. There are many credible scientists who believe we are living in simulation.
I am a literal 6 day creationist christian. Why? Because the Hebrew word for day used in Genesis is Yom. Yom is a literal 24 hour period of time. 1 day. The same word yom is used when Jonah was in the whale. He was in the whale for 3 literal days, not 3000 years. But mostly I believe God does not lie, He is trustworthy and His word is the truth from Genesis to Revelation. John 17:17 Thy word is truth.
Can I kindly challenge your thinking? A day = 24 hours = one revolution of the earth. On what "day" in creation was the earth created? Since the earth (and therefore our understanding of time) was not there at beginning of creation, how can "the first day" as to Genesis 1:3-5 be measured in earth time - in hours? The plants, sun, moon, stars were only created on the 4th day (seasons, days and years as described in verse 14). Earth time has nothing to do with time in the universe (God's time). 24h day is only a earthly concept. Every day is different in every planet. Venus has the longest day of any planet in our solar system. It completes one rotation every 243 Earth days.
@@aeasthouse316 Can I kindly challenge your thinking? You assume much when you ask [Since the earth (and therefore our understanding of time) was not there at beginning of creation, how can "the first day" as to Genesis 1:3-5 be measured in earth time - in hours?], instead of simply taking what the Almighty Holy Creator God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) actually states in His word. Exodus 20 points out that each day of creation is the same length. If the Almighty Holy God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) has the wherewithal, the power, the finesse of control and the intelligence to bring the universe to bear, why is it not possible for Him to do so in the manner described? See my long post on the problems in physics that we can never solve above. All people suffer from the same problem in that our view of God is way too small and He literally and absolutely beyond us. He is not required to do anything according to our opinions or beliefs. he is the power that brought all of creation into existence and He is the power that holds all of creation in existence. We are far to small to understand even the simplest of things in creation. But He has given us a mind to be able to look into and try to understand His creation.
This is one of those truths that we’ll find out after Jesus returns. I honestly don’t know whether the universe is young or old, all I know is that God created it all and is keeping it going!
Some used to interpret the earth "being on pillars" as literal (or physical), now we know that the 'pillars' are figurative of synchronicity and gravitational forces. Just as it mentions in other verses people that are 'pillars' ; or the church 'as the pillar holding up the word of God' before a fallen world.
Here is an analogy I like to use to explain how YEC works. The universe is like a game of Monopoly. God created the universe in 6 days which was a multiple of miracles. Outside of God performing miracles the universe is governed by natural laws that God set up. God initially creating the universe is like setting up a game of Monopoly where everyone is handed out starting cash. The natural laws that govern the universe (outside of miracles) are like the rules of the game; to earn more cash you have to play the game and pass Go (among other things). Future miracles are like "house rules" that people have. House rules ignore the official rules of the game; in the same way miracles ignore the natural laws that govern the universe. Now someone who doesn't know the rules of Monopoly could come into the room right as the game starts and assume you have been playing awhile since they see the starting cash. This would be people who think the earth is super old. They are using decay rates to date the earth but fail to recognize the starting conditions of the universe. Other people who know the rules of the game and know who set up the game would recognize that the game has just started. This would be the people who think the earth is young. We recognize that God created the earth and chose to set it up with certain stating conditions.
Exodus 20:11 says, "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." There's your answer, straight from God's mouth to your eyes/ears.
I never thought you would do a vid on this! As a Christian, who happens to be a Inerrancy Fundamentalist, which led me to knowing that God created the world in 6 literal days. He repeatedly states the evening and morning on each day. If God couldn’t create it in 6 days, maybe you’re just underestimating God’s word. Lastly, the science leads to the literal interpretation.
Just about 4 min in, but wanted to say "Answers in Genesis" give very compelling scientific evidence for a young earth. So, as much as what I agree with what you usually say, I would suggest you research this a little further. Starting with the Archeologist, Chemist, etc at Answers in Genesis
Jesus said one of these 2 phrases, you guess which is the one he said: “In the beginning, He made them male and female” Or billions of years after the beginning he made them asexual and then a few more billions of years of death and suffering he let them evolve and finally sinned at the tree and then cursed all creation with a second dose of death from sin all the while he called the first billions of death “very good”
You’re missing a lot of in between views. You’re locked in and are supremely right in your own eyes. You think others haven’t been there too? Most people start as literal 6k year old earth. And we’d be happy to believe that still if the evidence supported that. And many of us have been to the creation museum, and are very familiar with answers in Genesis work. Please don’t make assumptions when you’re not willing to examine all the evidence yourself. For example, just because the earth is old doesn’t say anything about whether or not evolution is true. It could be, or might not be, but that’s a different element. The earth could still be billions of years old and there be no evolution as you envision it. The age of the earth, origin of life, and evolution are all distinct issues. It is much more nuanced than you’re making it out to be. And so you can wrestle with this: is God a deceiver, like in Islam? Did God make the earth to appear much older than it actually is? Is all of cosmology, geology, paleontology, archaeology, elements of chemistry, biology, etc. all meant to look deceptive?
What helped me was reading Exodus 31, God gave Moses two tablets of stone, written with the *finger of God*. 'It is a sign between Me and the children of Israel forever; for in "six days" the Lord made the heavens and the earth.' Everywhere else in the Bible we know what 'day' means except Genesis 1? Seems odd and inconsistent. Jesus also references 'from the beginning', He made from male and female. Natural observed science cannot provide a timescale as it assumes natural process's have been and are a constant which shows our finite and flawed state. Peter is referring to God's patience and longsuffering (verse 9) with the Lord one day is like a thousand years. The key is 'With the Lord' or 'To the Lord' referring to that God is outside of time hence using that it's 'like' or 'as'.
If you don't believe the first chapter in the Bible, then the Bible is errant and imperfect. If the Bible is not true and not God-inspired, then Christ is false and following him is for fools.
Part 1/2 Do I question someone's salvation if they have a different view? No. If you believe in Jesus's shed blood to save you, then you are saved. Here's what we miss. There are only 2 options in Scripture either the universe was created in 6 literal days or those days are 1000 years each = 6000 years total. The problem with so many Christians is that when you understand the specificity of Scripture you'll never allegorize it again. Allogorizing the Bible is the result of a lack of understanding nothing else. Are there metaphors? Yes, are there symbols? Yes. Are there different forms of writing? Yes. General allegorizing is not one of them. Second, my rule of thumb is that if you reference or trust Christians from say 400 Ad and later for correct doctrine I would question it immensely. I myself wouldn't trust a biblical reference from 1600 onward for sound doctrine. In my experience, you're more likely to adopt a heretical doctrine the closer we listen to Christians to our time. This isn't because I think they were evil or malicious or not saved in any way but we have so many early sources and commentaries today from early Christians, from the Jewish people, and from the Dead Seas Scrolls that to me there are enough there to clear a lot of our questions up. What I try to do is reference material before 400 AD. Here's what we know the early Church wrote and taught about. Does it make it correct? No. But I'd rather see what they wrote rather than others because these were the disciples of the Apostles. Barnabas, AD First Century “Therefore, children, in six days, or in six thousand years, all the prophecies will be fulfilled. Then it says, ‘He rested on the seventh day.’ This signifies at the Second Coming of our Lord Jesus, He will destroy the Antichrist, judge the ungodly, and change the sun, moon, and stars. Then He will truly rest during the Millennial reign, which is the seventh day.” Epistle of Barnabas 15:7-9 Commodianus, AD 240 “We will be immortal when the six thousand years are completed.” Against the Gods of the Heathens 35 “Resurrection of the body will be when six thousand years are completed, and after the one thousand years, the world will come to an end.” Against the Gods of the Heathens 80 Victorinus, AD 240 “Satan will be bound until the thousand years are finished; that is, after the sixth day.” Commentary on Revelation 20.1-3 Methodius, AD 290 “In the seventh millennium we will be immortal and truly celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.” Ten Virgins 9.1 Now immediately I can see some areas of confusion. I have studied and taught Eschatology (the end times) for over 30 years and without getting into it I can see these two references aren't talking about the same event. “Therefore, children, in six days, or in six thousand years, all the prophecies will be fulfilled. Then it says, ‘He rested on the seventh day.’ This signifies at the Second Coming of our Lord Jesus, He will destroy the Antichrist, judge the ungodly, and change the sun, moon, and stars. Then He will truly rest during the Millennial reign, which is the seventh day.” Epistle of Barnabas 15:7-9 Commodianus, AD 240 “We will be immortal when the six thousand years are completed.” Against the Gods of the Heathens 35 “Resurrection of the body will be when six thousand years are completed, and after the one thousand years, the world will come to an end.” Against the Gods of the Heathens 80 The first one is about the Second Coming and the second is about the Rapture of the Church, 2 separate events. However, when over the scope of 2000 years we're talking about a decade say between these 2 events so I won't debate this too much. What it shows us is that they believed that the 6 days + 1 day of rest not only applied to Creation, and the days of the week, but also applied to the biblical timeline. This is where we can apply 2 Peter 3: 8 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. The 1 day is as 1000 years is directly related to the time that the LORD will allow to unfold to give all a chance to come to repentance. In Scripture, we see the Judgment Day in Revelation 20 where the Lake of Fire, aka Eternal Hell aka the 2nd Death is sentenced for all humanity. Judgment Day comes after the 1000-year reign of Jesus which by these early Church fathers believed comes after the 6 days or 6000 years of human history. This also shows us from an Eschatological standpoint that these disciples of the Apostles believed in what we today call "Premillennialism". Let's assume for a second, that this view of 6000 biblical years is correct as far as our history. I'll come back to this. As far as Creation I have an imperfect explanation. In Genesis 1:1 it says "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." Notice this says both were created. However, verse 2 specifically talks about earth 2 The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. In Job 38 we read 4 “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding. 5 Who determined its measurements? Surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? 6 To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone, 7 When the morning stars sang together, And all the sons of God shouted for joy? If you do a study the "sons of God" are the angelic host. We also see this in Job 1 6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them. 7 And the Lord said to Satan, “From where do you come?” So Satan answered the Lord and said, “From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking back and forth on it.” So what if in the beginning, God created both the Heavens and the material for the earth. Set up Heaven with the angelic host and then they were there to witness the LORD come back in Genesis 1:2 to organize the earth which was formless and void into our current universe. Still taking 6 literal days to organize it but the material that would be organized existed since the "beginning"?? Now, why this is imperfect, is because Exodus 20 says: 8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it. This passage here plus in Genesis both speak to a literal 24-hour day for the creation. What we might not consider is that in that 24-hour period, God could speed up time. As in plant a seed and time elapse in a 24-hour period to have mature trees, plants, and animals by the 6th day. Just some thoughts. However, what I am interested is what year are we in, in relation to the 6000th year if that is supposed to be significant either with the Rapture of the Church or the 2nd Coming of Jesus. I'm more of a forward-looker than a backward-looker. (Continued in Part 2).
Hebrew has no words for the days of the week. The days are numbered, so an Israeli would say to a friend "I'll meet you for coffee the third day". The Hebrew for "the third day" in Genesis 1 could equally be translated "Tuesday", and so with the others. Genesis 1 v 5 is different, where yom echad is variously translated "one day" (ASV, CJB, JPS, NASB, Douay etc), "first day" (KJV, ESV, NIV, NKJV, NLT etc) or "Day One" (ISV, Literal, YLT). All three make sense. Also bear in mind Exodus 20 v 11 (aye, there's the rub): "... the LORD made the heavens and the earth and the sea, and all that is in them, in six days, then he rested on the seventh day. Therefore, the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy".
God has to square a circle here. He has to lay out why things are, without explaining how things work. You can read it literally, and it works, because it’s not a textbook of scientific discovery. That’s one of the things we can do. It does start the narrative of why things are messed up, and lays the foundation for God’s plan to fix this mess.
The following is my understanding of it ... Some details on the Creation Days. 1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. >> God is proclaiming himself to be the creator. There are no details mentioned. Just the creation as a fact ... 2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. >> God knew that the earth wasn't suitable for life and subsequently he prepared the earth for human habitation. No timeline ... 3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. >> The universe is already in existence. (see verse one) Life on earth cannot exist without the sun, which had been obscured. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. >> The moon. 5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. >> Is it possible for God to do so! I think so, as everything had already been in place. 6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. >> Atmosphere, oxygen ect. 7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. >> Clouds and weather 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. >> We all know what heaven is, when we look up and see the birds flying around in it. 9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. >> the oceans were gathered into one place. I guess that the moon came in handy... 👇 Please note, the earth is already in existence,(Gen 1:1) including all the planets and the sun, although obscured. Now consider, a meteor had hit the planet and caused the extinction of the dinosaur 🦕 and the earth was in chaos because of it. (Gen 1:2) 🦕 Evidence suggests an asteroid impact was the main culprit which caused the extinction of the dinosaur 🦕Volcanic eruptions that caused large-scale climate change may also have been involved, together with more gradual changes to Earth's climate that happened over millions of years. The facts remain; it caused the earth to be in chaos. All the lifeforms we know now, came into existence after the extinction of the dinosaur 🦕 (About 65-66 million years ago?) I find it interesting to think that dinosaur 🦖🦕 had been the first life on this planet. We humans are not really the first creation. It should give us pause to think. Who brought the dinosaur into existence? Have they evolved into one big happy family from a fish or a bird ? ... 😳 All or much of the lifeforms we know now, came into existence after the extinction of the dinosaur 🦕 This timeframe is hardly long enough for life to have evolved, even if it could, for molecules don't care about life and it takes two of the same sort to re-create the same kind. Even in the case of 🐔🐓 God made the earth suitable for life. The bible tells us that this happened within six days. He practically removed the chaos within this timeframe, and he "' set in motion'" all lifeforms we know today. This reconstruction of our planet also affirms the seasons and the days of the week. God established the Sabbath, on the seventh day he rested. On a side note, people didn't have clocks in those days, when you consider this, it becomes apparent, how important this notion of seasonal and weekly structure must have been in ancient times. The story carries on with Adam and Eve being placed within a special garden called Eden. Again we don't know how long they have been there, (even if speaking metaphorically) but we do know the timeframe after the fall, after they had to leave that garden, about 6000 years ago or more, when incidentally, consciousness had entered their mind and lives. (While in the garden, although set apart for God's purpose, they were more like big children, not being aware of right or wrong.) From that point in time in human history, civilization had started and the generations of people have been remembered, and have been written down in the book of Genesis. The story of Cain reveals that other subjects existed in this world. Gen 4:15-17 The purpose of the book of Genesis reveals the Creator and his interactions with humans, created in his image and with inherent creativity. It is a timeless story and it's message applies to us today. I find this story much more plausible than to think that everything just evolved from a brainless chemical soup, with the sudden appearance of fish swimming out of this soup, then turning into birds to fly all over the world to evolve into dinosaurs, which we know have been in extinction millions of years ago.
Excellent video! I am young Earth creationist, I believe that there is good biblical-scientific case for young Earth. I am not dogmatic about it, it is interesting, important, but not necessary to get right or call each other heretics. I started thinking about it only when examining where those old earth theories lead. I am examining scientific issues like dating methods and so on, the question is much more nuanced than it seems, from perspective of science.
When Peter said that a day to the Lord is as a thousand years it had nothing to do with Genesis. The Genesis account is very specifically marked by numbers and the world "day" to show that these are 24 hour days. You can look it up on Answers in Genesis for the explanation if you want a thorough explanation, but what Peter was referring to was about the end times and the time it may take for Christ to come back. So, if Christ were raised up in 3 days, and a day is like a thousand years, then two days have passed since Christ left (almost) and He is likely to come in the third day, or after 2033, or about that time, give or take, since we don't know the exact date and also Jewish (and God's) calendars are different than our secular calendars. There are a lot of theological arguments on that but that's the takeaway as far as I'm concerned. The main point is, that we HAVE to take the Genesis account of creation literally, or we get in trouble theologically, because that would mean that death came before Adam and Eve sinned and if that was true then it totally nullifies the need for the death and resurrection of Jesus. If you don't understand the complete ramifications I suggest you go to Answers in Genesis videos on the subject so you can understand because it's pretty basic and vital. God could have created everything at once, in a split second. But He didn't. He used seven days to show us something. Many people believe that it is representative of how long this earth will be around, approximately 6000 years for man (because 6 is the number of man in the gematria) then a thousand year reign of Christ, making 7000, and then the new heaven and earth will be created and this old one of sin will be destroyed. But the way you tell what the author meant when he was writing out Genesis is to ask a Messianic Jew. They will tell you the days are 24 hour days and WHY specifically, they know that fact. As for science, science has been desperately trying to catch up to the Bible for centuries. I've studied many of the sciences as well as the Bible and numerous subjects involved with the Bible and I can tell you, science hasn't reached the top of the mountain yet, but they are beginning to see the clouds with things like DNA and how many times the Bible has been correct and science has been wrong and one day they will reach the peak of the mountain and look over at the other side and find God waiting there for them. This belief has nothing to do with salvation, but it does matter if you want to take any other part of the Bible seriously, because of the pointless incarnation, death and resurrection contradiction you get if you make the days long periods of time that I mentioned earlier. Also, many plants and animals had to be created within a day of each other because they rely on each other to survive. Here is a link to one of the shorter Answers in Genesis explanations of the days in Genesis. ruclips.net/video/aFjgW9UBG9E/видео.html
Genesis 1:3... evening and morning were the first day. There are scientists who do hold to a young earth. And have good reason to believe it. Evening and morning.
Thanks for those thoughts! Understood and agreed. Being united in the essentials is the important thing. I get it that in your business - the apologetics side of things, this can be a very distracting and difficult issue to deal with - IF a straightforward reading of the text is adopted. But that does not mean this is not a very important issue. Although it is not essential for salvation, if there was no original Adam, no original sin, no historical fall, etc., we have a problem, because this doctrine explains the need for the cross. So this issue could have a far reaching effect ON the essentials if we get it wrong. In your message you say that the killer did not tell us HOW He did it, but in the Bible, it seems pretty clear. God DID tell us how He did it - at least to a certain extent. He spoke the world into existence. Yes, He did it incrementally, but the young earth “incrementally” is a far cry from the “incremental” idea of the long age folk. And God tells us very clearly WHY He did it this way in Ex. 20:11-12 - to give us a pattern for our 7 day week. Although the word “day” CAN have various meanings, that does not mean that we are free to pick and choose from those meanings. 1) The context is important. 2) Other Scriptures are important (ie Ex. 20) and 3) how others in the Bible interpreted the passages. For instance, in Mark 10, Jesus Himself said that He created them male and female AT THE BEGINNING OF CREATION, but if the long age view is correct, this would be an outright lie. Because humans only came onto the scene towards the very very end of “creation” in that view. In order to avoid this problem, some have even gone so far as to say that Jesus was speaking as a man - He was mistaken! Didn't God COMPLETE creation on the 6th day and rest on Day 7? Even after Day 7 was finished, because His creative work was complete, He would still be resting from that kind of work even today, although He now has a different work that He is involved in. Long agers seem to think God has been creating for a very very long time. One very important thing for us to keep in mind when it comes to “SCIENCE” is that SCIENCE, as practiced currently, WILL NEVER AGREE with the Bible. It cannot because before they even try to solve the problem of the origin of the universe, life, and humans, they say eliminate God along with any supernatural cause as a possible hypothesis. I understand the reasoning for this in normal science where you can use the scientific method to verify your hypotheses, but when doing origins science, it's dangerous to determine ahead of time what can and can not be put forth as an answer. What if you go into a crime scene and say, “We can consider any suspect except for Joe. Joe cannot be named as a suspect.” OK, fine, but IF Joe is the guilty party, no matter what well thought out clever explanation you come up with, it will be wrong. So scientists come up with an answer, but it will always be wrong because it leaves God out of the picture. And as a result, no matter what they come up with, it will not agree with the Bible because God IS the Creator. So, take the Big Bang, for instance. Many Christians like it because it supports the idea that the universe had a beginning, but that does not make it true. The Big Bang is simply an attempt by scientists to explain the universe in their naturalistic paradigm which ASSUMES it had a totally natural cause. All of science is based on this ASSUMPTION! The Big Bang has many problems and scientists have been forced to come up with a bunch of supporting hypotheses to add to it in order to keep it from being falsified by the data. And even now, the Jamese Webb telescope keeps finding things that seem to require a whole lot of tweaking their atheistic model of the origin of the universe. The point is that the science on this is NOT settled. It keeps changing. So to use IT to inform our interpretation of Genesis seems highly questionable to say the least. Origins science involves a LOT of interpretation. Scientists place their data into their atheistic framework that assumes all natural causes and as a result it is bound to have lots of problems, BUT the Scripture gives us the right paradigm in which to plug in the data to get the right interpretation. The biblical answer is not "SCIENTIFIC" because it allows for God as a cause, but again, the scientific explanation will always be wrong because of it’s faulty assumption and approach. Do we trust man’s word and ideas that are based on unprovable assumptions and that keep on changing year by year, and probably will continue to change? Or, do we trust God’s Word that does not change? Both sides still have questions and issues to work out, but it seems to me that one side has the Word of the Creator on which to base it’s interpretation of the natural world. Scientists may ridicule it as pseudoscientific or whatever, but that does not mean it is wrong. Origins science is extremely difficult because we can’t do experiments to check our hypotheses. It’s much more like forensic science where interpretation plays a huge role. I appreciate your videos and your approach to apologetics. It has been very helpful to me. Thanks. Sorry this got so long.
Well for me, not gonna determine if I believe in God or not I don’t know why people take it so crazy literally and then walked away from Christianity because of it don’t think it should do that
None of the old-earth people can tell me how they interpret Exodus 20:11. "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy." How can it mean anything other than 6 literal days??!! Please help me understand.
When God created everything, I think he created it with "built in" age. Meaning he created everything in a fully mature form instead of everything being little seeds and babies.
Seems to me that God knew Genesis would be questioned as supernatural an event it was, so He seems to go out of His way mentioning “and there was morning and there was evening the fourth day” etc. (ie: 6 consecutive earth rotations), clearly showing it happened in six 24hr literal days.
I was an old earth theistic evolutionist. But then somebody pointed out to me that would put death before sin. While I can see no problem with saying the earth is X number of years, I can see how it would be a big problem to say things were dying before man came. Because man brought sin into the world and sin brought death into the world. Romans 5:12. I have heard some try to explain this by saying it was just human death that happened after sin or even that early humans weren't made in the image of God so their deaths didn't count. But in Romans 8 it says that creation fell because of sin. This word "creation" cannot mean humans because it says the creation will share in the future glory with the children of God. In the New Testament, children of God refer to those who belong to God. Which means "creation" refers to animals or it's teaching that every single human will go to Heaven whether they are the children of God or not because they will share in the future glory with the children of God. Since Jesus said not every human will be saved, creation must mean animals. I hear some say, "What about plant death? We know Adam and Eve and the animals ate plants in the garden of Eden before sin. Well, plants don't meet the biblical definition of life and therefore (biblically speaking) they were never alive and cannot die. In the Garden of Eden, plants are described as food for living things not living things themselves. Genesis 1:29-30. And they have no breath or life or lifeblood. In the Bible, there are approved plant-based free willing offerings. But they are not atonement for sin offerings because they have no life blood and it takes the shedding of blood to pay for sins. Apparently, sap doesn't count. There are no verses that say don't drink/eat the sap because the life is in the sap. I agree with him that this is not a salvation issue. But I disagree with what he said about people who believe in a young earth having to explain the science. You can believe the Bible without having an answer for every skeptic. I have studied the science much since converting to a young earth creationist. But I didn't have to learn all that before I believed the Bible.
The topic of origins is a battleground. Thank you for the concise summary! One point: Science does not demand that the earth is hundreds of millions of years old. On the other hand fashion certainly does require it to be very old, as does a naturalistic model of origins based on imaginary molecules-to-life evolution. A young-earth model is not unscientific. There is a growing body of research by scientists who believe in a historical Genesis account, and it is actually rather good. Are there sound reasons to dismiss Answers in Genesis or CMI as anti-science lunatics? There are certainly examples of sloppy thinking and poor use of science in the creationist fraternity (ahem, Mr K Hovind), but that is hardly justification for rejecting all of it. I'm against calling anyone who says they believe in Jesus as Lord a "heretic", and it doesn't help to be overly dogmatic about details in an origin story. Still, Genesis does appear to be a historical account. There are many awkward things in Genesis difficult to explain away as poetry (several near thousand-year lifespans, for example). Among christians, especially ones with strong ties to American higher education, there is a real sense of desperation to be taken seriously. It is not reassuring to see evolutionary dogmas (yes, dogmas as CS Lewis called them ruclips.net/video/PNNUPN3-WeM/видео.html) affirmed as "science" by Christians. Whether this is done to avoid rejection in an anti-christian environment is something said Christians should think about for themselves. However, I am very confident that there are no scientific (in the true sense of the word) reasons to reject a historical reading of Genesis. After all, Jesus referenced Genesis all the time and apparently believed it. As did Peter, who wrote that there would come a time when people would reject the idea that there was a flood that destroyed the world.
I agree that the Creation Account is a hybrid of the varied interpretations. A space of time between Gen 1:1 and 1:2 and then creation 'days' of unspecified time spans to get ultimately to the creation of Mankind which is where Moses takes us as readers of God's 'story'. Because I do no think that Adam and Eve sinned at the first opportunity. There may have been many prior encounters with the 'serpent' before the official one that spanned possibly a hundred years, who knows, but Moses only focuses on the encounter that mattered in getting to his (God's) point of the sacrifice element -the Lamb slain before the creation of the world (1 Peter 1:20) "He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake." So the 2 Authors, Moses and Peter agree with, and express that 'creation' was about the Redeemer, not limited to the dictates of time in the sense that our known timelines define God's capabilities.
Thank you interesting topic ,I was researching my own geneology ,this lead me to Jesus's geneology and how we are related to Jesus through Adam.i came to see the years and ages of people then saw there are kind of charts you can buy this was facinating to to because you can see the overlap of lives I saw in one of your videos this chart .I've come understand this is quite important when it comes to or origins , if Jesus became a man and was the son of Adam ,as God promised we have to work in more recent times .Jesus said there are 12 hour in a day , this is true at the equator it's exactly 12 hours of sunlight.i do understand that time is sometimes referred to a bit differently in some scriptures and the use of "this "generation " in Jesus geneology it give how many generations there were ,I was speaking to an atheist at the time , they asked how long is a generation I read so and so was the farther or so and so so it means the next generation born in that line .there was a flood where I live it totally changed the landscape in one day ,so I don't believe thousand or millions of years are needed for massive change to occur.thank you , appreciate your sharing.
Its interesting that the only time people debate the meaning of day (or time) is with creation. Nobody claims the Isrealites walked around Jericho for 7,000 years (instead of 7 days), that the Isrealites wondered in the desert for 40 ×365 × 1000 years, or that Jesus was in the tomb for 3,000 years instead of 3 days. If Adam was made on Day 6, then on Day 7, he was already 1000 years old, or maybe he was an metaphoric amount of time old + a day... We can't take God at His Word, because we dont want to (Romans 1:18-20), not because He didnt clearly speak it - Ex 20:1,11.
Great job laying out the protological issues surrounding this touchy subject, Jim. As a Biblical Apologist (SES graduate), I have some great news for old creationists and new creationists. Genesis 1:2 appears to say that the earth was formless and void, but this is actually a Latin translation that was applied to the English text. Originally, it would have been translated as 'desolate and waste' in Hebrew. Why does that matter? According to Moses, the earth is old and already created, but it is uninhabitable. Using the Hebrew word 'arb' (Bara'), God is creating a new earth on top of the old one in order to make it habitable. Thus, both viewpoints are valid when viewed from a Biblical perspective.
Watch pastor Allen Nolan at cornerstone fellowship community Church tahlequah Oklahoma he explains time, space and matter formula in his teachings of the book of Genesis.
God is not man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should change his mind. Has he said, and will he not do it? Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it?
Thanks for the video. The Bible is inspired by God, contains lots of history, much philosophy, and superb guidance about virtually everything in life. The Bible is truth, but is often not literal, and is mostly not a science book.
The most important thing to understand is God created the universe but we don't (of course can't) know how old the earth is exactly, it's just speculation.
I like to assume that as the universe expands, time gets slower. like how the days on earth are getting 2.3 milliseconds slower every century. From the point of the big bang, time and light would be extremely close and fast. only as the universe expanded did time and light would stretch, and lengthen.
I look at scripture and read in John 2 that Jesus turned water into wine not just any wine but the best wine that would have to be aged wine and when he fed the 5000 it wasn’t with bread dough and raw fish but baked bread and cooked or dried fish so I don’t think that it’s out of the realm of possibility that He could have created the universe having some things young and others older. Just a thought.
Very good point! That supports my (math/science major) husband's belief that God created the world with history. I use Exodus 20:11 as the basis for my young earth position.
The problem with the book of nature is what we can know and what we assume. There are two very fundamental aspects of the universe that we can never know about as a means in which we determine the age of anything. The first of these is the one-way speed of light. It is assumed that in terms of our universe, the one-way speed of light is the same as the two-way speed of light. Here's the rub. As long as the average is c then it doesn't matter what each way is, nothing in our physics changes. It could be instantaneous one way and c/2 the other way and the average is c. It could be c one way and c the other way and the average is still c. What this means is that distance no longer gives any correlation to length of time as we could be seeing what is happening at the far reaches of our universe as it is happening right now or the other extreme is that we could be seeing what happened twice as long ago as based on the estimated distance. We can in no way determine what the situation actually is. This situation gives glory to the Almighty Holy Creator God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) as only He knows and we can not find out by ourselves. The second aspect is that we cannot use radiometric dating to determine the age of anything because we cannot determine the actual initial composition of any sample that we might use. We make assumptions here that can never be verified. The basic of this dating method relies on the decay product proportions found in any sample. If the assumed proportions are incorrect then we could be dating something as being very much older than it actually is or we could be dating it very much younger than it actually is. Again this situation gives glory to the Almighty Holy Creator God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) as only He knows and we can not find out by ourselves. The only thing that the would be giving us insight is the book of revelation, which is the bible. Now here it appears that the creation is indeed six actual 24 hour days as confirmed by Exodus 20 in the ten commandments (or words). However, this still gives us no actual referent to how old the earth actually is. Her, we have a notable problem and that is we appear to have a 360 day year in the early part of Genesis and a 365 + a bit year now. This alone screws up any calculation of the age of the earth as well as a potential for a missing 600 years in Genesis. There appears to be missing generations as well, we don't know. So the view of many YEC is as fragile as the view of OEC. My own personal opinion on the matter is that the universe is young and that what we see in the night sky is happening right now. But I don't make this a matter of primary importance. I do know that the data from evolutionary biological experiments performed by atheistic evolutionary biologists and geneticists does not match with their declarations that macro-evolution is reality. The funny thing here is that when challenged to go find the data, nobody seems to want to do this and just they just assume that these experimenters never lied or coloured their results. Strangely enough, the prevalent attitude is that one can believe the proclamations of scientists as being true when the reality is that so many of these scientists are only giving their interpretation of the data collected and that interpretation will change over time. Scientific investigation is supposed to be fun and a means by which we can worship the Holy Creator God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) as we learn more and more about His creation, His universe and what He has awesomely done. I watch my grandchildren and stand in awe of the Holy Creator God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) and have to laugh at our inconsequential and feeble efforts in every technological area that we have. we fail to see that the entire technological and industrial efforts of mankind on this planet have not even come close the the technological and engineering wonder that is found in a single living cell, let alone the communication and coordination found in any living multicellular organism on this planet. Over a period of 40 or so years, I have been involved in analysing data professionally and I have often found that people interpret the data collected based on their expectations instead of looking at the data with a view of looking at it and seeing what is actually there. From an engineering and technological point of view, what The Holy Magnificent Creator God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) has done just blows everything else that man has done into insignificance. The best thing of all though is that because we have been made in the image of Him, we have the opportunity to discover what He has done. That is an incredible "wow" moment when you see this.
I think they are more people concerned to accommodate Genesis into the atheist worldview on natural processes times, that what the verses on Genesis said: God created on 6 days and rest in the 7th day.
I don't know if there is a god or not, but I know the universe is old, that's for sure. I don't understand why some people think the universe is only thousands of years old. I don't understand how people can think that everything in the universe, all the galaxies, stars, planets, etc, were all created at the same time, when astrophysicists and astronomers observe galaxies of different ages and in different stages of formation, and new stars and planets are still forming in the universe today, so obviously everything wasn't created all at once. The observable universe has a long, deep history that can be traced back through time using several different techniques. So, it isn't merely the fact that the universe *looks* old; there are so many ways that scientists working in different fields can trace things back through time. The universe and nature have a long history.
I think that there's reasonable evidence on both sides for the age of the Earth. But I also think that because Genesis wasn't an eye-witness account, it's not necessarily completely accurate. I agree the Bible is inspired by God but I don't think that means every single word was God-given (though, I do think the crazy patterns in the Bible were given by Him since it seems impossible for a human to create without a computer or a LOT of time on their hands). However, anything that was told as an eye-witness account, I believe is true. Not because I think people can't lie, but because their accounts have overtime been proven by evidence.
God created Adam as a full grown, fully mature man. Couldn't he create a universe by speaking it into existence fully matured. It would seem to be old to us but to God he just created it.
Small addition, but a critical one: What did Jesus reference as truth? There are many aspects of early Genesis that Jesus referenced as historical fact: Adam, Abel, Noah, Abraham. I'm willing to hear differening opinion up until they contradict Jesus' account and then i know they are false. He was there at creation and i refuse to believe he would lie about these accounts. So, check your theory against the Savoir's word. Does it match? If not, re-think your stance.
I agree they are my brothers and sisters as well. But placing death and destruction prior to the fall of man into sin means man did not introduce death into the world. This view is completely antithetical to the Bible. I agree that we need to look into science, but it must be good science and if the theory fails like the theory of evolution, it should not be considered viable. Answers in Genesis is a wonderful ministry that has done so much work to articulate this. They employ a slew of discerning scientists as well who care deeply about credible science. As Christians we ought to love the beauty of the order God made more than any other group. We need more Godly people doing honest science! Encourage your kids and grandkids into stem degrees! ❤
When He made creation, HE did not consult me. If HE did create it all in a few days, fine. If HE did it over billions of years, fine. Either way, all glory is HIS.
This is NOT my “pet theory” but the WORD of GOD: “For in six DAYS the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them …” (Exodus 20:11) God does NOT lie!!!! God is NOT a LIAR!!!! Do NOT call God a liar! Do NOT blaspheme!!!
What do you think about Covenant Eschatology? This view says Genesis is not speaking about material creation; it's speaking about the beginning of a covenant. I've been trying to learn more about it recently.
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Pretty straightforward, God (spirit) created time, space, matter (material). God created from the beginning, Genesis speaks of creation. When Adam & Eve sinned, was it necessary to save man. Because we sinned, sin, and will sin, a salvation plan, covenant, is necessary, covenant with the Jews was part of that plan.
I've never understood this issue. When God made Adam and Eve, they were adults, not infants. When he made trees they were fully grown, not seeds. The earth was old when God made it. We are talking about God, the one who created the sun. This is a non-issue.
How long did it take God to make Adam? How old was Adam when He blew the breath of life into Adam? How long did it take God to part the red sea? How long did it take God to feed the multitude with the loaves and fish?-did He have to make a microscopic organism that had a series of adaptations over a long period of time that turned into a fish 🐟 in the basket? How long did it take to change creatures into a human before Adam which means you have death before sin? The 6 day creation and rest on the 7th day is your current week and literally is evident that He set up our week in the first week of creation. The scripture that says a day is like a 1000 years and 1000 years is like a day, I believe it means God is outside time, space and matter. He literally is the author of natural laws, He wrote them, and He can operate inside and outside them. This means He is all powerful, the Alpha and Omega, the Great I Am who is due our praise and worship. There is no other god. It only makes sense that if there were more gods there adds an new question of how many and they would be creatures because there would need to be an ultimate power that decided when to stop creating other gods because someone chose a number to create. Thats why God is the only true God and He is all powerful. If you start questioning processes and Gods decisions your looking into His time to make up His mind and how powerful He is. I think it is related to where we put our trust-faith. God said to them in the garden on the day that you eat of the tree of knowledge you will surely die. Then satan asked them did God tell you that you will die if you eat of this trees fruit you will die? You will not die but be like God and know good and evil. So they took Gods words and cast them aside and believed satan instead which is placing their trust in satan. Taking their trust and faith from God to satan. God came down, died on a cross, rose on the 3rd day and now you take your trust and put it in Him. Everything in-between is constantly having to identify sin, feel the weight of that sin, learning to trust in God in the most desperate situations and looking towards Him and His promises...even towards the coming back to redeem us from that fallen state in the garden. He made the world in 6 days and rested on the 7th. This 7th day became holy and He wanted us to remember all He has done and reflect on Him and dedicate a day every week to set aside for Him. Believe in the power of the Almighty God and put your trust in Him, don't doubt or wavier in His power all the way to His power to save you and resurrect the dead.
Scripture tells us WHAT creation is showing us: For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Romans 1, 20 God reveals us in HIS word that HE created in the beginning, that is matter and time: HE put in creation HIS concept from eternity, HIS eternal thoughts unto matter with time within six days. There is no time before God created time with day one, no day zero, minus one and so on. Scientintist are researching the results of God's work of this first six days of the universe, and what happened to it afterwards and all the conditions on which it functions but NOT how God materialised HIS eternal concept with time in the first six days.
I have to correct you here in that it is the interpretation by scientists of the data collected that has been shown to be wrong. Your characterisation of [science] is not not helpful, it leads to people not being rational about what we can and cannot learn about the universe around us by using the methods of scientific investigation as we study the creation of the Magnificent Holy Awesome Creator God (Father, son and Holy Spirit).
It's great that you recognise the full range of plausible Biblical interpretations. My own view is that there is no hermenteutical warrant for YEC, because 'Like a poem' is a good way of understanding what its meaning was like to the original readers, and indeed, the repetitive structure of Genesis 1 is typical of Hebrew poetry. We don't usually take poetry literally.
My friend there is Biblical warrant for treating it as a historical narrative. There is a hermeneutical warrant for YEC because of the toledot and the Sabbath day being set apart as holy (i.e., set apart from every other day). The Sabbath being the day on which God rested is what The Law directly relies upon for it's warrant of a Sabbath day. It's also used in Daniel in the 70 weeks prophecy, the years of Jubilee and etc. So God's rest alone I think allows a warrant for YEC. I understand that there are other ways of interpreting it (I used to believe Hugh Ross's view) but the fact that you can build a case off of the Sabbath alone without respect to the toledot and its related arguments I think means that there does exist enough data to provide a warrant for a YEC interpretation. God bless ♥.
I agree that it's not an essential that affects salvation. However, when we interpret the Bible we have to take into consideration the context of the passage. Neither Psalm 90 or 2 Peter 3 are talking about creation. They are talking about our lifespan in comparison to the eternality of God and His plan. When interpreting "yom" in the creation account we need to look at that context and other contexts that mention it, such as the 4th commandment concerning the Sabbath. We also need to be careful about saying "science says" when the scientific data is being interpreted based on human assumptions. No one was there to see what happened. Which brings me to the problem with the analogy you gave. You implied that we have to wait until we get to heaven to see what God says about this. As far as the details, sure, but as far as how long it took, He's already told us. The question is, who more consistently interprets what He said.
Here is a logical argument I've just thought of, today. It never entered my mind before. Let's hypothesise the creation account for each day as 1000 years or 1 million years. So 6 days of 1000 years would be 6000 years. Then on the 7th day, God rested, which was 1000 years. But God created Adam and Eve on the 6th day (6th period of 1000 years, say the last day of that period). Then, on the "8th day" (period of 1000 years), Adam and Eve would be at least minimum of 1002 years old after God rested for 1000 years. But later in Genesis 5, it says Adam lived for 930 years. And Seth lived for 912 years and so on. Do we now not take those numbers literally? If we take the age of Adam, Seth, Enosh as literal (930, 912 and 905), then Adam should've lived through the God's rest day on the 7th day as 1 day or at most as 100 years. Even 1 day as 100 years isn't a plausible argument, it's because Adam had Seth when he was 130 and Adam and Eve had Cain and Abel before Seth. So Adam and Eve would've been younger than 130 years old. The Bible also says Adam and Eve sinned before they had any children, So Adam and Eve would've been even younger than 100 years old or something. Adam couldn't have roamed around the earth or Eden on the 7th day as 1000 years or 1 million or 1 billion years before the fall. The key here is that God rested on the 7th day. God doesn't need resting, does he? That day is there to give us a real timeline that there was only 1 day gap after God created Adam and Eve. So the only plausible explanation of the creation account is literally one day at a time. Otherwise, the later account in Genesis wouldn't make any sense or be nullified.
Thank you so much! I might even agree with you 100% (..and I don't usually agree with myself that much...🙄) I will say, I sort of go to the younger earth side, but I do understand one of the greatest arguments against it (the only one I really see) is the starlight; from so far away - equals millions of years, etc. However, if you look at Russell Humphrey's book Starlight And Time, he has a cosmology which solves not only the distant star problem for "young earthers", but the problem for "long agers" seen in the far reaches of the universe: all the galaxies completely formed, as opposed to in their infancy (I guess not a problem for a long age believers though hahaha!). And at the risk of going too long, another thing Dr. Humphries did, is predict the magnetic fields of the planets. He did this based on the Earth being 6,000 years old. He was dead on several planets when one of our satellites passed by and measured these readings . Evolutionary predictions were off by several orders of magnitude...
I have a question, If the universe could be much older than the biblical account we see, how should we interpret the existence of humans: Did we evolve from other species of animals, or were we popped into existence somewhere in the timeline from formed clay/dirt by God? And if we evolved from animals over an extended period of time, does that mean death existed before the original sin (animals dying out/eating each other)?
Dear @stephenkumalo3202 Some points to consider" "IF the universe could be much older than the biblical account" You are starting out with the assumption that your interpretation of the Biblical account demands a short period of time, But what "IF" (there's that word again that denotes a hypothetical) the proper interpretation supports a long period of time ? There are theories of interpretation of the text where the age of the earth does not presuppose that humans have been in existence for a long period or short period of time (the age of the earth is not necessarily related to the age of humanity). "Did we evolve from other species of animals, " Most theories of creation do not support "universal descent" (that we evolved from other animals), but there are a few that do. (I think Dr. Frances Collins holds that perspective, but don't quote me on that) There are some theories that supports the idea that God intervened in history from time to time to create in stages. "death existed before the original sin (animals dying out/eating each other)?" Some theories assert that "death" referring to "Physical death" did not occur before the Fall. Other theories support the idea that physical death did occur before the fall, but spiritual death was the result of the fall. It is obvious that spiritual death was a result of the Fall, and about everyone agree with that, but it is not as obvious that physical death is a result of the Fall, and many people disagree with that assertion. For some theories, it is necessary to hold that perspective (the Fall cause physical death), because that is one of the foundational principles according to the presupposed assumptions of that perspective. It has to be that was to make things fit into the paradigm. Note; there are Christians that do not believe that humans evolved from animals, but do believe that physical death existed before the Fall. Dr. Craig's position would hold this idea. Dr. Hugh Ross, of "Reasons To Believe" would also hold this idea, but the theory he holds is different from Dr. Craig's theory, so there is two theories that hold that position. Be Well, DZ
I think there’s good reason to believe the Biblical account as written. Jesus referenced the Old Testament as real history on numerous occasions. Jesus was also there at the beginning. Jesus was doing miracles that didn’t happen naturally in uniformitarian fashion like turning water into wine and raising the dead.
Evolution as a theory doesn't work at all. It has never been observed or proven in any way. The missing links are still missing, completely, and we don't see one kind of an animal evolving into another, even in the fossil record (which itself if looked at from the flood point of view tells an entirely different story that long ages anyway).Knowing even a little about how DNA and genes work makes evolution impossible. It just isn't a viable theory with modern understanding of genes and DNA.
Probably heaven is a place outside time, and when we sinned the whole “process” / “history” started from that specific point since sin is described as an event that shook all creation. Likely the event that set all of human history in march.
I agree. This is why I’m a young earth creationist. To anyone reading this that is unconvinced of a young earth or struggling with your faith because you can’t seem to reconcile the Word of God with the teachings of modern science, I encourage you to seek out some creation apologists. AnswersinGenesis, GenesisApologetics, Kent Hovind, Dr. Jason Lisle are just a few great resources on the subject.
I had a 100 year old friend and I asked her "Do you believe in a young earth or old earth creation?" She said "I believe it was created.". That was it. Love it.
There is a book titled "In six days: Why 50 Scientists choose to believe in Creation." I found this book to be very helpful. It is written by scientists who have their PhDs in Physics, Botany, Genetics, Biology, Geology, etc.
Thank you for your recommendation. God bless. 😀🙏
@@patricklehane8914 *_God Bless_*
Ill check it out!
If you do not accept literal 6-day creation, you are implynig that God LIED in the Fourth Commandment (Exodus 20:11).
And that instantly makes your a blasphemer.
That settles it for me.
@@nicoladibara1936
Amen
This has to be one of the best thought out and respectful responses I've ever seen on this topic. Thank you for handling this valuable subject with the insight it deserves!
I wrestled with this topic for some time and I basically came out with the approach of Mr. Wallace. If I come before Jesus and my interpretation was wrong I’m not going to lecture God on how he could have made it more distinguishable. I will be forced to do as I always do, and just marvel over his wisdom to craft something so miraculous. We are broken. It’s like trying to read instructions for baking a cake with shattered reading glasses. You might nail down a few ingredients but I’d bet my money the end result will be a little off. I’m happy to let the author of the book explain to me how it all comes together at his book signing. Nice video.
I sent this to my kid. You helped put my thoughts into words. Thank you! See you at the book signing! 🙏🏻
This is Awesome! I came to Christ late in life. The creation account always puzzled me. I was one that first took it at face value. 6 days. We're good. Then I started to think about it more and more. Then I started to believe that a day is equal to a thousand years, so it must have taken much, much longer than 6 days. Then I finally threw my hands in the air and said to myself. It doesn't matter! What matters i that Jesus died for my sins. That we are directed to love one another. That's what matters.
A solid foundation matters, if death is before sin, then there is no foundation.
Don't be discouraged, you'll find that the age of the universe is based on assumptions, we don't KNOW without a doubt how old the earth and universe are, so 6 days certainly fits with the observable universe as we know it. Just as an example we don't know the one-way speed of light, we know the reflected speed of light and have assumed they are the same speed even though if measured point A to B light travels backwards in time and is therefore instantaneous, that would completely change the lightyear conversation and observing the past when looking to distant reaches of space.
@@TheClimbingBronyOldColt *_God Bless_*
@@TheClimbingBronyOldColtI believe “death” came to mankind no matter how you look at Genesis.
What works for me: ”I believe x, but I don’t know for sure. God still created the whole thing, does it really matter exactly how He did it?”
Very much agree, this issue (though important) should not be what becomes between people especially believers. The enemy is very cunning and could use it to create division and destruction. Salvation is not determined by our understanding of creation.
I've really enjoyed your podcasts, and videos!
Tell me where does the first good news apear?
Yes, not a salvation issue. If you believe in evolution the creation event didn't happen and the Bible is lying. Many then flusĥ the whole thing. PTL
@@alanpfeiffer9686garden of Eden. Why? That’s not an creation age issue. And we don’t know on what day after man’s creation that happened. Nor did the great deceiver use creation account to deceive them with.
@@johnglad5not true. Even if you believe in macro evolution (which I don’t) God would still be the Creator. In any case, we still have a legitimate Creation Account.
But in all this bupkis I am reminded of one Christian Scientist named Galileo…turns out he was right didn’t he? Did the Christian faith come crashing down? No. I have studied the very early church fathers who also struggled with Genesis and speaking truth for myself-reading Genesis from a child on…always seemed weird to what I was told. I plainly could see an historical poetic writing in a “mythological” (which does not actually mean not true) style of origins which never shook my faith. I had a very high reading comprehension beyond my age. It’s a collection of literature with many literary styles. Although the Kai poem format uses “day” in a 24 hour period sense, it is still a poem. The first use of “day” is not even a 24 hour day and is actually used to NAME light. It can be taken at most as 12 hours (1/2) day. It’s first usage after the creation “week”, “day” means a longer period of time-at minimum it could be 8 days but more likely a long period of time because it refers back to the beginning of all creation as a whole-as in “that day”. The NT tells us we are still living in the 7Th day! How can that be? The first sentence in the Bible refers to the creation of the universe period, THEN God comes to the earth at some stage of it’s development to begin the rest of it. Who know’s but God that timeframe?! And let’s not forget that numbers and genealogies in those times and throughout the Bible are usually symbolic…especially the number 7.
Some are worried about “death” entering post sin being lost. It’s not. Death for mankind that was specially created in the Image of God occurred post their sins. That is not lost. And the whole of creation does groan because of our sin and our utter failure to properly manage it there after. Death did occur before the fall actually. Everything that lives, including plants, has life. God did give permission to kill and eat it-bottom of the food chain. I have not yet studied the word more commonly translated for “food”. I’m pretty sure I will find an interesting answer as I always do. Why do I mention that word? The KJV translates it as “meat”. Why? Is the word actually “meat”? Words have meaning…we all know what “meat” means. Why that special command? Was Adam & Eve a special created man/woman apart from meat eating mankind in the wild? Why after the fall did God kill an animal(s) to clothe them so fast when plants did just fine? Why did they immediately start killing animals and burning the best parts to God? Why begin a slaughter of all living things so soon after the fall? God didn’t want that for them. Could it be there WAS death and dying and meat eating before them? All kinds of questions-especially when you view this special event after creation of mankind in chapter 1 in chapter 2.
The problem isn’t with a legitimate form of Evolution like: Adaptation, the instantaneously abrupt appearance’s of life (as basically shown in Genesis), the kinds “evolving” within kinds more like blades of grass than all life in a tree from an most improbable single cell Abiogenesis-which was proven impossible to happen by science in the 1800’s (life cannot come from non life), Irreducible complexity, DNA and ID, etc.. Why science chases Abiogenesis and the scientific religion of Darwinian Evolution (both proven wrong) isn’t because of legit lack of awesome scientists who are screaming for a more realistic theory…it’s because of the atheist gatekeepers of current modern science.
Methods used for dating are problematic and both YEC and OEC assumes many things for dating. Dating is useful and I take it with a grain of salt realizing that the age of the world and universe isn’t a real issue and we need some kind of measuring stick to use. Besides…I don’t think God wants us to know exacting time…that’s only for Him so we can’t predict certain things like His second coming…
Have a blessed day my new friend. Don’t blame science, blame the scientists and their lack of faith in God that blinds them to tell the truth in their philosophy of the evidence.
This is the best explanation of the issue of creation I have ever heard or seen. It is well thought out and presented as well as respectful to all sides. Great job! Thank you!
I like your balanced approach to this topic.
Personally I trust the literal interpretation, six literal day
I found it helpful when I pondered John’s comment at the end of his gospel account where he said that these were only some of the things Jesus did during his ministry. He actually did much more but if one were to write it all down, there wouldn’t be enough books in the world to contain it all. We can speculate from this that God has been extraordinarily busy and, therefore, while the Bible covers the entirety of history, it doesn’t actually chronicle it. God’s Word is intended for us to know Him, not necessarily everything He ever said or did. We would not be the first Christians to have some misunderstanding of the Old Testament, since even Jesus’s closest disciples were not expecting the kind of messiah he turned out to be and needed constant clarification from him.
Let us suppose, for a moment, that God meant to say that He made it in seven days. How could He put it more plainly than He did in Genesis and Exodus?
Should we also suppose that God meant to say that trees clap their hands? Or that he uplifts by his right arm? Of course he did. But that doesn’t mean that he means it in a literal sense as opposed to trying to convey an understanding of a certain concept.
Suppose God wanted us to know that His days are not like our days, could He have explained that anywhere in scripture to show that to us? Could He have included it in one of the psalms, perhaps, that specifically talks about the creation. That would have helped.
@@manxydom9879exactly! Is Jesus a door?
You do know that part of understanding the Bible-that was not actually written to us-is to also understand the culture, etc., of the people it was written to?
Let us then suppose, for a moment, the peculiar time and circumstances in which Elohim (plural common name of all the gods which God used like over 2000 times) did cause this true Mythos to be written and is so peculiarly like the false patterned Mythos written in that time and before-that Elohim meant to say “7 days” figuratively-using a special symbolic number (7). Then Elohim made it pretty clear that He is the true Elohim who creates, names and patterns everything and His people have a good 7 day patterned week to follow in their measly short lives. Then Jesus comes later and say’s, “Yo! Keep Following the pattern and remember who your creator is!” Seems really plain and clear to me!
COME ON man! Thats like saying "I am the door" implies that Jesus is a door on hinges. Seriously! Or that thunder claps its literal hands - ridiculous. The Bible was written in historical facts and also poetic forms for people with limited understanding of science. However, its amazing how much science confirms the Bible, like quarantine sick people, roundness of the Earth and hanging upon nothing, as well as the universe having a beginning.
This guy is right on point.
"In the beginning GOD created the heavens and the earth"
As simple as that!
I would highly recommend looking into Answers in Genesis and brining him some people from there to talk about this topic, would be great!
Part of the misconception is assuming that "the science" that humans do is perfect - it isn't and is awfully bias at times. The biggest crux of this issue is that if evolution is true this means death was in creation before the fall and that is NOT what scripture CLEARLY teaches and is constant with. Death came through sin and sin through Adam and Eve, which is the entire foundation for the reason God had to become a MAN, Jesus, as the second Adam, and died was buried and resurrected. All of scripture is consistent with this, especially the New Testament, the words that Jesus says and his disciples. If evolution is true then the rest of the Bible is absolutely meaningless, Jesus died for nothing and the resurection wouldnt have happened because it wouldn't have met the qualifications of God's covenant, His laws. God has a nature, moral, RULES even. He does not lie - cannot sin because that is not who He is. He can't just do things because "He's God He can do whatever". It's either God is telling the truth about our origins and it had to happen the way he said it did or he's a liar. We cannot have an origin story that is both creation and evolution at the same time. Sure it may not necessarily matter to an individual so much but the truth is if you look at the big picture over time and generations its clear that this confused topic is taking its toll. Because we all are taught "the science says" we push God out of everything. This is what Satan wants.
Nice to hear a clear statement. Those are important aspects. I also think that as long as we ask man to describe past we have speculation. But if we ask God we have truth. We cannot and shall not mix that. We cannot even compare speculation to truth. Here we see the weekness when reading scripture through the lense (dogma) of criminal observation. What has a crime to do with creation? Not much. We cannot say that we can observe what we have not seen but when there is an eyewitness we shall not speculate but our role is to trust the truth!
Thank you for the remembrance! 😊
I have reevaluated things and am now a young earth creationist. I have watched some of Ken Hams videos, and people should be open minded to watch them. I trust Bible more than science.
If a computer came to be by random, then it cant be trusted to be reliable and consistent, to calculate accurately, and get accurate consistent reliable results.
The same it is with the brain, if by random, thoughts cant be trusted, and mind/brain cant be trusted to do science. But if orderly origin (God) it can be trusted.
Modern science (started by theists expecting to find order) can take things apart, see how they work, but lack ability to put together, to tell reason and purpose.
*I bake a cake* and ask you to find out with science, the reason and purpose why I baked the cake. Impossible, only when I tell the reason is the purpose known.
Amen!!!
AMEN! 🎯👍👏
been here since 2000 subs glad to see more people finding the truth through you! Keep going and God Bless.
I keep this note on my phone and add to it when I can.
So we know God can perform miracles. The way it describes Adam and Eve right after creation is as if they are young adults. I see no reason God couldn't have made an earth that looked older.
God created natural processes to govern the universe and so for future people to reach the stature Adam and Eve were created with, they would have to grow up normally and not be instantly created by God.
Now that said I believe the Earth is the same way. If a new planet was to start to be formed it might take billions of years to do so if that's how the natural laws God set up require it to go. But at the beginning God performed miracles and made everything so it may look older than it is, but just like Adam and Eve, I believe the universe younger than it looks. Most if not all other miracles break the laws of physics so I see no reason God creating the universe would be any different.
In the New Testament when Jesus heals people, did he make medice and then take them through the process of treatment and only use normal physical means to heal said people? No, he instantly healed people. I am sure if a doctor who was an unbeliever had looked at them before and then after they would try to come up with an explaination as to how they were healed and that it wasn’t instant but that is not how he was healed so while the physical "evidence" may point to the long process of medical treatment [simply by ruling out an instantaneous healing miracle would lead to this] in fact the person was just healed instantly. So why can these miracles be instantaneous but creation can't?
This combined with how many Bible verses in both the Old and New Testaments talk about the lineages as if they are literal shows support for YEC. Also Jesus being able to be traced back to Adam is important.
If you try to say the super old people in the lineages are given those massive age number for honorary reasons or those are just metaphical and stand for months not years, how can you split the ages into metaphical and real when the genealogies just list them all there together and it suggests they are literal?
If you try to say that Adam is a metaphor for all mankind and just a representative then why does the Bible say sin came through one man i.e. Adam and then the lineages treat Adam as an individual? I would say Adam was humanity's representative but also a real individual just like modern day republic government officials are. They are elected to represent a group of people but also are individuals themselves.
Also the word day I am pretty sure usually means a literal day in Genesis and even if it didn't always mean a literal day, the word day combined with the phrase "there was evening then morning, the next day" definitely suggests literal days.
Not only that but the Bible tells us God made the birds before the land animals, and that just goes counter to evolution.
The argument that "the sun and moon were created on the 3rd day so the word day can't mean an actual day" is very weak. There are a couple of easier options than reading millions of years into the Bible:
1) God knew how long He was going to make a day. So He just did all the work within those time periods to begin with.
2) God could have come up with the word day after making the sun and moon and before relaying Genesis to Moses. God could have decided to make the rotation of the earth and thus the days line up with the time he had already spent on the first 2 days of creation.
This is like someone doing some work over consecutive time intervals that happen to be of the same length. Then later, they give that time period a name and tell others how long it took after the fact using the new time period in the retelling of the story.
In either case, it seems God was not pressed on time. He finished before evening and then starts the next morning, so He was not working around the clock. God can create infinitely more than we can imagine and simultaneously because He is all powerful.
The verses talking about a day being a thousand years and a thousand years being like a day to God is not meant to give us more context for Genesis. It is simply stating that God is outside time.
Not only that but finding soft tissue and blood sample on creatures that supposedly died hundreds of thousands to millions of years ago is harder to believe than God made the earth and there was a global flood.
We also have paintings/drawings from ancient people depicting dinosaurs. How is this possible if humans and dinosaurs didn’t live together since only somewhat recently have humans begun to dig up fossils and recognize what they are? [I have links below of this, some items may be fake but even if all were fake/misunderstood this is really only a minor point in my arguments] Behomoth's description is much closer to a sauropod dinosaur.
The world's oldest trees are also younger than a YEC view of the world. This suggest that the earth is younger than millions of years old as well. [Again linked below for those curious]
Are we to believe God didn't care about who knows how many barely-not-humans before he revealed Himself to Adam? I don't think so. I also don't believe that it was only human death that came through Adam but all death.
Population charts also indicate its very possible to get today's population from Noah's family. I would argue they also suggest that if a global flood didn’t happen then today's population should be much higher. [Again linked below for those curious]
Also people saying the earth is billions of years old: How do you know the starting conditions of the universe? While we might know the decay rates of certain materials we have no idea of the starting conditions so you can't use any of those dating methods without some blind faith that you know the starting conditions.
As for the Flood. I see Genesis as suggesting it is global and not local. Here are a few points:
1) Noah's ark is extremely oversized for a local flood. He would not need that many animals just for a localized flood.
2) If it was just local Noah could have just moved away in the 120 years God gave him instead of building the ark.
3) Are we to believe all of humanity could be killed by a local flood? The whole point of the flood was to kill all of humanity except for Noah and his family because of humanity's sin.
4) The bird Noah sent out would have been able to easily find land to make a new home at with a localized flood so the bird returning because it can't find land doesn't really make sense.
5) The duration of the flood is unbelievably long for just a local flood.
*I won't ever say that someone isn't saved if they believe in an older earth, I just disagree on that point
www.genesispark.com/exhibits/evidence/historical/ancient/dinosaur/
www.icr.org/article/why-arent-earths-oldest-trees-older
creation.com/biblical-human-population-growth-model
answersingenesis.org/evidence-for-creation/six-evidences-of-young-earth/
Thank you so much for taking the time to explain so well everything I believe in too. God reveals what we need to know and humans reject, change or misuse that information sometimes in the light of what other humans think. Jesus is the way, the truth and the life and no one comes to the Father but by him. God bless everyone 🙏 🛐✝️.
I would like to add some resources here. Genesis Apologetics on RUclips, Dr. Jason Lisle (love this guy), and Kent Hovind if you enjoy corny dad jokes.
It is not that the Holy Creator God (Father, Son and holy Spirit) made the earth and universe look older but that they were created complete. This is a very significant difference. What it effects is our interpretation of that completeness. If we assume that the completeness requires long periods of time for [evolutionary processes], we then get interpretations that are wrong in some way. But we can also get wrong interpretations if we make other assumptions about how He created things if we assume He made them to appear old.
The Awesome Holy Creator God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) is God and He holds the prerogative to create His universe in any way He likes without regard to how we assume He made it. If you look at each and every miracle described in the pages of the bible from the smallest to the greatest, one begins to understand the finesse, control and power of our Glorious Holy Creator God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) especially in regards to the required engineering involved. We only dream of the technological wonders of what we could do like the replicators of Star Trek to the building of world destroying machine of Star Wars to all the other marvels we put in science fiction stories. Yet we see marvels in the pages of the bible of the reality that our Holy God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) is doing and has done, from the raining of the axe head to the feeding of the 500 thousand to the extending of the day for the battle of Israelites.
Study these things as an engineer and technologist and you have to stand in absolute wonder of what He can do.
7 days isn’t complete at one single time. We also still live in the 7th day according to the NT. We notice that God did NOT complete that “day”…you have a mighty mountain to overcome with that. And why stop at 7 days? Were we supposed to live and relive 7 days over and over and over again? No…God said, “…for day’s, month’s, years…”, so why the pattern of 7 days so important-besides the pattern for exodus to follow so that mankind will take time out of his busy schedule and remember God their Creator and Savior, etc.,? And I do recall Jesus and the disciples breaking the Sabbath so…
Have you ever traversed even a small ocean in a small boat? Did you know that very large ships travel small oceans? “World” is translated many ways in the Bible. It COULD have been a MASSIVE area flood of great devastation. Mankind had not yet even scattered across the earth. The “world” in which mankind lived may also have had every species of animal in it as well. Doves are not long range birds that you think they are. They just didn’t find life on the exposed earth in the area yet. Since man had not yet scattered across the earth and God only needed to wipe mankind out…why would He need to flood the entire earth to do so? The early Christians thought they had spread the gospel over the entire world…imagine their surprise when Columbus sailed the sea’s. 40 day’s and 40 nights is symbolic just as much as Jonah spent “3 days” in the belly of a whale. The story of Noah is not lost or bothered-just the interpretation of it is much more clear now. The Christians of Galileo’s day had to reinterpret and “get over it and move on” as well just as much as those in Columbus’s day. Imagine how much the flat earth teaching of the Bible had to be reinterpreted. Time for the clearer understanding of our times. No…I don’t believe in Evolution like the Darwinian’s and the Abiogenesis gatekeeper atheists and many Christians and other religions do. I also take any time/dating methods with a grain of salt…includes YEC and OEC.
Yeah…Genesis 1 is not a hill that Christ was crucified on…it matters in many ways, but it’s not clear dogma as the very early church fathers declared. But it did lead to a persecution of perhaps one of the best all time church fathers, Origen and yet no one touched the others before or after him. Look what happened to Galileo for simply discovering the earth revolves around the sun and not the other way around and when we had to adjust from flat earth dogma’s. Let’s not let this happen to us. We are divided enough. Everything about us is ruining the salvation of souls in the West. It’s really bad.
Thank you very much. That is immensely helpful not only in dealing with other Christians, but with atheist.
Amazing explanation. Thank God for you, my brother. I will be able to point my friends to this video to best explain my thoughts and feelings, but in an articulate manner. My God bless you and your family.
Love your evidence based logical reasoning. But, I do wish you'd add a bit more graphical content too keep my eyes just as engaged as my mind.
There is an additional theory that was not touched on, and that is the idea that God created order out of and already existing but disordered world. (Not gap theory). Check out dr Josh Swamidass and dr dr Michael Heiser's ideas.
I read the theories of Dr. Gerald Schroeder in "Genesis and the Big Bang", and other books. To me, he made a very convincing case of the "days" of Genesis being dependent on the observer's viewpoint, Creation is from God's viewpoint, so the "days" of Creation are on a different scale from earthly days. Recommend his books.
Dr. Hugh Ross does the same thing…from Gods point of view
This is a really touchy subject. I think I mostly fall on the side of the person who wrote the letter. and I have been accused of not being saved because I don't hold to the young creationist ideals. I just wanted to say thank you very much for tackling it and I think you did a wonderful job!
Well, yes, you are saved. The average Christian will think that's the main point of Christianity but really it's not. I'm being sidetracked here. But I'll finish this and get to the main point quickly. It's good that you are saved but Jesus Christ did not really command his disciples to simply get other people to heaven. But being simply saved is not really the point of Christianity. Here is what Christianity really is according to Matthew 28:18-20:
18 And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age." (Matthew 28:18-20, ESV)
We are to be disciples and make disciples of Jesus Christ. And we must observe all things that Jesus Christ commanded us to. And do you know one of the things that Jesus commanded us to observe? A literal 6 days creation with 1 day of rest. Don't believe me?
Read Exodus 20:8-11-
8 "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy. (Exodus 20:8-11, ESV)
We follow the similar 7 day week format in our work day schedule. 6 working days and 1 rest day. If this doesn't convince you that biblical creation is extremely clear that God created the Earth in 6 literal days and took rest on the 7th literal day, I'm not sure what biblical verse does.
Also coming to (Natural) Science with regards to the age of the Earth and the Universe, (Natural) science has really no business in telling us what happened in the past or how old the Earth and the universe is. That business belongs to the Historical sciences NOT natural science. Natural science can only observe the present day physical processes. The problem is Academia and the legal system in the US have abused and misused Natural science and they have ruined science and they have plagued the real sciences with pseudoscience such as Uniformitarian geology and Cosmology by adding in the unfalsifiable assumption that "the present is key to the past". That ultimate principle on which our current pseudoscientific historic model of the Earth and the universe (universe is 27.4 billion years old) is a completely unfalsifiable principle.
The fact is real Natural science is agnostic about the age of the universe. It is the job of the historical sciences such as History, Archaeology, Genetics, Anthropology etc to tell us what happened in the past and how and when the Earth and the Universe came into existence. The correct philosophical decision we should take is to rely on historical sciences (including the Bible) over the naturalistic pseudoscience that is Uniformitarianism and Cosmology.
Also another thing. The peer review process is an extremely broken system at the heart of academia. One of the massive unintended consequences of peer review is that when new science and new knowledge emerges, new science can never be peer reviewed. Peer review is really just group think. There is no open mindedness at all. There are also so many other problems with peer review which I might point out later.
Genesis is foundation, if death before sin, then payment for sin is redundant, and there is no foundation.
A fossil is by quick burial, preserving carcass from decay and predators, under immense pressure.
What was added to the rock, what was in the rock, what was removed from the rock, we don't know.
Tap is dripping, you did not see when it was turned on, the rate of it, nor previous amount in the sink.
If a computer (brain) came to be by random, then it cant be trusted to be reliable and consistent.
The age of earth, is based on guesses, pressumptions, and assumptions, that presupposes old age.
Besides historical observed age, there is no way of knowing accurate true age, any guesses are false.
You know your age, I know my age, because it is observed, written down, but rocks have no label on them.
It is assumed content of rock is the same and nothing were added or removed, decay rate is assumed constant.
Earth had a different climate, different climate, different amount of sunlight entering, different decay rate.
The radiometric dating method, does not get historic age correct, and so cant be trusted on unknown ages.
God is the only witness, the only historical record of age we have, is The Bible, geneology back to Adam.
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
John 1:1 In the beginning was the word, the word was with God, and the word was God.
@@BhikPersonal
So, let's “strive to enter that rest” (Heb. 4:11)!
@@BhikPersonalif we are to follow the same literal 7 day pattern (which is simply a pattern to follow-plainly clear) then only the Jews, maybe Muslims, and 7th Day Adventist’s are only strictly following it. Also, we are in the 7th day still so explain that one. If we never left the 7th day then how can we go back to days 1-7? We can’t. So it’s a pattern-not a literal 7 day creation week, but a PATTERN to follow. Also, Christian’s were given liberty of things. We worship on Sunday’s and everyday we choose. The main thing God and Jesus are concerned with is that we do take time out of our busy lives and worship Him. Oh yeah…Jesus broke the Sabbath day a number of untold times. So there is that as well.
@@BhikPersonalwhere to you get the 27.4 billion years?
Creation is the philosophical foundation of the Gospel, reality, and truth(cf.Revelation 14:6and 7).
When I read the verse "one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years is like one day" in 2 Peter 3:8, I interpret it as God saying he lives outside our spacetime, much like a computer programmer doesn't live inside the computer. There are many credible scientists who believe we are living in simulation.
Excellent!! I think Mr. Wallace is holding the wise, unifying and humble position.
Brilliant overview. Thanks.
I am a literal 6 day creationist christian. Why? Because the Hebrew word for day used in Genesis is Yom. Yom is a literal 24 hour period of time. 1 day. The same word yom is used when Jonah was in the whale.
He was in the whale for 3 literal days, not 3000 years.
But mostly I believe God does not lie, He is trustworthy and His word is the truth from Genesis to Revelation.
John 17:17 Thy word is truth.
Can I kindly challenge your thinking? A day = 24 hours = one revolution of the earth. On what "day" in creation was the earth created? Since the earth (and therefore our understanding of time) was not there at beginning of creation, how can "the first day" as to Genesis 1:3-5 be measured in earth time - in hours? The plants, sun, moon, stars were only created on the 4th day (seasons, days and years as described in verse 14). Earth time has nothing to do with time in the universe (God's time). 24h day is only a earthly concept. Every day is different in every planet. Venus has the longest day of any planet in our solar system. It completes one rotation every 243 Earth days.
@@aeasthouse316 Can I kindly challenge your thinking? You assume much when you ask [Since the earth (and therefore our understanding of time) was not there at beginning of creation, how can "the first day" as to Genesis 1:3-5 be measured in earth time - in hours?], instead of simply taking what the Almighty Holy Creator God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) actually states in His word. Exodus 20 points out that each day of creation is the same length.
If the Almighty Holy God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) has the wherewithal, the power, the finesse of control and the intelligence to bring the universe to bear, why is it not possible for Him to do so in the manner described? See my long post on the problems in physics that we can never solve above. All people suffer from the same problem in that our view of God is way too small and He literally and absolutely beyond us. He is not required to do anything according to our opinions or beliefs. he is the power that brought all of creation into existence and He is the power that holds all of creation in existence.
We are far to small to understand even the simplest of things in creation. But He has given us a mind to be able to look into and try to understand His creation.
For anyone interested in study, the "Let's Talk Creation Podcast" is excellent!
This is one of those truths that we’ll find out after Jesus returns. I honestly don’t know whether the universe is young or old, all I know is that God created it all and is keeping it going!
Some used to interpret the earth "being on pillars" as literal (or physical), now we know that the 'pillars' are figurative of synchronicity and gravitational forces. Just as it mentions in other verses people that are 'pillars' ; or the church 'as the pillar holding up the word of God' before a fallen world.
Here is an analogy I like to use to explain how YEC works.
The universe is like a game of Monopoly.
God created the universe in 6 days which was a multiple of miracles. Outside of God performing miracles the universe is governed by natural laws that God set up.
God initially creating the universe is like setting up a game of Monopoly where everyone is handed out starting cash.
The natural laws that govern the universe (outside of miracles) are like the rules of the game; to earn more cash you have to play the game and pass Go (among other things).
Future miracles are like "house rules" that people have. House rules ignore the official rules of the game; in the same way miracles ignore the natural laws that govern the universe.
Now someone who doesn't know the rules of Monopoly could come into the room right as the game starts and assume you have been playing awhile since they see the starting cash. This would be people who think the earth is super old. They are using decay rates to date the earth but fail to recognize the starting conditions of the universe.
Other people who know the rules of the game and know who set up the game would recognize that the game has just started. This would be the people who think the earth is young. We recognize that God created the earth and chose to set it up with certain stating conditions.
Exodus 20:11 says, "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." There's your answer, straight from God's mouth to your eyes/ears.
as a YEC, he made a very important point we tend to forget
I never thought you would do a vid on this!
As a Christian, who happens to be a Inerrancy Fundamentalist, which led me to knowing that God created the world in 6 literal days. He repeatedly states the evening and morning on each day. If God couldn’t create it in 6 days, maybe you’re just underestimating God’s word.
Lastly, the science leads to the literal interpretation.
Just about 4 min in, but wanted to say "Answers in Genesis" give very compelling scientific evidence for a young earth. So, as much as what I agree with what you usually say, I would suggest you research this a little further. Starting with the Archeologist, Chemist, etc at Answers in Genesis
It is the recreation of the universe that is instantaneous.
Jesus said one of these 2 phrases, you guess which is the one he said:
“In the beginning, He made them male and female”
Or
billions of years after the beginning he made them asexual and then a few more billions of years of death and suffering he let them evolve and finally sinned at the tree and then cursed all creation with a second dose of death from sin all the while he called the first billions of death “very good”
You’re missing a lot of in between views. You’re locked in and are supremely right in your own eyes. You think others haven’t been there too? Most people start as literal 6k year old earth. And we’d be happy to believe that still if the evidence supported that. And many of us have been to the creation museum, and are very familiar with answers in Genesis work. Please don’t make assumptions when you’re not willing to examine all the evidence yourself.
For example, just because the earth is old doesn’t say anything about whether or not evolution is true. It could be, or might not be, but that’s a different element. The earth could still be billions of years old and there be no evolution as you envision it.
The age of the earth, origin of life, and evolution are all distinct issues. It is much more nuanced than you’re making it out to be.
And so you can wrestle with this: is God a deceiver, like in Islam? Did God make the earth to appear much older than it actually is? Is all of cosmology, geology, paleontology, archaeology, elements of chemistry, biology, etc. all meant to look deceptive?
What helped me was reading Exodus 31, God gave Moses two tablets of stone, written with the *finger of God*. 'It is a sign between Me and the children of Israel forever; for in "six days" the Lord made the heavens and the earth.'
Everywhere else in the Bible we know what 'day' means except Genesis 1? Seems odd and inconsistent.
Jesus also references 'from the beginning', He made from male and female.
Natural observed science cannot provide a timescale as it assumes natural process's have been and are a constant which shows our finite and flawed state.
Peter is referring to God's patience and longsuffering (verse 9) with the Lord one day is like a thousand years. The key is 'With the Lord' or 'To the Lord' referring to that God is outside of time hence using that it's 'like' or 'as'.
If you don't believe the first chapter in the Bible, then the Bible is errant and imperfect. If the Bible is not true and not God-inspired, then Christ is false and following him is for fools.
What a great take on this contentious topic. Thanks for making it.
"7 fold doctrine of creation" by Dean Odle absolutely explains this whole subject.Just awesome.....love from Bastrop Texas,Brent
Part 1/2
Do I question someone's salvation if they have a different view? No. If you believe in Jesus's shed blood to save you, then you are saved.
Here's what we miss. There are only 2 options in Scripture either the universe was created in 6 literal days or those days are 1000 years each = 6000 years total.
The problem with so many Christians is that when you understand the specificity of Scripture you'll never allegorize it again.
Allogorizing the Bible is the result of a lack of understanding nothing else. Are there metaphors? Yes, are there symbols? Yes. Are there different forms of writing? Yes. General allegorizing is not one of them.
Second, my rule of thumb is that if you reference or trust Christians from say 400 Ad and later for correct doctrine I would question it immensely. I myself wouldn't trust a biblical reference from 1600 onward for sound doctrine. In my experience, you're more likely to adopt a heretical doctrine the closer we listen to Christians to our time. This isn't because I think they were evil or malicious or not saved in any way but we have so many early sources and commentaries today from early Christians, from the Jewish people, and from the Dead Seas Scrolls that to me there are enough there to clear a lot of our questions up. What I try to do is reference material before 400 AD.
Here's what we know the early Church wrote and taught about. Does it make it correct? No. But I'd rather see what they wrote rather than others because these were the disciples of the Apostles.
Barnabas, AD First Century
“Therefore, children, in six days, or in six thousand years, all the prophecies will be fulfilled. Then it says, ‘He rested on the seventh day.’ This signifies at the Second Coming of our Lord Jesus, He will destroy the Antichrist, judge the ungodly, and change the sun, moon, and stars. Then He will truly rest during the Millennial reign, which is the seventh day.” Epistle of Barnabas 15:7-9
Commodianus, AD 240
“We will be immortal when the six thousand years are completed.” Against the Gods of the Heathens 35 “Resurrection of the body will be when six thousand years are completed, and after the one thousand years, the world will come to an end.” Against the Gods of the Heathens 80
Victorinus, AD 240
“Satan will be bound until the thousand years are finished; that is, after the sixth day.” Commentary on Revelation 20.1-3
Methodius, AD 290
“In the seventh millennium we will be immortal and truly celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.” Ten Virgins 9.1
Now immediately I can see some areas of confusion. I have studied and taught Eschatology (the end times) for over 30 years and without getting into it I can see these two references aren't talking about the same event.
“Therefore, children, in six days, or in six thousand years, all the prophecies will be fulfilled. Then it says, ‘He rested on the seventh day.’ This signifies at the Second Coming of our Lord Jesus, He will destroy the Antichrist, judge the ungodly, and change the sun, moon, and stars. Then He will truly rest during the Millennial reign, which is the seventh day.” Epistle of Barnabas 15:7-9
Commodianus, AD 240
“We will be immortal when the six thousand years are completed.” Against the Gods of the Heathens 35 “Resurrection of the body will be when six thousand years are completed, and after the one thousand years, the world will come to an end.” Against the Gods of the Heathens 80
The first one is about the Second Coming and the second is about the Rapture of the Church, 2 separate events. However, when over the scope of 2000 years we're talking about a decade say between these 2 events so I won't debate this too much.
What it shows us is that they believed that the 6 days + 1 day of rest not only applied to Creation, and the days of the week, but also applied to the biblical timeline.
This is where we can apply 2 Peter 3: 8 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.
The 1 day is as 1000 years is directly related to the time that the LORD will allow to unfold to give all a chance to come to repentance. In Scripture, we see the Judgment Day in Revelation 20 where the Lake of Fire, aka Eternal Hell aka the 2nd Death is sentenced for all humanity. Judgment Day comes after the 1000-year reign of Jesus which by these early Church fathers believed comes after the 6 days or 6000 years of human history.
This also shows us from an Eschatological standpoint that these disciples of the Apostles believed in what we today call "Premillennialism".
Let's assume for a second, that this view of 6000 biblical years is correct as far as our history. I'll come back to this.
As far as Creation I have an imperfect explanation. In Genesis 1:1 it says
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." Notice this says both were created.
However, verse 2 specifically talks about earth
2 The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
In Job 38 we read 4 “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding. 5 Who determined its measurements? Surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? 6 To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone, 7 When the morning stars sang together, And all the sons of God shouted for joy?
If you do a study the "sons of God" are the angelic host. We also see this in Job 1
6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them. 7 And the Lord said to Satan, “From where do you come?”
So Satan answered the Lord and said, “From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking back and forth on it.”
So what if in the beginning, God created both the Heavens and the material for the earth. Set up Heaven with the angelic host and then they were there to witness the LORD come back in Genesis 1:2 to organize the earth which was formless and void into our current universe. Still taking 6 literal days to organize it but the material that would be organized existed since the "beginning"??
Now, why this is imperfect, is because Exodus 20 says:
8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.
This passage here plus in Genesis both speak to a literal 24-hour day for the creation. What we might not consider is that in that 24-hour period, God could speed up time. As in plant a seed and time elapse in a 24-hour period to have mature trees, plants, and animals by the 6th day. Just some thoughts.
However, what I am interested is what year are we in, in relation to the 6000th year if that is supposed to be significant either with the Rapture of the Church or the 2nd Coming of Jesus.
I'm more of a forward-looker than a backward-looker.
(Continued in Part 2).
Hebrew has no words for the days of the week. The days are numbered, so an Israeli would say to a friend "I'll meet you for coffee the third day". The Hebrew for "the third day" in Genesis 1 could equally be translated "Tuesday", and so with the others.
Genesis 1 v 5 is different, where yom echad is variously translated "one day" (ASV, CJB, JPS, NASB, Douay etc), "first day" (KJV, ESV, NIV, NKJV, NLT etc) or "Day One" (ISV, Literal, YLT). All three make sense.
Also bear in mind Exodus 20 v 11 (aye, there's the rub): "... the LORD made the heavens and the earth and the sea, and all that is in them, in six days, then he rested on the seventh day. Therefore, the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy".
God has to square a circle here. He has to lay out why things are, without explaining how things work. You can read it literally, and it works, because it’s not a textbook of scientific discovery.
That’s one of the things we can do.
It does start the narrative of why things are messed up, and lays the foundation for God’s plan to fix this mess.
The "1000 years is as a day" just means that God the Lord is outside of time...after all,Jesus created time.
The following is my understanding of it ...
Some details on the Creation Days.
1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. >>
God is proclaiming himself to be the creator. There are no details mentioned. Just the creation as a fact ...
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. >>
God knew that the earth wasn't suitable for life and subsequently he prepared the earth for human habitation. No timeline ...
3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. >>
The universe is already in existence. (see verse one) Life on earth cannot exist without the sun, which had been obscured.
4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. >>
The moon.
5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. >>
Is it possible for God to do so! I think so, as everything had already been in place.
6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. >>
Atmosphere, oxygen ect.
7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. >>
Clouds and weather
8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. >>
We all know what heaven is, when we look up and see the birds flying around in it.
9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. >>
the oceans were gathered into one place. I guess that the moon came in handy...
👇
Please note, the earth is already in existence,(Gen 1:1) including all the planets and the sun, although obscured.
Now consider, a meteor had hit the planet and caused the extinction of the dinosaur 🦕 and the earth was in chaos because of it. (Gen 1:2)
🦕
Evidence suggests an asteroid impact was the main culprit which caused the extinction of the dinosaur 🦕Volcanic eruptions that caused large-scale climate change may also have been involved, together with more gradual changes to Earth's climate that happened over millions of years. The facts remain; it caused the earth to be in chaos.
All the lifeforms we know now, came into existence after the extinction of the dinosaur 🦕
(About 65-66 million years ago?)
I find it interesting to think that dinosaur 🦖🦕 had been the first life on this planet. We humans are not really the first creation. It should give us pause to think. Who brought the dinosaur into existence? Have they evolved into one big happy family from a fish or a bird ? ... 😳
All or much of the lifeforms we know now, came into existence after the extinction of the dinosaur 🦕
This timeframe is hardly long enough for life to have evolved, even if it could, for molecules don't care about life and it takes two of the same sort to re-create the same kind. Even in the case of 🐔🐓
God made the earth suitable for life.
The bible tells us that this happened within six days. He practically removed the chaos within this timeframe, and he "' set in motion'" all lifeforms we know today.
This reconstruction of our planet also affirms the seasons and the days of the week.
God established the Sabbath, on the seventh day he rested.
On a side note, people didn't have clocks in those days, when you consider this, it becomes apparent, how important this notion of seasonal and weekly structure must have been in ancient times.
The story carries on with Adam and Eve being placed within a special garden called Eden. Again we don't know how long they have been there, (even if speaking metaphorically) but we do know the timeframe after the fall, after they had to leave that garden, about 6000 years ago or more, when incidentally, consciousness had entered their mind and lives. (While in the garden, although set apart for God's purpose, they were more like big children, not being aware of right or wrong.)
From that point in time in human history, civilization had started and the generations of people have been remembered, and have been written down in the book of Genesis.
The story of Cain reveals that other subjects existed in this world. Gen 4:15-17
The purpose of the book of Genesis reveals the Creator and his interactions with humans, created in his image and with inherent creativity. It is a timeless story and it's message applies to us today.
I find this story much more plausible than to think that everything just evolved from a brainless chemical soup, with the sudden appearance of fish swimming out of this soup, then turning into birds to fly all over the world to evolve into dinosaurs, which we know have been in extinction millions of years ago.
Excellent video! I am young Earth creationist, I believe that there is good biblical-scientific case for young Earth. I am not dogmatic about it, it is interesting, important, but not necessary to get right or call each other heretics. I started thinking about it only when examining where those old earth theories lead. I am examining scientific issues like dating methods and so on, the question is much more nuanced than it seems, from perspective of science.
When Peter said that a day to the Lord is as a thousand years it had nothing to do with Genesis. The Genesis account is very specifically marked by numbers and the world "day" to show that these are 24 hour days. You can look it up on Answers in Genesis for the explanation if you want a thorough explanation, but what Peter was referring to was about the end times and the time it may take for Christ to come back. So, if Christ were raised up in 3 days, and a day is like a thousand years, then two days have passed since Christ left (almost) and He is likely to come in the third day, or after 2033, or about that time, give or take, since we don't know the exact date and also Jewish (and God's) calendars are different than our secular calendars. There are a lot of theological arguments on that but that's the takeaway as far as I'm concerned. The main point is, that we HAVE to take the Genesis account of creation literally, or we get in trouble theologically, because that would mean that death came before Adam and Eve sinned and if that was true then it totally nullifies the need for the death and resurrection of Jesus. If you don't understand the complete ramifications I suggest you go to Answers in Genesis videos on the subject so you can understand because it's pretty basic and vital. God could have created everything at once, in a split second. But He didn't. He used seven days to show us something. Many people believe that it is representative of how long this earth will be around, approximately 6000 years for man (because 6 is the number of man in the gematria) then a thousand year reign of Christ, making 7000, and then the new heaven and earth will be created and this old one of sin will be destroyed. But the way you tell what the author meant when he was writing out Genesis is to ask a Messianic Jew. They will tell you the days are 24 hour days and WHY specifically, they know that fact. As for science, science has been desperately trying to catch up to the Bible for centuries. I've studied many of the sciences as well as the Bible and numerous subjects involved with the Bible and I can tell you, science hasn't reached the top of the mountain yet, but they are beginning to see the clouds with things like DNA and how many times the Bible has been correct and science has been wrong and one day they will reach the peak of the mountain and look over at the other side and find God waiting there for them. This belief has nothing to do with salvation, but it does matter if you want to take any other part of the Bible seriously, because of the pointless incarnation, death and resurrection contradiction you get if you make the days long periods of time that I mentioned earlier. Also, many plants and animals had to be created within a day of each other because they rely on each other to survive. Here is a link to one of the shorter Answers in Genesis explanations of the days in Genesis. ruclips.net/video/aFjgW9UBG9E/видео.html
Genesis 1:3... evening and morning were the first day. There are scientists who do hold to a young earth. And have good reason to believe it.
Evening and morning.
Yep and as Exodus 20 v11 states six days .
2. A "day to God" argument can not be correct. God is timeless.
Thanks for those thoughts! Understood and agreed. Being united in the essentials is the important thing. I get it that in your business - the apologetics side of things, this can be a very distracting and difficult issue to deal with - IF a straightforward reading of the text is adopted. But that does not mean this is not a very important issue. Although it is not essential for salvation, if there was no original Adam, no original sin, no historical fall, etc., we have a problem, because this doctrine explains the need for the cross. So this issue could have a far reaching effect ON the essentials if we get it wrong.
In your message you say that the killer did not tell us HOW He did it, but in the Bible, it seems pretty clear. God DID tell us how He did it - at least to a certain extent. He spoke the world into existence. Yes, He did it incrementally, but the young earth “incrementally” is a far cry from the “incremental” idea of the long age folk.
And God tells us very clearly WHY He did it this way in Ex. 20:11-12 - to give us a pattern for our 7 day week. Although the word “day” CAN have various meanings, that does not mean that we are free to pick and choose from those meanings. 1) The context is important. 2) Other Scriptures are important (ie Ex. 20) and 3) how others in the Bible interpreted the passages. For instance, in Mark 10, Jesus Himself said that He created them male and female AT THE BEGINNING OF CREATION, but if the long age view is correct, this would be an outright lie. Because humans only came onto the scene towards the very very end of “creation” in that view. In order to avoid this problem, some have even gone so far as to say that Jesus was speaking as a man - He was mistaken! Didn't God COMPLETE creation on the 6th day and rest on Day 7? Even after Day 7 was finished, because His creative work was complete, He would still be resting from that kind of work even today, although He now has a different work that He is involved in. Long agers seem to think God has been creating for a very very long time.
One very important thing for us to keep in mind when it comes to “SCIENCE” is that SCIENCE, as practiced currently, WILL NEVER AGREE with the Bible. It cannot because before they even try to solve the problem of the origin of the universe, life, and humans, they say eliminate God along with any supernatural cause as a possible hypothesis. I understand the reasoning for this in normal science where you can use the scientific method to verify your hypotheses, but when doing origins science, it's dangerous to determine ahead of time what can and can not be put forth as an answer.
What if you go into a crime scene and say, “We can consider any suspect except for Joe. Joe cannot be named as a suspect.” OK, fine, but IF Joe is the guilty party, no matter what well thought out clever explanation you come up with, it will be wrong.
So scientists come up with an answer, but it will always be wrong because it leaves God out of the picture. And as a result, no matter what they come up with, it will not agree with the Bible because God IS the Creator.
So, take the Big Bang, for instance. Many Christians like it because it supports the idea that the universe had a beginning, but that does not make it true. The Big Bang is simply an attempt by scientists to explain the universe in their naturalistic paradigm which ASSUMES it had a totally natural cause. All of science is based on this ASSUMPTION! The Big Bang has many problems and scientists have been forced to come up with a bunch of supporting hypotheses to add to it in order to keep it from being falsified by the data. And even now, the Jamese Webb telescope keeps finding things that seem to require a whole lot of tweaking their atheistic model of the origin of the universe. The point is that the science on this is NOT settled. It keeps changing. So to use IT to inform our interpretation of Genesis seems highly questionable to say the least.
Origins science involves a LOT of interpretation. Scientists place their data into their atheistic framework that assumes all natural causes and as a result it is bound to have lots of problems, BUT the Scripture gives us the right paradigm in which to plug in the data to get the right interpretation. The biblical answer is not "SCIENTIFIC" because it allows for God as a cause, but again, the scientific explanation will always be wrong because of it’s faulty assumption and approach.
Do we trust man’s word and ideas that are based on unprovable assumptions and that keep on changing year by year, and probably will continue to change? Or, do we trust God’s Word that does not change? Both sides still have questions and issues to work out, but it seems to me that one side has the Word of the Creator on which to base it’s interpretation of the natural world. Scientists may ridicule it as pseudoscientific or whatever, but that does not mean it is wrong. Origins science is extremely difficult because we can’t do experiments to check our hypotheses. It’s much more like forensic science where interpretation plays a huge role.
I appreciate your videos and your approach to apologetics. It has been very helpful to me. Thanks. Sorry this got so long.
Well for me, not gonna determine if I believe in God or not I don’t know why people take it so crazy literally and then walked away from Christianity because of it don’t think it should do that
None of the old-earth people can tell me how they interpret Exodus 20:11. "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy." How can it mean anything other than 6 literal days??!! Please help me understand.
When God created everything, I think he created it with "built in" age.
Meaning he created everything in a fully mature form instead of everything being little seeds and babies.
Seems to me that God knew Genesis would be questioned as supernatural an event it was, so He seems to go out of His way mentioning “and there was morning and there was evening the fourth day” etc. (ie: 6 consecutive earth rotations), clearly showing it happened in six 24hr literal days.
Problem is that there is no sun or moon until a few days in - which is what we base our days on. So there isn’t in existence a 24 hour day yet.
The creation of the universe (heavens and earth) in Gen 1:1 comes before creation week. Creation week begins in Gen 1:3.
I was an old earth theistic evolutionist. But then somebody pointed out to me that would put death before sin. While I can see no problem with saying the earth is X number of years, I can see how it would be a big problem to say things were dying before man came. Because man brought sin into the world and sin brought death into the world. Romans 5:12.
I have heard some try to explain this by saying it was just human death that happened after sin or even that early humans weren't made in the image of God so their deaths didn't count. But in Romans 8 it says that creation fell because of sin. This word "creation" cannot mean humans because it says the creation will share in the future glory with the children of God. In the New Testament, children of God refer to those who belong to God. Which means "creation" refers to animals or it's teaching that every single human will go to Heaven whether they are the children of God or not because they will share in the future glory with the children of God. Since Jesus said not every human will be saved, creation must mean animals.
I hear some say, "What about plant death? We know Adam and Eve and the animals ate plants in the garden of Eden before sin. Well, plants don't meet the biblical definition of life and therefore (biblically speaking) they were never alive and cannot die. In the Garden of Eden, plants are described as food for living things not living things themselves. Genesis 1:29-30. And they have no breath or life or lifeblood. In the Bible, there are approved plant-based free willing offerings. But they are not atonement for sin offerings because they have no life blood and it takes the shedding of blood to pay for sins. Apparently, sap doesn't count. There are no verses that say don't drink/eat the sap because the life is in the sap.
I agree with him that this is not a salvation issue. But I disagree with what he said about people who believe in a young earth having to explain the science. You can believe the Bible without having an answer for every skeptic. I have studied the science much since converting to a young earth creationist. But I didn't have to learn all that before I believed the Bible.
The topic of origins is a battleground. Thank you for the concise summary!
One point: Science does not demand that the earth is hundreds of millions of years old. On the other hand fashion certainly does require it to be very old, as does a naturalistic model of origins based on imaginary molecules-to-life evolution. A young-earth model is not unscientific. There is a growing body of research by scientists who believe in a historical Genesis account, and it is actually rather good.
Are there sound reasons to dismiss Answers in Genesis or CMI as anti-science lunatics? There are certainly examples of sloppy thinking and poor use of science in the creationist fraternity (ahem, Mr K Hovind), but that is hardly justification for rejecting all of it.
I'm against calling anyone who says they believe in Jesus as Lord a "heretic", and it doesn't help to be overly dogmatic about details in an origin story. Still, Genesis does appear to be a historical account. There are many awkward things in Genesis difficult to explain away as poetry (several near thousand-year lifespans, for example).
Among christians, especially ones with strong ties to American higher education, there is a real sense of desperation to be taken seriously. It is not reassuring to see evolutionary dogmas (yes, dogmas as CS Lewis called them ruclips.net/video/PNNUPN3-WeM/видео.html) affirmed as "science" by Christians. Whether this is done to avoid rejection in an anti-christian environment is something said Christians should think about for themselves. However, I am very confident that there are no scientific (in the true sense of the word) reasons to reject a historical reading of Genesis. After all, Jesus referenced Genesis all the time and apparently believed it. As did Peter, who wrote that there would come a time when people would reject the idea that there was a flood that destroyed the world.
I think so.
But our understanding of what is being said is what has the difficulty.
Was there death before sin ?? That answers the question to old or young earth.
I agree that the Creation Account is a hybrid of the varied interpretations. A space of time between Gen 1:1 and 1:2 and then creation 'days' of unspecified time spans to get ultimately to the creation of Mankind which is where Moses takes us as readers of God's 'story'. Because I do no think that Adam and Eve sinned at the first opportunity. There may have been many prior encounters with the 'serpent' before the official one that spanned possibly a hundred years, who knows, but Moses only focuses on the encounter that mattered in getting to his (God's) point of the sacrifice element -the Lamb slain before the creation of the world (1 Peter 1:20) "He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake." So the 2 Authors, Moses and Peter agree with, and express that 'creation' was about the Redeemer, not limited to the dictates of time in the sense that our known timelines define God's capabilities.
Thank you interesting topic ,I was researching my own geneology ,this lead me to Jesus's geneology and how we are related to Jesus through Adam.i came to see the years and ages of people then saw there are kind of charts you can buy this was facinating to to because you can see the overlap of lives I saw in one of your videos this chart .I've come understand this is quite important when it comes to or origins , if Jesus became a man and was the son of Adam ,as God promised we have to work in more recent times .Jesus said there are 12 hour in a day , this is true at the equator it's exactly 12 hours of sunlight.i do understand that time is sometimes referred to a bit differently in some scriptures and the use of "this "generation " in Jesus geneology it give how many generations there were ,I was speaking to an atheist at the time , they asked how long is a generation I read so and so was the farther or so and so so it means the next generation born in that line .there was a flood where I live it totally changed the landscape in one day ,so I don't believe thousand or millions of years are needed for massive change to occur.thank you , appreciate your sharing.
God bless you sir!
Its interesting that the only time people debate the meaning of day (or time) is with creation. Nobody claims the Isrealites walked around Jericho for 7,000 years (instead of 7 days), that the Isrealites wondered in the desert for 40 ×365 × 1000 years, or that Jesus was in the tomb for 3,000 years instead of 3 days. If Adam was made on Day 6, then on Day 7, he was already 1000 years old, or maybe he was an metaphoric amount of time old + a day... We can't take God at His Word, because we dont want to (Romans 1:18-20), not because He didnt clearly speak it - Ex 20:1,11.
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth". 'Nuff said.
Great job laying out the protological issues surrounding this touchy subject, Jim. As a Biblical Apologist (SES graduate), I have some great news for old creationists and new creationists. Genesis 1:2 appears to say that the earth was formless and void, but this is actually a Latin translation that was applied to the English text. Originally, it would have been translated as 'desolate and waste' in Hebrew. Why does that matter? According to Moses, the earth is old and already created, but it is uninhabitable. Using the Hebrew word 'arb' (Bara'), God is creating a new earth on top of the old one in order to make it habitable. Thus, both viewpoints are valid when viewed from a Biblical perspective.
Watch pastor Allen Nolan at cornerstone fellowship community Church tahlequah Oklahoma he explains time, space and matter formula in his teachings of the book of Genesis.
God is not man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should change his mind. Has he said, and will he not do it? Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it?
Thanks for the video. The Bible is inspired by God, contains lots of history, much philosophy, and superb guidance about virtually everything in life. The Bible is truth, but is often not literal, and is mostly not a science book.
I don’t like how people fight over something that doesn’t really matter.
The most important thing to understand is God created the universe but we don't (of course can't) know how old the earth is exactly, it's just speculation.
I like to assume that as the universe expands, time gets slower. like how the days on earth are getting 2.3 milliseconds slower every century.
From the point of the big bang, time and light would be extremely close and fast. only as the universe expanded did time and light would stretch, and lengthen.
Something I find interesting is the fact that alternate translation of 'In the beginning' is 'When'.
I look at scripture and read in John 2 that Jesus turned water into wine not just any wine but the best wine that would have to be aged wine and when he fed the 5000 it wasn’t with bread dough and raw fish but baked bread and cooked or dried fish so I don’t think that it’s out of the realm of possibility that He could have created the universe having some things young and others older. Just a thought.
Very good point! That supports my (math/science major) husband's belief that God created the world with history. I use Exodus 20:11 as the basis for my young earth position.
The problem with the book of nature is what we can know and what we assume. There are two very fundamental aspects of the universe that we can never know about as a means in which we determine the age of anything.
The first of these is the one-way speed of light. It is assumed that in terms of our universe, the one-way speed of light is the same as the two-way speed of light. Here's the rub. As long as the average is c then it doesn't matter what each way is, nothing in our physics changes. It could be instantaneous one way and c/2 the other way and the average is c. It could be c one way and c the other way and the average is still c.
What this means is that distance no longer gives any correlation to length of time as we could be seeing what is happening at the far reaches of our universe as it is happening right now or the other extreme is that we could be seeing what happened twice as long ago as based on the estimated distance. We can in no way determine what the situation actually is. This situation gives glory to the Almighty Holy Creator God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) as only He knows and we can not find out by ourselves.
The second aspect is that we cannot use radiometric dating to determine the age of anything because we cannot determine the actual initial composition of any sample that we might use. We make assumptions here that can never be verified. The basic of this dating method relies on the decay product proportions found in any sample. If the assumed proportions are incorrect then we could be dating something as being very much older than it actually is or we could be dating it very much younger than it actually is. Again this situation gives glory to the Almighty Holy Creator God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) as only He knows and we can not find out by ourselves.
The only thing that the would be giving us insight is the book of revelation, which is the bible. Now here it appears that the creation is indeed six actual 24 hour days as confirmed by Exodus 20 in the ten commandments (or words). However, this still gives us no actual referent to how old the earth actually is. Her, we have a notable problem and that is we appear to have a 360 day year in the early part of Genesis and a 365 + a bit year now. This alone screws up any calculation of the age of the earth as well as a potential for a missing 600 years in Genesis. There appears to be missing generations as well, we don't know. So the view of many YEC is as fragile as the view of OEC.
My own personal opinion on the matter is that the universe is young and that what we see in the night sky is happening right now. But I don't make this a matter of primary importance. I do know that the data from evolutionary biological experiments performed by atheistic evolutionary biologists and geneticists does not match with their declarations that macro-evolution is reality. The funny thing here is that when challenged to go find the data, nobody seems to want to do this and just they just assume that these experimenters never lied or coloured their results. Strangely enough, the prevalent attitude is that one can believe the proclamations of scientists as being true when the reality is that so many of these scientists are only giving their interpretation of the data collected and that interpretation will change over time.
Scientific investigation is supposed to be fun and a means by which we can worship the Holy Creator God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) as we learn more and more about His creation, His universe and what He has awesomely done. I watch my grandchildren and stand in awe of the Holy Creator God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) and have to laugh at our inconsequential and feeble efforts in every technological area that we have. we fail to see that the entire technological and industrial efforts of mankind on this planet have not even come close the the technological and engineering wonder that is found in a single living cell, let alone the communication and coordination found in any living multicellular organism on this planet.
Over a period of 40 or so years, I have been involved in analysing data professionally and I have often found that people interpret the data collected based on their expectations instead of looking at the data with a view of looking at it and seeing what is actually there.
From an engineering and technological point of view, what The Holy Magnificent Creator God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) has done just blows everything else that man has done into insignificance. The best thing of all though is that because we have been made in the image of Him, we have the opportunity to discover what He has done. That is an incredible "wow" moment when you see this.
AMEN brother!!!!!!
"Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female" - Jesus
I think they are more people concerned to accommodate Genesis into the atheist worldview on natural processes times, that what the verses on Genesis said: God created on 6 days and rest in the 7th day.
Excellent
I don't know if there is a god or not, but I know the universe is old, that's for sure. I don't understand why some people think the universe is only thousands of years old. I don't understand how people can think that everything in the universe, all the galaxies, stars, planets, etc, were all created at the same time, when astrophysicists and astronomers observe galaxies of different ages and in different stages of formation, and new stars and planets are still forming in the universe today, so obviously everything wasn't created all at once.
The observable universe has a long, deep history that can be traced back through time using several different techniques. So, it isn't merely the fact that the universe *looks* old; there are so many ways that scientists working in different fields can trace things back through time. The universe and nature have a long history.
I’d say good job and well done
I think that there's reasonable evidence on both sides for the age of the Earth. But I also think that because Genesis wasn't an eye-witness account, it's not necessarily completely accurate. I agree the Bible is inspired by God but I don't think that means every single word was God-given (though, I do think the crazy patterns in the Bible were given by Him since it seems impossible for a human to create without a computer or a LOT of time on their hands).
However, anything that was told as an eye-witness account, I believe is true. Not because I think people can't lie, but because their accounts have overtime been proven by evidence.
God created Adam as a full grown, fully mature man. Couldn't he create a universe by speaking it into existence fully matured. It would seem to be old to us but to God he just created it.
It is not that it is a matter that it is old but that it is complete and this is a huge difference in position.
Small addition, but a critical one: What did Jesus reference as truth? There are many aspects of early Genesis that Jesus referenced as historical fact: Adam, Abel, Noah, Abraham.
I'm willing to hear differening opinion up until they contradict Jesus' account and then i know they are false.
He was there at creation and i refuse to believe he would lie about these accounts.
So, check your theory against the Savoir's word. Does it match? If not, re-think your stance.
In seminary, my professors believed God created through evolution. I couldn't agree with them.
I agree they are my brothers and sisters as well. But placing death and destruction prior to the fall of man into sin means man did not introduce death into the world. This view is completely antithetical to the Bible. I agree that we need to look into science, but it must be good science and if the theory fails like the theory of evolution, it should not be considered viable. Answers in Genesis is a wonderful ministry that has done so much work to articulate this. They employ a slew of discerning scientists as well who care deeply about credible science. As Christians we ought to love the beauty of the order God made more than any other group. We need more Godly people doing honest science! Encourage your kids and grandkids into stem degrees! ❤
When He made creation, HE did not consult me. If HE did create it all in a few days, fine. If HE did it over billions of years, fine. Either way, all glory is HIS.
This is NOT my “pet theory” but the WORD of GOD:
“For in six DAYS the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them …” (Exodus 20:11)
God does NOT lie!!!!
God is NOT a LIAR!!!!
Do NOT call God a liar!
Do NOT blaspheme!!!
Thank you, that helps
What do you think about Covenant Eschatology? This view says Genesis is not speaking about material creation; it's speaking about the beginning of a covenant. I've been trying to learn more about it recently.
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Pretty straightforward, God (spirit) created time, space, matter (material).
God created from the beginning, Genesis speaks of creation. When Adam & Eve sinned, was it necessary to save man.
Because we sinned, sin, and will sin, a salvation plan, covenant, is necessary, covenant with the Jews was part of that plan.
I've never understood this issue. When God made Adam and Eve, they were adults, not infants. When he made trees they were fully grown, not seeds. The earth was old when God made it. We are talking about God, the one who created the sun. This is a non-issue.
Please stop using the term [old], you should be using the term [complete]. Big difference conceptually.
How long did it take God to make Adam? How old was Adam when He blew the breath of life into Adam? How long did it take God to part the red sea? How long did it take God to feed the multitude with the loaves and fish?-did He have to make a microscopic organism that had a series of adaptations over a long period of time that turned into a fish 🐟 in the basket? How long did it take to change creatures into a human before Adam which means you have death before sin? The 6 day creation and rest on the 7th day is your current week and literally is evident that He set up our week in the first week of creation. The scripture that says a day is like a 1000 years and 1000 years is like a day, I believe it means God is outside time, space and matter. He literally is the author of natural laws, He wrote them, and He can operate inside and outside them. This means He is all powerful, the Alpha and Omega, the Great I Am who is due our praise and worship. There is no other god. It only makes sense that if there were more gods there adds an new question of how many and they would be creatures because there would need to be an ultimate power that decided when to stop creating other gods because someone chose a number to create. Thats why God is the only true God and He is all powerful. If you start questioning processes and Gods decisions your looking into His time to make up His mind and how powerful He is.
I think it is related to where we put our trust-faith. God said to them in the garden on the day that you eat of the tree of knowledge you will surely die. Then satan asked them did God tell you that you will die if you eat of this trees fruit you will die? You will not die but be like God and know good and evil. So they took Gods words and cast them aside and believed satan instead which is placing their trust in satan. Taking their trust and faith from God to satan. God came down, died on a cross, rose on the 3rd day and now you take your trust and put it in Him. Everything in-between is constantly having to identify sin, feel the weight of that sin, learning to trust in God in the most desperate situations and looking towards Him and His promises...even towards the coming back to redeem us from that fallen state in the garden. He made the world in 6 days and rested on the 7th. This 7th day became holy and He wanted us to remember all He has done and reflect on Him and dedicate a day every week to set aside for Him. Believe in the power of the Almighty God and put your trust in Him, don't doubt or wavier in His power all the way to His power to save you and resurrect the dead.
Scripture tells us WHAT creation is showing us: For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Romans 1, 20
God reveals us in HIS word that HE created in the beginning, that is matter and time: HE put in creation HIS concept from eternity, HIS eternal thoughts unto matter with time within six days.
There is no time before God created time with day one, no day zero, minus one and so on.
Scientintist are researching the results of God's work of this first six days of the universe, and what happened to it afterwards and all the conditions on which it functions but NOT how God materialised HIS eternal concept with time in the first six days.
Science has been proven wrong more than religion has been proven wrong😂😂😂
I have to correct you here in that it is the interpretation by scientists of the data collected that has been shown to be wrong. Your characterisation of [science] is not not helpful, it leads to people not being rational about what we can and cannot learn about the universe around us by using the methods of scientific investigation as we study the creation of the Magnificent Holy Awesome Creator God (Father, son and Holy Spirit).
It's great that you recognise the full range of plausible Biblical interpretations. My own view is that there is no hermenteutical warrant for YEC, because 'Like a poem' is a good way of understanding what its meaning was like to the original readers, and indeed, the repetitive structure of Genesis 1 is typical of Hebrew poetry. We don't usually take poetry literally.
My friend there is Biblical warrant for treating it as a historical narrative. There is a hermeneutical warrant for YEC because of the toledot and the Sabbath day being set apart as holy (i.e., set apart from every other day). The Sabbath being the day on which God rested is what The Law directly relies upon for it's warrant of a Sabbath day. It's also used in Daniel in the 70 weeks prophecy, the years of Jubilee and etc. So God's rest alone I think allows a warrant for YEC. I understand that there are other ways of interpreting it (I used to believe Hugh Ross's view) but the fact that you can build a case off of the Sabbath alone without respect to the toledot and its related arguments I think means that there does exist enough data to provide a warrant for a YEC interpretation. God bless ♥.
I agree that it's not an essential that affects salvation. However, when we interpret the Bible we have to take into consideration the context of the passage. Neither Psalm 90 or 2 Peter 3 are talking about creation. They are talking about our lifespan in comparison to the eternality of God and His plan. When interpreting "yom" in the creation account we need to look at that context and other contexts that mention it, such as the 4th commandment concerning the Sabbath. We also need to be careful about saying "science says" when the scientific data is being interpreted based on human assumptions. No one was there to see what happened. Which brings me to the problem with the analogy you gave. You implied that we have to wait until we get to heaven to see what God says about this. As far as the details, sure, but as far as how long it took, He's already told us. The question is, who more consistently interprets what He said.
Here is a logical argument I've just thought of, today. It never entered my mind before.
Let's hypothesise the creation account for each day as 1000 years or 1 million years. So 6 days of 1000 years would be 6000 years. Then on the 7th day, God rested, which was 1000 years. But God created Adam and Eve on the 6th day (6th period of 1000 years, say the last day of that period). Then, on the "8th day" (period of 1000 years), Adam and Eve would be at least minimum of 1002 years old after God rested for 1000 years. But later in Genesis 5, it says Adam lived for 930 years. And Seth lived for 912 years and so on. Do we now not take those numbers literally?
If we take the age of Adam, Seth, Enosh as literal (930, 912 and 905), then Adam should've lived through the God's rest day on the 7th day as 1 day or at most as 100 years. Even 1 day as 100 years isn't a plausible argument, it's because Adam had Seth when he was 130 and Adam and Eve had Cain and Abel before Seth. So Adam and Eve would've been younger than 130 years old. The Bible also says Adam and Eve sinned before they had any children, So Adam and Eve would've been even younger than 100 years old or something. Adam couldn't have roamed around the earth or Eden on the 7th day as 1000 years or 1 million or 1 billion years before the fall. The key here is that God rested on the 7th day. God doesn't need resting, does he? That day is there to give us a real timeline that there was only 1 day gap after God created Adam and Eve. So the only plausible explanation of the creation account is literally one day at a time. Otherwise, the later account in Genesis wouldn't make any sense or be nullified.
Thank you. Much appreciated explanation. God Bless!
Thank you so much! I might even agree with you 100% (..and I don't usually agree with myself that much...🙄)
I will say, I sort of go to the younger earth side, but I do understand one of the greatest arguments against it (the only one I really see) is the starlight; from so far away - equals millions of years, etc.
However, if you look at Russell Humphrey's book Starlight And Time, he has a cosmology which solves not only the distant star problem for "young earthers", but the problem for "long agers" seen in the far reaches of the universe: all the galaxies completely formed, as opposed to in their infancy (I guess not a problem for a long age believers though hahaha!).
And at the risk of going too long, another thing Dr. Humphries did, is predict the magnetic fields of the planets.
He did this based on the Earth being 6,000 years old. He was dead on several planets when one of our satellites passed by and measured these readings .
Evolutionary predictions were off by several orders of magnitude...
I have a question,
If the universe could be much older than the biblical account we see, how should we interpret the existence of humans:
Did we evolve from other species of animals, or were we popped into existence somewhere in the timeline from formed clay/dirt by God?
And if we evolved from animals over an extended period of time, does that mean death existed before the original sin (animals dying out/eating each other)?
Dear @stephenkumalo3202
Some points to consider"
"IF the universe could be much older than the biblical account"
You are starting out with the assumption that your interpretation of the Biblical account demands a short period of time, But what "IF" (there's that word again that denotes a hypothetical) the proper interpretation supports a long period of time ?
There are theories of interpretation of the text where the age of the earth does not presuppose that humans have been in existence for a long period or short period of time (the age of the earth is not necessarily related to the age of humanity).
"Did we evolve from other species of animals, " Most theories of creation do not support "universal descent" (that we evolved from other animals), but there are a few that do. (I think Dr. Frances Collins holds that perspective, but don't quote me on that)
There are some theories that supports the idea that God intervened in history from time to time to create in stages.
"death existed before the original sin (animals dying out/eating each other)?"
Some theories assert that "death" referring to "Physical death" did not occur before the Fall. Other theories support the idea that physical death did occur before the fall, but spiritual death was the result of the fall. It is obvious that spiritual death was a result of the Fall, and about everyone agree with that, but it is not as obvious that physical death is a result of the Fall, and many people disagree with that assertion.
For some theories, it is necessary to hold that perspective (the Fall cause physical death), because that is one of the foundational principles according to the presupposed assumptions of that perspective. It has to be that was to make things fit into the paradigm.
Note; there are Christians that do not believe that humans evolved from animals, but do believe that physical death existed before the Fall. Dr. Craig's position would hold this idea. Dr. Hugh Ross, of "Reasons To Believe" would also hold this idea, but the theory he holds is different from Dr. Craig's theory, so there is two theories that hold that position.
Be Well, DZ
I think there’s good reason to believe the Biblical account as written. Jesus referenced the Old Testament as real history on numerous occasions. Jesus was also there at the beginning. Jesus was doing miracles that didn’t happen naturally in uniformitarian fashion like turning water into wine and raising the dead.
Evolution as a theory doesn't work at all. It has never been observed or proven in any way. The missing links are still missing, completely, and we don't see one kind of an animal evolving into another, even in the fossil record (which itself if looked at from the flood point of view tells an entirely different story that long ages anyway).Knowing even a little about how DNA and genes work makes evolution impossible. It just isn't a viable theory with modern understanding of genes and DNA.
Probably heaven is a place outside time, and when we sinned the whole “process” / “history” started from that specific point since sin is described as an event that shook all creation.
Likely the event that set all of human history in march.
I agree. This is why I’m a young earth creationist.
To anyone reading this that is unconvinced of a young earth or struggling with your faith because you can’t seem to reconcile the Word of God with the teachings of modern science, I encourage you to seek out some creation apologists. AnswersinGenesis, GenesisApologetics, Kent Hovind, Dr. Jason Lisle are just a few great resources on the subject.