I like your rubric my friend Inspiration Interpretation Implications I woukd however encourage you to add one more "I" namely integrity Thanks again for all that you do Looking forward to seeing your book
Great video! Thanks Steve. Just a note on presentation: even though we would totally agree on YEC, we can't say that the first 3 days are literal solar days because Solar wasn't created until 24 hours after the beginning of day 3. Might I suggest that as fellow Christians in the YEC brotherhood, we use calendar days instead of solar days. We understand that solar day, calendar day, and 24hour days are synonymous, but for accuracy, I do think that we should use calendar days instead when referring to Genesis 1. Thanks for your work!
Hey Steve, nicely done. 👍 I have to say though, I really miss you talking to me in the camera. I felt more engaged and interested. Having you looking off to the side and mostly obscured by your hat... is extra work to stay engaged. I prefer your previous set up! 😅 Anyway, on a technical note, I'm curious about what camera and lens you use, as well as your recording settings such as aperture, ISO, shutter speed, etc.? 🙂 Keep up the great work. Blessings! 👑
Good video. The text clearly states the days are 24 hr days. People like Hugh Ross, who think the original author was intending to communicate long periods of time, are mistaken. Hugh still teaches this. Having said that, I agree with Hugh: we live in an ancient universe. The creation story is not meant to teach scientific lessons or exactly how God created things. God communicates through science (the book of nature) which clearly shows an old earth.
Pretend there is a magic genie who can do anything that's logically possible. But, imagine this genie is in place of God prior to the creation of anything. So, this genie is all that existed prior to the existence of anything else. Then this genie created (and designed) everything else. Now, additionally pretend that this genie created and designed everything in random ways. Horses have six legs, dogs are a lot centipedes, and most kinds of trees have mouths and intestines. Clouds are in all the space, and so is the kind of air that animals breathe. So, there is no cosmically precious atmosphere around only the Earth. Also, there are no humans, no sin, and no Gospel. So, this genie has created everything in random ways, in random sequences, and in random lengths of time. The genie first created rocks. No air, no space, no gravity, no time, no etc.. Just some rocks. Next, the genie creates elephants. Still no air, and no Earth. Just elephants. So the elephants were just there with the rocks. Still no space or time yet. So the elephants were, say, in some kind suspending animation for now. But, hey, there were elephants even if they were not active yet. Only then did this genie create space and air. So, now, there was space and air and elephants are rocks. Nothing else yet. Assuming this kind of scenario is logically possible, it would have been possible for God. In other words, if anything like this would have been logically possible, then, instead of the genie doing this, it would have been possible to God to have begun to create in this arbitrary way. My point in all this is to define for the reader what I think is the essence of the claim, held by many of my fellow YEC's, that Genesis 1 'plainly' teaches that God created the lightbearers belatedly (specifically on Day Four). Why Day Four? Why not, say, as the final thing God creates? Thus, all else of the text being shifted one day: that the Day Four text for creating the ocean animals and birds, the Day Five text for creating land animals and humans, and the Day Six text for creating the lightbearers. Logically possible. Why Day Four? Surely, God could have created EVERYTHING in a NORMALLY expected sequence. Why did He, supposedly, create the lightbearers BELATEDLY? Again, why did God, supposedly, create the lightbearers BELATEDLY? Is that the most NATURALLY plain reading of the Day Four portion? And, for the Hebrew people, in their own language usage, is the resultingly compulsory reading of vs. 1-3 the most naturally plain reading of those first three verses?
I like your rubric my friend
Inspiration
Interpretation
Implications
I woukd however encourage you to add one more "I" namely integrity
Thanks again for all that you do
Looking forward to seeing your book
Great video! Thanks Steve. Just a note on presentation: even though we would totally agree on YEC, we can't say that the first 3 days are literal solar days because Solar wasn't created until 24 hours after the beginning of day 3. Might I suggest that as fellow Christians in the YEC brotherhood, we use calendar days instead of solar days. We understand that solar day, calendar day, and 24hour days are synonymous, but for accuracy, I do think that we should use calendar days instead when referring to Genesis 1. Thanks for your work!
Hey Steve, nicely done. 👍
I have to say though, I really miss you talking to me in the camera. I felt more engaged and interested. Having you looking off to the side and mostly obscured by your hat... is extra work to stay engaged. I prefer your previous set up! 😅
Anyway, on a technical note, I'm curious about what camera and lens you use, as well as your recording settings such as aperture, ISO, shutter speed, etc.? 🙂
Keep up the great work. Blessings! 👑
What is your opinion about the geography in Genesis 2 and the possibility that it matches the modern world?
Good video. The text clearly states the days are 24 hr days. People like Hugh Ross, who think the original author was intending to communicate long periods of time, are mistaken. Hugh still teaches this. Having said that, I agree with Hugh: we live in an ancient universe. The creation story is not meant to teach scientific lessons or exactly how God created things. God communicates through science (the book of nature) which clearly shows an old earth.
Pretend there is a magic genie who can do anything that's logically possible. But, imagine this genie is in place of God prior to the creation of anything. So, this genie is all that existed prior to the existence of anything else. Then this genie created (and designed) everything else.
Now, additionally pretend that this genie created and designed everything in random ways. Horses have six legs, dogs are a lot centipedes, and most kinds of trees have mouths and intestines. Clouds are in all the space, and so is the kind of air that animals breathe. So, there is no cosmically precious atmosphere around only the Earth. Also, there are no humans, no sin, and no Gospel.
So, this genie has created everything in random ways, in random sequences, and in random lengths of time. The genie first created rocks. No air, no space, no gravity, no time, no etc.. Just some rocks. Next, the genie creates elephants. Still no air, and no Earth. Just elephants. So the elephants were just there with the rocks. Still no space or time yet. So the elephants were, say, in some kind suspending animation for now. But, hey, there were elephants even if they were not active yet.
Only then did this genie create space and air.
So, now, there was space and air and elephants are rocks. Nothing else yet.
Assuming this kind of scenario is logically possible, it would have been possible for God. In other words, if anything like this would have been logically possible, then, instead of the genie doing this, it would have been possible to God to have begun to create in this arbitrary way.
My point in all this is to define for the reader what I think is the essence of the claim, held by many of my fellow YEC's, that Genesis 1 'plainly' teaches that God created the lightbearers belatedly (specifically on Day Four). Why Day Four? Why not, say, as the final thing God creates? Thus, all else of the text being shifted one day: that the Day Four text for creating the ocean animals and birds, the Day Five text for creating land animals and humans, and the Day Six text for creating the lightbearers. Logically possible.
Why Day Four?
Surely, God could have created EVERYTHING in a NORMALLY expected sequence. Why did He, supposedly, create the lightbearers BELATEDLY?
Again, why did God, supposedly, create the lightbearers BELATEDLY? Is that the most NATURALLY plain reading of the Day Four portion? And, for the Hebrew people, in their own language usage, is the resultingly compulsory reading of vs. 1-3 the most naturally plain reading of those first three verses?