My heart is sad... I will miss him being here on earth with us so badly... Thank you, Jesus, that he is in your arms. Thank you for the work you gave him to do for the Kingdom. ❤️ May his family feel your comfort and peace.
If God was working miraculously during the creation week, so that light could travel billions of lightyears in a single day. And trees could grow up out of the ground in a single day. And animals could be created full out of the ground, and produce offspring after their kind in a single day. And Billions of years worth of events were all sped up superfast to happen within a very short amount of time... then why not apply this to everything that happened during the creation week? And if we do apply this to everything, then at what point does the apparent age, and the actual age cease to be distinguishable? It all becomes relative. If a billion years worth of things happening, was sped up or shrunk down to fit into a literal 24 hour day, then how is that any different from saying the 24 hour day was slowed down or expanded to fit a literal billion of years worth of things happening? Again, it all just becomes relative... which when you think about it, actually sounds kind of Biblical, considering that a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years is like a day, in the sight of the LORD.
Really like this channel guys. Presenting both sides of any argument in a really measured way is good to see. In regards to how Starlight fits into a young earth. It is worth reading the short book 'Starlight & Time' by Dr D. Russell Humphreys. His answer is very compelling. We know that Gravity Distorts Time, so it is time that is relative. Just as the theory of relativity states, (Speed of light is constant).
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING ON A YOUNG EARTH GUY!!! 🎉❤🎉❤ People don’t want to listen because they assume that young earthers have shut off their brains, but when you listen to the arguments, you realize are actually good reasons for them to have that position.
I think what made young earthers off putting for me is that they were very dishonest about some evidence, like the space and speed of light and super novas. He mentioned these items in the videos. Young earther dont have all the answers, and neither do old earthers. I think its important for a young earther to understand it's not apostasy to believe in old earth. Their are issues with both sides. Im an old earth earth, but new creation. Earth is empty and void for long time before God created the rest of it. Perhaps he was designing the universe during that time like an artist. He just took his time. God is ever lasting he isnt bound by our time frame.
No, when you actually listen to the arguments they are shit, poorly evidenced, and logically unreasonable. Then when it's pointed out, ya close your ears and say something along the lines of "ya just aren't open minded"
I really struggled to reconcile the Bible to science, AIG and other great Christian defences have really given me great confidence in God’s word. Young earth is the only consistent view throughout scripture
How does one explain the length of a day when the sun and moon weren't created until the 4th day? How do we explain the verse speaking about "a thousand years being like a day with the LORD"...? If Adam and Eve were with the Lord before the fall would a day not be as it is with the LORD? There was obviously a separation at the fall of man, and it wouldn't surprise me if the dimensional/realm shift caused a difference between how we interpret time and what it really is with the LORD. But in HIS Omniscience GOD created what we would need for time keeping in our realm, before it was needed. Anyway, we can all agree, GOD knows what He is doing and we can trust HIM. Everything will be explained one day.
@@davewhaley6917 the Bible isn't always as straightforward as you may assume. You may interpret the text in a straightforward way, but that does not mean you are correct
Oh mate 😔, it is truly sad to hear, Dr. Michael Heiser, has passed away. But, also a celebration at the same time, that he gets to go and be in the presence of the, Lord! Praying for peace and comfort over the family. 🙏🏻 A truly great discussion! I believe in a young Earth creation. Though, I think my only question would be; how old is the 'gap' between the Earth being formed, to when, God, created us... When the Earth was without form and void. Though, I know that there was no such thing as "time" until the first day. That's the only thing I struggle to understand. I'd also love to one day be able to afford to take a trip over to, America, all the way from, Australia, to visit the Ark Encounter, Lord willing!
Mount St Helens is a good example of how strata is formed in such a short space of time. The whole landscape around the volcano is completely different and that happened in a few years. Imagine a world wide flood and how that would create massive canyons and rock layers.
The landscape is completely different, just like you said. That's why it happened over such a short period of time. The Grand Canyon took millions of years to carve.
@@travisbicklepopsicle why do you think that? a the rock layers are similar to the GC, just because the GC is bigger doesn’t mean it took millions of years, just a bigger event. Mountains didn’t take millions of years to come about, they grew quickly as the tectonic plates collided and the continents sub-ducted, pushing the top layer up. Do you think that’s plausible?
@@danielwarton5343 because so many specialists (geologists and other scientists) have been accumulating data and evidence from the Grand Canyon and its layers, for a long, long time, and all that accumulated evidence clearly demonstrates the canyon is millions of years old, not just from geology, but biology as well. Completely different climates throughout the eons; at one point the entire area was actually a desert. So many different representations of different populations of organisms in all the different layers.. the whole situation with the Grand Canyon is so complex involving so many different sciences you'd have to really spend a lot of time looking into it yourself if you really want to learn how scientists know it's millions of years old and was carved by a river.
So happy that you finally got a new earther on!! The point that I want Christians to understand is that there is so much science that absolutely proves Genesis. I'd like to see this conversation continue. I know salvation doesn't hinge on this, but I believe that it is important.
You guys need to invite Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson. He is a Harverd PhD and specializes in genetics. He has a book called "Traced". It will further explain the issue of ancestry and intermarriage. In addition his findings fit within the young earth position.
Absolutely 💯! I'm 50 and have spent almost as much time on this model though my life as I have the mandatory prohibitional law of evolutionary mythology. What dr nathaniel is working is awesome could a great revealing by God at some point. Its something that is that big and hard to filter out in biology .
Then maybe you should read up on a few critics from other professionals within the field. At the same time you should read up on the subject yourself and you will see Jeanson is wrong
@@stefanmud991you should read the evolutionary filters not the CNN abstract report. The only skeptical argument to date by evolutionist is that the text book dont say that. . This is 100% fact.
In the original studys that are written up on peer review down at the bottom in fine print they will announce what filters by some ratio but that what they use to try and fit the data they want. You can read it without censorship
@@stefanmud991 in all fields or study deep time evolutionary mythology is running out of time with the same anomalous problems. Cosmology our representation of time doesn't work out side the solar systems light cone or on the qauntom level . 500 million years after big bang James Webb is seeing fully mature giant red galaxy. Mixed all throughout is young green peas galaxy even close to milkyway that is full of hydrogen younger than a few 100 million at most. In geology they are missing 2 billion years strata in unconformities. One is ground up and and re deposited over young strata. In fossil record the rest of the world has started to ignore the evolutionist 500 thousand year ape to man problems. Not even into 500 million year old soft brain tissues in labs all around the world or the species stasis that hasn't changed in 3 billion years. The first Bacteria we still see today unchanged.
As a former YEC for 40 years and now an OEC, Six minutes and it’s already painful to listen to, the Grand Canyon argument has been disproven numerous times, there are multiple flood events in the Grand Canyon many different years apart, some being slow, very slow, some being fast, many, many years apart. It just takes somebody reading both points of view and YEC is a fable,😢
There’s a reason why very few scientists believe in a global flood, it’s because there is no evidence for a global flood, Dr. Hugh Ross said if there was evidence for a global flood he would subscribe to that, evidence points otherwise. I wish you guys would’ve pushed back on some of his statements, as well as bring in the argument of Adams day, I.e. tending the garden, naming the animals, Eve being created, that was all supposed to happen in 24 hour period? I think not.
My only caution to my YEC and OEC friends is, don't assume you have the market cornered on faithful Biblical hermeneutics. "Inconsistencies" in another's interpretation could be arising from glitches in your own methodology, not necessarily in theirs.
I also love how the argument is "Old earthers like the geological record" while "Young earthers like a very poor interpretation and understanding of Genesis 1-11."
I've heard Ken Ham say that whenever you have the word YOM "Day" paired with a number it is _always_ a literal 24 hour day. However, 2Ch 21:19 pairs the word YOM with the number 2, and it is translated as "Years" not "Days", showing that Ken Ham's argument that Yom is always a literal 24 hour day when paired with a number, simply is not true. As for Jesus saying "He who made them at the beginning made them male and female", I'm sorry but that's not an argument for YEC, because Adam and Eve were *_not_* created at the beginning of the Creation Week, they were created at the END of the Creation Week. So whether you interpret the Days as 24 hours or billions of years, either way almost six full Days have passed between the Beginning of Genesis 1:1 and the creation of Adam. Rather, Jesus is referring to the beginning of man, when they were created. And indeed that is what we see throughout the whole of the Creation Week, it is the Beginnings of everything God created, and it doesn't matter if there was a day, a year, a century, or an aeon prior to each creation event, that event is the Beginning of that thing being made. So yes, when God made mankind, at the beginning, He made them male and female, and whether that was 5 days after He laid the foundations of the earth, or 5 billion years after makes no difference, it was still the beginning of the creation of man.
It is a false presumption that the old earth the old earthers have the science on their side. There are so many good arguments and interpretations of data on the science that support a young earth!!! One of my favourites is polystrate fossils. Not to mention many other things like how fossils are best formed (rapid burial by flooding) and the order that creatures are found in the fossil record and the fact that species (kinds really ) appear fully formed in the fossil record with no previous "ancestors" and many still exist as "living fossils" today! I could go on!!
A big NO on the 'polystrate' stuff. That's not even a term related to geology or any field of science. It only shows up in creationist publications. In other words, it is completely made-up and meaningless. Please don't take my word for it; just take a few seconds and do some quick online research and you'll see 👍
@@travisbicklepopsicle so, how does a fossil of a tree standing through many (poly) layers (strata) happen? How old is the tree if it isn't contained within in one strata? can it be two or five or ten ages all at once? What does it matter if it's a creationist term? Use a different word if you like.
Chaffey’s presentation is a perfect example of what happens when you don’t spend the time to educate yourself on an extremely complicated topic. Nearly every argument he made needed further argumentation. While you can’t answer every objections possible in a live stream, he didn’t even scratch the surface. I would mention one of them but this comment would be too long. If you want a hint, feel free to check out my playlist on the Young-Earth evolution debate. The main reason I commented was because he argued that YEC is the belief in literal 6 days, a global flood, historical Adam, etc. He then says that all early church fathers were YEC. This claim is flat-out wrong. There were plenty of people throughout church history who didn’t believe in a literal creation week and very few of them even commented on any of it so we have pretty much no idea what they thought about modern-day YEC. Most scholars on the topic think creation out of nothing didn’t even exist prior to the 2nd century. Most early church fathers MIGHT have thought the earth was young based on a metaphorical reading of Genesis 1 anyways and there’s good reason to think they weren’t actually concluding the age of the earth based off this reading.
"They didn't comment on it so we don't know what they thought" Argument from silence. Wouldn't it make more sense to assume that they believed the Bible when it describes a literal 6 day creation week and a young earth
@@bobbyfischersays1262 That’s not an argument from silence but arguments from silence still have evidential weight so it doesn’t matter if it is. If nobody comments on something, we have no way to know what they thought. We can’t assume that our 21st century way of reading the Bible is the same as it was 2,000 years ago. An obvious reason for that is that many of the church fathers spent a lot of time reading scripture figuratively while today, we spent much more time reading things literally. What Tim Chaffey won’t tell you is that the few people that he is citing as being Young Earth Creationists in history didn’t do it based off of the genealogies. It was based on a figurative reading of Genesis where they assumed each day lasted for 1,000 years and therefore thought that the world will end in 6,000 years just like creation supposedly ended in 6,000 years. We know of others that rejected this view. If that was their only reason to be YEC, and we have someone rejecting that view, that’s good justification to think they weren’t YEC.
Genesis isn’t trying to prove or disprove science. The problem is people trying force the Bible to defend what it isn’t trying to. Genesis is an account of creation not a timeline of events or of How we should scientifically approach geology.
@@bobs8005why don’t you think it’s a timeline? It’s very specific in terms of day 1, day 2 etc. We see chronology in the text and also in Revelation. To e consistent we read the Genesis account in the same way we do the rest of the Bible.
Huh?? Nothing in science is about 'truth', as everything in science is provisional and subject to change in light of new information. This is one of the *strengths* of science, and it is how, and why, science works.
Oh my gosh! “In the last days” is not referring to the last 2000 years of history! Peter was speaking about what all the prophets had predicted in the last days that surrounded the coming of the messiah, and the end of the Old Covenant! This is a misapplication of the phrase “in the last days”.
Good grief, Josh. You now live in Kentucky where the Ark is at. Would love for you young men to do a session, on location, from the Ark! That would be wonderful.
"Assumes that the same processes observed today have always been in effect" - that's a crucial statement made by Tim Chaffey, with his implication being that the witness of the stars have been, paraphrasing, built with contradiction or an "appearance of age. The Bible is not silent about whether God fixed the laws of his creation when he made it. I encourage every believer to look that up for themselves. On the issue of whether God creating a world with animal predation, decay, etc. Augustine made some very interesting points about whether that is the way God created or was all caused by the fall.
What an incredible discussion! I am an old earth creationist who believes in the inerrancy of scripture and a flood over the whole earth. I just think science hasn't yet caught up with scripture, so I am open to interpretations which fit the Bible. I've heard we started as vegetarians before, but missed how Genesis 1:29, incredible! The speed of light is the same in different directions. We know how to measure the speed of light in different directions, I do it all the time. Radio waves are light. Maybe it's a young earth, but the creation story isn't a science text book and doesn't specify whether the days are from a human perspective only, God only or both. Maybe the 7 days are God's timeframe only which is not the same as for humans (2nd Peter 3:8). Maybe it's the same timeframe for both. How long were Adam and Eve in the garden? The Bible doesn't exactly specify at all. It's a terrible sin to add your own words to the Bible and in so doing poison others on the gospel message.
Great conversation. And while I’m currently still an Old-earther I enjoy the heart of Tim here and the method with which he expressed the young earth position. I have not cared for the judgmental and accusations from people like Ham and Hovind against others in the past. But when we frame this as a friendly in-house discussion within the Body of Christ we can have unity in majors and diversity of opinions in the minors.
He also likes to say that he believes in the Big Bang, he just knows who banged it. So take what he says with a grain of salt. He's willing to compromise with vogue science to reach a wider audience with his apologetics.
< Forensic scientist who is a Young Earth Creationist and Worldwide Flood believer. When God said, "Let there be light." Do you believe He had to wait?
I feel like Tim misrepresents the old earth view when he claims that the issue comes down to the hermeneutical difference of whether we take what the Bible says, or we try to reconcile what the Bible says with what we learn from science. I came to my old earth creation views entirely through studying the Biblical text. I honestly don’t know the science on either side, so that didn’t influence what brought me to my old earth beliefs. And I know there are many others that have come to their beliefs for the same reasons.
No, they wouldnt have gotten Exodus 20 before Genesis 1. Genesis is their family history. Their cultural identity. The stories that were told over and over again about the past and how they got to where they were, then (excluding the mixed multitude at Sinai) Different cultures but still people just like us. They would be aware of the creation story, Noah, and all that. We just look at it as the Bible, but it was their not that distant history. Check your perspective. Decent interview tho.
I believe he meant they were given the 10 commandments on stone before Moses wrote down the entire Torah and later gave them Genesis. Yes, I'm sure they had been told about creation orally through Noah and his descendants. But not written.
Excellent, balanced and Biblical discussion. There will always be questions on all sides of this topic that can’t be fully answered in this life, but I really value the Word of God being allowed to speak to it so fully. The questions raised by an old earth creation are huge for me, and so I appreciate that this was touched on a little in the discussion.
Has anyone heard of the cosmic days. Like if 1 day is 1000 years and 1000 years is like a day. So if we stay consistent with this thought then we our in the 6th cosmic day meaning that there is still a sabbath rest to enter which would be the seventh cosmic day coming soon which would be the 1000 year kingdom on earth and then from there we will move into the 8th cosmic day which in biblical numerology constitutes new beginning which will be eternity. Such a beautiful structure of God and his plan from the end to the beginning to be with his people and he will be their God. Thoughts on this and has anyone else come across this idea.
Yeah, I've heard of it. Don't think it has much merit. It's already been over 6,000 years since creation. And that's a woodenly literal interpretation of the verse that says 1000 years is like a day to the Lord. The key word is "like". He's eternal, we're not. That's the point. Cheers
The irony of both young and old earth is that they both pursue the “science” or genesis 1. Instead it’s Gods answer to the other creation stories from the ancient near east. The story says more about Gods character than it does science. Arguing science into it is missing the point.
Around 2900 BC there was a catastrophic flood of the Tigris/Euphrates Valley (that is geologically evident), and it seems that this episode triggered the 4 or 5 flood legends extant in the Near East....all of these have similar things in common, unlike other flood stories from around the world....
Yes praise Dr. Heiser and more so praise God for guiding him to his purpose for the body of Christ and getting believers and non alike to dig into the scriptures
Did he just say he wasn't a scientist. Well he makes alot of scientific statements. I don't see any proof of a young earth in the bible. I believe this view does injustice to Christianity and drives many people to not believe or trust the bible. I'm gonna take John Lennox's view over this guys.
There are sometimes detrimental interpretive problems related to both YEC and (especially) to flat Earth because we have two words in English that modern Bible readers confuse: "earth (not capitalized) = older usage (means: land, country/territory/region or its people, ground, soil, and is used to render 'eretz'and 'ga' in scripture); its frame of reference is GROUND LEVEL. Outside of the Bible, this usage is NEARLY ARCHAIC today. "Earth" (capitalized) = the name designating our planet, typically in the celestial mechanics sense (DOESN'T APPEAR in English Bibles); its frame of reference is HIGH ALTITUDE. This is the usage most contemporary people know and use. The big problem comes when people read a passage that mentions "earth"--the land or a region--but fail to recognize the significance of the lack of capitalization and mistake it for "Earth." When this happens passages that are actually talking about the land or a region are mistakenly thought to be talking about the PLANET and/or its celestial mechanics. When the Bible talks about the water covering "the earth" it means THE LAND or THE REGION--that's what 'eretz' means. But people are so used to "Earth" in their everyday discourse that when they see "earth" in the Bible their brain registers 'planet Earth' instead which, in this case, sounds convincingly like a WORLDWIDE flood. See how this can affect interpretation?
@@bobbyfischersays1262 I think the biblical text ALLOWS FOR an enormous regional flood instead of a global flood because 'eretz' in biblical Hebrew means 'land' or 'region.' I think what Genesis describes is Noah's personal EXPERIENCE of the Flood--i.e., in terms of what Noah experienced there was flood water AS FAR AS THE EYE--his eye--COULD SEE. The water's depth was measured by a sounding that Noah/family took off the ark. The mountains/hills that were covered by the flood waters were those of the landscape where Noah lived, perhaps knew from travel, and around which the ark floated. 'Ararat' pins down the location where the ark finally ran aground as the Middle East (Turkey) and this region was indeed the cradle of early human habitation and a regional flood there would have sufficed to accomplish God's purpose in judging the ancient world with an anthropologically 'universal' flood. So, yes, I think a large regional flood is a clear possibility given the wording of the text, plus a large regional flood also solves the 'Where did all the water go afterward?' and 'But a global flood doesn't fit with worldwide geology!' types of objections.
Also unexplained - From Genesis, we have firm references to the Flood, but no one writes about fitting in the Theia impact (evidenced by the Moon and by large unmelted chunks down near the core) plus the ancient Deniliquin impact crater ( highly weathered), Vredefort impact crater, and then the better known Chixculub impact crater. Each of these events is clearly seen in God's natural record and all of these events dwarf the Flood, so why don't ancient texts mention these catastrophes, especially as each would have caused an impact winter decades long. How do we fit all of these events, into the YE timeline? Yes, we have God's unerring scripture, but we also have God's timeline written in God's unerring geological record. Possibly since this video was posted, we have detected gravitational wave disruptions from a pair of colliding neutron stars, which coincided with Gamma rays arriving from this event. After a journey of 130 million years, there was a discrepancy of 1.7 seconds in arrival time, indicating that the 'speed of gravity' is also C. It seems like every few months, there is a new problem for YEC advocates to explain.
That says the earth is a circle, not a sphere. Isaiah knows the difference between the two, see 22:18. The flat earth is a circle, not a sphere. Your prooftext works against your position. Also this video is not about flat vs globe earth.
Curious if it occurs to any YE creationists, that for some, it's a reverence for what the text (Gen 1 & 2) actually says which motivates a non-dogmatic stance on "the age of the earth".
This is what I hold too. Just came across a great Christian teaching from the dead sea scrolls and the teaching of the essences and Xtra biblical text that shows that these lines of jews who John the Baptist and Jesus learned from that about 4000bc the earth was created for human life. I don't concierge this a huge issue for Christians as long as if they hold to evolution doesn't effect how they view life and the law of Christ.
Questions for Tim Chaffey: 20:30 You say the "plain reading" of the text tells you that the earth was created in six 24-hour periods, and so we should accept that. So, why are you not a "flat earth creationist", for the "plain reading" of the text gives us a "firmament" above our heads? 20:45 You suggest that the ancient Israelites would have received Exodus 20 before Genesis 1: What evidence do you have to support that? There are even other Young Earth Creationists who would disagree, by saying that Genesis was part of an oral tradition that predated Exodus 20 by a long period of time. 21:55 Claiming a 6,000 year old earth assumes that the numbers associated the genealogies are not symbolic, and that there are no gaps. Do we really have evidence that the numbers are not symbolic, and that there are no gaps? 22:40 Tim asserts that there would be no reason to have birds on board on the ark if there was a local flood. Why would he say that? If the flood covered a large area, where birds would not be able to survive without a place to land, the exact opposite would be case, right? Some birds can fly hundreds of miles. Others can not. Dr. Heiser's argument is that none of the things that Tim Chaffey brings up gives us any conclusive insight into the mindset of the ancient Israelite. We can appreciate Tim's efforts to uphold the truth of Scripture, and generous positive disposition towards Michael Heiser, but this do not indicate that Tim has grasped the thrust of Dr. Michael Heiser's argument for a more nuanced view of inerrancy.
He said they believe an ice age occurred after the flood. Also, they believe the genealogies are precise and mostly without gaps. Where do we place an ice age in the stories after the flood? We have Noah releasing the animals back into the world, he works the soil and plants a vineyard, etc… Where is the ice age and how does everyone survive? And why cleanse the earth of evil, keep the people and animals that deserve to be saved just to subject them to an ice age?
The ice age was in the polar areas and northern southern extremes. As he explained there was a lot of precipitation which would have fallen as snow in these areas. The book of Job mentions the ice. And it is thought he lived after the flood, possible during the exodus. So it could have been several hundred years. As the ice melt it ran off and filled up the ocean basins created during the flood when the continents rose.
18:13 "Church throughout the history has been young earth"... how about Origen, Cyprian, Clement of Alexandria etc.? But hey... let us see what Jewish tradition tells us... written between 300 and 500 CE (same as Early Church period) "Bereishet Rabbah" states that the words “and it was evening, and it was morning” indicate that “there was a series of epochs before then; the Holy One created worlds and destroyed them, approving some and not others.”... Anyway, sure, there were a lot of literalists back then but to claim it was an only ancient view is just wrong. And we are talking about a time when you could claim that Earth is flat and not be ridiculed by everyone. What Hugh Ross claimed, and Mr. Chaffey twisted is that if science showed that Earth was young it would be clear that the Bible in this particular segment was literal, that some words that have multiple meanings have the meaning Young Earthers claim they have. Since science clearly is not supporting YEC, as with Flat Earth, we can conclude that the meaning of the words and expressions are not those YEC claims to be, just as everyone knows that Sun does not revolve around Earth abandoning the literal interpretation of Psalm 18 because of science!
I've never heard anyone claim this I believe the world was created in 6 literal days with the appearance of age just like Adam and eve were created with the appearance of being adults if you were to do a study of them you would estimate them to be adults even though they were just created you can do the same with the earth when you study it you can guess the age it must have taken this long to creat this but God can do that in one literal day
The Flood was a particularly catastrophic deluge of the Tigris/Euphrates Valley sometime around 2900 BC....there is all sorts of geologic evidence for this.....and to the denizens of that Valley...it would have seemed as if the whole world was flooded. There are at least 4 other "Noah" stories from the Tigris/Euphrates valley that tell pretty much the same story....
How did Adam even conceptualise DEATH if death did not even exist before his sin? This is a real conundrum....Genesis is just the Hebrew version of Pandora's Box
Scientists HAVE settled the matter with at least 10 different scientific disciplines agreeing on ages and times of the Earth.....10 DIFFERENT DISCIPLINES.
John 15 is the very HEART of the New Testament (maybe NOT in a Psalm 118 sense - I don't know that!) but chapters 12 through 17 should be required reading for all. Ezekiel 1-10 is good medicine! The Jewish people started drifting, too. Make your theological knots tight to the dock, or trouble will follow.
A question. If all the species of dinosaurs were in the ark according to the young earth theory, why are they extinct and not preserved. They had a short joy ride.
I was taught that God brought the animals He wanted on the Ark and allowed the dinosaurs to become extinct at that time. I have not made up my mind as to which camp I’m in, but I like hearing all the theories. I just thought I’d add another.
Sorry, this guy doesn't know what he's talking about, which shows by the fact that he constantly had to clarify that he's "not a ____". He probably knows the plain text version of the Bible well, but he's ignoring all context and that's not how it's meant to be read. Firstly, the Bible isn't a science textbook, and it doesn't forbid the study of the universe outside itself. To go by his method of study, I would have to deny my own existence because I'm not mentioned in the Bible. That is _not at all_ what the Bible is for. Secondly, experts on Herbrew literature know that the first part of Genesis is poetic. It's actually very obvious when you put yourself in the shoes of the ancient Hebrew. You know, the _people that wrote the book._ The hyper literal interpretation is something that comes from imposing modern sensibilities on an ancient text. He accused OEC's of "reinterpreting" (very backhanded btw) but reading an ancient text without considering the ancient context is doing just that. He also basically accused Hugh Ross of trusting science more than the Bible. No, Hugh Ross trusts science more than _your_ hyper literal interpretation of the Bible. That's where this gets bad, because we can agree to disagree, but all these little backhanded snipes at OEC's is doing nothing but dividing the church, and I think shows his bias. It's not about finding truth, it's about proving OEC's wrong.
So well said. I also challenge everyone to go and listen to the Hugh Ross/Eric Hovind conversation that Tim references here. Tim simplifies the entire context of the question Mr. Hovind asked Dr. Ross. First, he said "all" scientists - not the majority (he even reiterates - "Everyone"). And then Dr. Ross gives a thorough explanation of why he would have to reassess what he believes to be true, if ALL scientists came to reverse their position on the age of creation. Tim makes it sound like Hugh is just going along with the majority opinion and admits it... That's not the case. I don't know if Tim purposely misrepresented this dialogue, but the end result is just that. A misrepresentation of Dr. Ross's words. Sadly, I find this to be par for the course when listening to a YEC explain their point of view. And what you said about the way YEC's use backhanded comments to question OEC's faith, without coming right out and saying it (although I have heard more dogmatic YEC's do just that)... Dr. Ross essentially tells Eric Hovind the same thing - that he's doing that - in their conversation.
Is it your opinion that the Biblical authors were intending to communicate an old earth? Or that by using poetry they weren't actually trying to communicate truth at all?
Biggest issue with worldwide flood and young earth from my perspective in the first geologists expected to find it due to their reading of scripture and couldn't find the evidence. Oil companies and mining companies employ normal geologists to find oil and minerals, if young earth creationists had the more insightful perspective you would expect them to make useful predictions of where fossil fuels and minerals would be found, and a mining company/oil company based on young earth science should outperform others.
No disrespect here, but how do you know all geologists are old earth? Also to describe how it happened doesn’t mean you can then know the exact lay of the land.
@@danielwarton5343 the first geologists weren't old earth they expected to see evidence of a worldwide flood, and originally interpreted some of thr features created by ice as flood features until they realised they looked like the features in areas currently glaciated. The science of geology as taught in universities is based on processes that take more than a few thousand years, if some geologists are young earth it would be based on the assuming that old earth methods could be used because God created a young earth with the illusion of being old (which would work in terms of explaining all the evidence other than the lack of evidence for a world wide flood but seems a bit unnecessary).
How are you guys right and let’s say, the hindus wrong? Or is it just different ways to undertand the same divine “presence”. Or are they just plain wrong? I’m very new to this, I want to understand.
Thank you for seeking! God has revealed himself to us through nature, through divine revelation as YAHWEH and Jesus in Scripture, and through changed and redeemed lives. We'd recommend reading Lee Strobel's The Case for Christ and C.S. Lewis's Mere Christianity. Both Strobel and Lewis were prior atheists who came to believe in God and Jesus and provide their reasoning in their books. You may also want to check out GotQuestions.org. Also, God says to seek, ask, and knock. If you seek Him and ask the Holy Spirit to reveal himself to you, He will. God is all around us. Seek and you will find Him!
But that doesn’t help. Those are just guys who became Christians and wrote about it. There are guys who became Hindus and wrote just as convincingly about that. Why are your guys right and the others wrong? And don’t tell me it’s in the book. They have a book too. If there is just one god, why did he (or it or I don’t know the pronouns) create Buddhism and Hinduism and Scientology (I’m kidding about Scientology of course, everyone knows that’s just a pyramid scheme). Is it the devil? Did lucifer create Buddha?
Firstly I would like to commend Tim's posture - being able to present both sides of the arguement fairly and then positioning what he believes is quite different to how I have heard his boss speak. And I say that as a fellow Aussie. Could a young earther explain a couple of points to me? 1) I dont get the incongruence between old earth and a global flood. The grand canyon can still show the sediment lines from the flood, with that sediment created billions of years ago. 2) Death came to man, through sin according to Paul. We were contingently eternal in the garden, and sin brought death to Adam and Eve. Doesnt mean death didnt exist in the chaos state outside the garden. We were to subdue the earth to the state of the garden. But we fell and were exiled. That's why Jesus died for us, not for all creatures on the planet 3) The generations coming to 6-12k years, is from Adam and Eve. Check Joshua Swamidass work. Adam and Eve can be the ancestors of every homo sapien, and also co-exist with neanderthals and other hominins (e.g where did Cain get his wife). That geneology shouldnt be the measure of the age of the earth. This arguement conflates 2 different things. 4) Do young earthers also beleive in a flat earth?
@@HELPMENOW150 thank you. Flat earth seems to be a result of highly literal exegesis, so I thought it may be the majority of young earthers as well. Appreciate the response
Good episode. While I think the creation account(s) have a more theological meaning, I enjoyed this episode. Both sad and glad to hear about Michael Heiser. I thank the Lord profusely for him as he had a huge impact on me and my faith.
Cats are obligate carnivores. This seems to lead to a dichotomy of either 1) cats of all types ate other animals before Adam's fall or 2) God recreated the digestive systems of felines (even though He declared the initial creation as good).
@@j7489 I will grant that He could have. However, that is the sort of thing YEC must wrestle with and have solid answers to the questions. Similarly, did dinosaurs exist 6k-10k years ago?
Hi, the Bible does not say that Adam was the first to sin. Before Adam could sin, Lucifer had sinned and had become Satan who was thrown down from heaven. So Satan, the first sinner was present to tempt Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden in their sinless state. 1John 3:8b "for the devil sinneth from the beginning. John 8:44a, Isaiah 14:12-15, Ezekiel 28:13-17. The bible says "let there be light " on an earth already created by HIM but turned into "without form and void and darkness upon ....Gen 1:2. Because of the fall of satan from heaven. Luke 10:18.
You lose me when you try to prove the scriptures by using science. I have a hard time believing the Noah story but because Jesus said it happened, I believe it 💯. If you believe the world was created in 6 day, that’s great, you have the best reason why you believe that. Because the Bible says so. Why bring science into an issue of faith?
"We start with the Bible" well then you're not doing Science, but pseudoscience, and that kinda kills the whole "appeal to alternative scientific analysis" :T
Checked multiple translations and an interlinear. Not sure how regional can be derived from those passages. Peter uses "Kosmos" in the global sense in his epistles. That's not always the case in the NT though. John for example is all over the place with it; from groups of people to the whole universe.
@@detached3:6 uses Kosmos tote--the world at the time. 2:5 says the world of the ungodly. That seems to mean the part of the world that had been settled by humans, as there would have been no need to flood the rest.
I watched Tim Chaffey on young earth creationism as he justifies his theory on the contents of Genesis. He also admits that he is not a scientist so he takes his belief system about creation without any science to back up his claim. His belief then rests solely on the bible which is a form of brain-washing because facts reside in science. He has left his reason at the doorstep of entering Genesis. He has been practically brainwashed. Older conservative believers will use Genesis in spiritual matters relating to the fall and will use science to explain how the creation was made. To try and reconcile science with the description of man’s fall and the subsequent plan of God to restore man’s image is a feat that will cause frustration and division among believers. Faith and Reason are compatible. Both work together to make my beliefs practical. Reason makes Faith rational and Faith makes reason useful for God’s purposes. God speaks to us in the Bible and God also speaks to us in His Creation. You say the flood created the millions of fossils and you would say that because your leader Ken Ham says there could be no death before man sinned when the bible clearly says that death passed on to all men only….not to the animal world. Your version of Creation is irrational because your faith in a few verses insists that God created perfection and therefore there could be no death before man sinned. When God clearly says that when Man sinned death passed on to all MEN….it did not say animals also. Outside the garden there was no access to the Tree of Life. Barred from reentry, the cherubs prevented man from eating of the tree of life. So now he joins the rest of creation outside the garden where there is death which has always been. God’s perfection in your interpretation says that there could be no death with perfection. That is your definition…man made I might add. God’s perfect plan called for a thinning out of the animal population so that each species could survive. The problem with the Church today is that the leaders are uneducated in other disciplines other than the bible. In the late 1800’s and early 1900’s many of England’s ministers were well educated in Religion, History, Literature and Science. And most of them knew the ancient languages. I bring this up to compare with what we are putting out today.
Do you ever tell a story where you give details in an order that isn't quite the sequence of events? You mention things that seem most important to you and then have to go back and fill in details.
God reveals Himself through His Word. And adding even one more hour to the six days of creation inspires a form of evolution and deception, contradicting the Biblical genealogy and prophecies of God's word. What if God, in eternity past, conceived the cosmos fully complete, in a form that is billions of years old? Then when he spoke each day into existence, everything He made, formed and created proceeded forward, including light in real time. That would satisfy the six days of creation and not contradict Biblical genealogies and prophecies of God's word. Can this be proven scientifically? Perhaps some evidence may exist. In a recent discovery within the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation, the Planck data confirms what the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe data reveals, that our Earth and solar system may be cosmically aligned. And according to cosmologists, one thing is evident, the alignments with our Earth and solar system somehow exist! Moreover, because these features do not fit the Standard Model of Cosmology, scientists dubbed it the Axis of Evil because it can destroy everything in their Big Bang hypothesis. However, instead of an Axis of Evil. Could these alignments show an actual Axis of Beginning of a completely new cosmological theory, conceivably, leading to our Creator guiding the exploration? "And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:" ACTS 2:17. The Earth is where the Biblical story begins. Our Salvation is what His story is about, and Jesus, the Word of God, is the story's hero.
The Bible is the revelation of God. It is not a science book nor does it try to be. Moses' original Torah was more than likely lost or destroyed after the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem and the destruction of Solomon's temple. The Torah as we have it today was written in hindsight by 2nd Temple Jews following exile in Babylon and servitude under the Assyrians and Greeks. Their writing was influenced by their time in captivity ( Hence the similar stories in other ancient civilizations' writings), but always maintained the original revelation and prophecies of God. Genesis 1-11 establishes a sovereign and omnipotent framework of God's creation, not a scientific one.
@@christiantompkins6423 It is not a continuous narrative in nature. Genesis 1-11 are distinctively different writing styles than Genesis 12-Deuteronomy. Genesis 1 and 2 are even distinctively different genres. Genesis 3 through Noah is similar in style and genre but that genre is not a historical narrative. That genre is what is known as "Primeval Narrative." Primeval Narrative's purpose is to paint a picture or to give a reason for what succeeds it. The story of Noah in general is not a story about a flood but a story about God re-establishing Holy Rest (Noah's name literally means rest). But Rest, not in the sense of relaxation, but Rest in the sense of order and purpose. Similar to what Jesus says when he said "Come to me...and I will give you rest" that rest is not comfort but divine purpose. To read a document that was written over 4000 years ago with a modern understanding of history, the cosmos, and philosophy is idiotic. You must go back to how it was initially understood. And I promise you that when you look into it truthfully, you will find out that it is not what you think it is. Great books to consider are "The Lost World" series by John Walton. "Lost world of Genesis One," "The Lost world of Adam and Eve," The Lost World of the Torah" and "The Lost World of the Flood."
Just heard about Dr. Heiser! Now he is experiencing firsthand that Unseen Realm he spent so many years writing about!
Heard about him 2020. Blew my mind
His work changed my life. He will be missed.
I also just heard. Selfishly, I am devastated. I hope he is experiencing all the amazing things he taught about that left me in wonderment.
My heart is sad... I will miss him being here on earth with us so badly... Thank you, Jesus, that he is in your arms. Thank you for the work you gave him to do for the Kingdom. ❤️ May his family feel your comfort and peace.
Yeah praise God,he's part of the great cloud of witnesses
Love Tim Chaffey. Thank you for having him on for this conversation!
RIP Dr Michael Heiser
😔
Very knowledgeable dude. Peace to him and his family.
If God was working miraculously during the creation week, so that light could travel billions of lightyears in a single day. And trees could grow up out of the ground in a single day. And animals could be created full out of the ground, and produce offspring after their kind in a single day. And Billions of years worth of events were all sped up superfast to happen within a very short amount of time... then why not apply this to everything that happened during the creation week?
And if we do apply this to everything, then at what point does the apparent age, and the actual age cease to be distinguishable? It all becomes relative.
If a billion years worth of things happening, was sped up or shrunk down to fit into a literal 24 hour day, then how is that any different from saying the 24 hour day was slowed down or expanded to fit a literal billion of years worth of things happening? Again, it all just becomes relative... which when you think about it, actually sounds kind of Biblical, considering that a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years is like a day, in the sight of the LORD.
Really like this channel guys. Presenting both sides of any argument in a really measured way is good to see. In regards to how Starlight fits into a young earth. It is worth reading the short book 'Starlight & Time' by Dr D. Russell Humphreys. His answer is very compelling. We know that Gravity Distorts Time, so it is time that is relative. Just as the theory of relativity states, (Speed of light is constant).
Good program today. Thank you for talking with someone from Answers In Genesis. I love their ministry.
Praying for Dr. Heiser's family, and friends. 🙏
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING ON A YOUNG EARTH GUY!!! 🎉❤🎉❤ People don’t want to listen because they assume that young earthers have shut off their brains, but when you listen to the arguments, you realize are actually good reasons for them to have that position.
I think what made young earthers off putting for me is that they were very dishonest about some evidence, like the space and speed of light and super novas. He mentioned these items in the videos. Young earther dont have all the answers, and neither do old earthers. I think its important for a young earther to understand it's not apostasy to believe in old earth. Their are issues with both sides. Im an old earth earth, but new creation. Earth is empty and void for long time before God created the rest of it. Perhaps he was designing the universe during that time like an artist. He just took his time. God is ever lasting he isnt bound by our time frame.
The evidence young earthers use for their views come from one guy who wasn't even educated in his field. That's turning your brain off
No, when you actually listen to the arguments they are shit, poorly evidenced, and logically unreasonable.
Then when it's pointed out, ya close your ears and say something along the lines of "ya just aren't open minded"
Great episode, I enjoyed it. I have always believed in the literal 6 days of creation and still do.
I really struggled to reconcile the Bible to science, AIG and other great Christian defences have really given me great confidence in God’s word. Young earth is the only consistent view throughout scripture
@@danielwarton5343 the Bible is pretty straightforward while science is really , a lot of guesswork and theories that constantly change over time
How does one explain the length of a day when the sun and moon weren't created until the 4th day?
How do we explain the verse speaking about "a thousand years being like a day with the LORD"...?
If Adam and Eve were with the Lord before the fall would a day not be as it is with the LORD?
There was obviously a separation at the fall of man, and it wouldn't surprise me if the dimensional/realm shift caused a difference between how we interpret time and what it really is with the LORD. But in HIS Omniscience GOD created what we would need for time keeping in our realm, before it was needed.
Anyway, we can all agree, GOD knows what He is doing and we can trust HIM. Everything will be explained one day.
@@davewhaley6917 the Bible isn't always as straightforward as you may assume. You may interpret the text in a straightforward way, but that does not mean you are correct
@@danielwarton5343 the people who wrote the Bible didn't believe that
Oh mate 😔, it is truly sad to hear, Dr. Michael Heiser, has passed away. But, also a celebration at the same time, that he gets to go and be in the presence of the, Lord! Praying for peace and comfort over the family. 🙏🏻
A truly great discussion! I believe in a young Earth creation. Though, I think my only question would be; how old is the 'gap' between the Earth being formed, to when, God, created us... When the Earth was without form and void. Though, I know that there was no such thing as "time" until the first day. That's the only thing I struggle to understand.
I'd also love to one day be able to afford to take a trip over to, America, all the way from, Australia, to visit the Ark Encounter, Lord willing!
Been to the ark last year. It was awesome!
The ark is absolutely amazing!
Mount St Helens is a good example of how strata is formed in such a short space of time. The whole landscape around the volcano is completely different and that happened in a few years. Imagine a world wide flood and how that would create massive canyons and rock layers.
The landscape is completely different, just like you said.
That's why it happened over such a short period of time. The Grand Canyon took millions of years to carve.
@@travisbicklepopsicle why do you think that? a the rock layers are similar to the GC, just because the GC is bigger doesn’t mean it took millions of years, just a bigger event. Mountains didn’t take millions of years to come about, they grew quickly as the tectonic plates collided and the continents sub-ducted, pushing the top layer up. Do you think that’s plausible?
You got it right: "imagine", pure speculation.
@@danielwarton5343 because so many specialists (geologists and other scientists) have been accumulating data and evidence from the Grand Canyon and its layers, for a long, long time, and all that accumulated evidence clearly demonstrates the canyon is millions of years old, not just from geology, but biology as well.
Completely different climates throughout the eons; at one point the entire area was actually a desert. So many different representations of different populations of organisms in all the different layers.. the whole situation with the Grand Canyon is so complex involving so many different sciences you'd have to really spend a lot of time looking into it yourself if you really want to learn how scientists know it's millions of years old and was carved by a river.
So happy that you finally got a new earther on!! The point that I want Christians to understand is that there is so much science that absolutely proves Genesis. I'd like to see this conversation continue. I know salvation doesn't hinge on this, but I believe that it is important.
You guys need to invite Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson. He is a Harverd PhD and specializes in genetics. He has a book called "Traced".
It will further explain the issue of ancestry and intermarriage.
In addition his findings fit within the young earth position.
Absolutely 💯!
I'm 50 and have spent almost as much time on this model though my life as I have the mandatory prohibitional law of evolutionary mythology.
What dr nathaniel is working is awesome could a great revealing by God at some point.
Its something that is that big and hard to filter out in biology .
Then maybe you should read up on a few critics from other professionals within the field.
At the same time you should read up on the subject yourself and you will see Jeanson is wrong
@@stefanmud991you should read the evolutionary filters not the CNN abstract report.
The only skeptical argument to date by evolutionist is that the text book dont say that. . This is 100% fact.
In the original studys that are written up on peer review down at the bottom in fine print they will announce what filters by some ratio but that what they use to try and fit the data they want.
You can read it without censorship
@@stefanmud991 in all fields or study deep time evolutionary mythology is running out of time with the same anomalous problems.
Cosmology our representation of time doesn't work out side the solar systems light cone or on the qauntom level .
500 million years after big bang James Webb is seeing fully mature giant red galaxy. Mixed all throughout is young green peas galaxy even close to milkyway that is full of hydrogen younger than a few 100 million at most.
In geology they are missing 2 billion years strata in unconformities. One is ground up and and re deposited over young strata.
In fossil record the rest of the world has started to ignore the evolutionist 500 thousand year ape to man problems.
Not even into 500 million year old soft brain tissues in labs all around the world or the species stasis that hasn't changed in 3 billion years. The first Bacteria we still see today unchanged.
As a former YEC for 40 years and now an OEC, Six minutes and it’s already painful to listen to, the Grand Canyon argument has been disproven numerous times, there are multiple flood events in the Grand Canyon many different years apart, some being slow, very slow, some being fast, many, many years apart. It just takes somebody reading both points of view and YEC is a fable,😢
There’s a reason why very few scientists believe in a global flood, it’s because there is no evidence for a global flood, Dr. Hugh Ross said if there was evidence for a global flood he would subscribe to that, evidence points otherwise. I wish you guys would’ve pushed back on some of his statements, as well as bring in the argument of Adams day, I.e. tending the garden, naming the animals, Eve being created, that was all supposed to happen in 24 hour period? I think not.
This is the challenge of this format, you hear one side and not the counter view, which can make it confusing
My only caution to my YEC and OEC friends is, don't assume you have the market cornered on faithful Biblical hermeneutics. "Inconsistencies" in another's interpretation could be arising from glitches in your own methodology, not necessarily in theirs.
Great show! I have liked the Answers in Genesis guys since I heard about them 20+ years ago.
I also love how the argument is "Old earthers like the geological record" while "Young earthers like a very poor interpretation and understanding of Genesis 1-11."
I've heard Ken Ham say that whenever you have the word YOM "Day" paired with a number it is _always_ a literal 24 hour day. However, 2Ch 21:19 pairs the word YOM with the number 2, and it is translated as "Years" not "Days", showing that Ken Ham's argument that Yom is always a literal 24 hour day when paired with a number, simply is not true.
As for Jesus saying "He who made them at the beginning made them male and female", I'm sorry but that's not an argument for YEC, because Adam and Eve were *_not_* created at the beginning of the Creation Week, they were created at the END of the Creation Week. So whether you interpret the Days as 24 hours or billions of years, either way almost six full Days have passed between the Beginning of Genesis 1:1 and the creation of Adam.
Rather, Jesus is referring to the beginning of man, when they were created. And indeed that is what we see throughout the whole of the Creation Week, it is the Beginnings of everything God created, and it doesn't matter if there was a day, a year, a century, or an aeon prior to each creation event, that event is the Beginning of that thing being made.
So yes, when God made mankind, at the beginning, He made them male and female, and whether that was 5 days after He laid the foundations of the earth, or 5 billion years after makes no difference, it was still the beginning of the creation of man.
Excellent show! Appreciated the questions asked. Thank you so much for all you guys do! Praying for Heiser's family.
It is a false presumption that the old earth the old earthers have the science on their side. There are so many good arguments and interpretations of data on the science that support a young earth!!! One of my favourites is polystrate fossils. Not to mention many other things like how fossils are best formed (rapid burial by flooding) and the order that creatures are found in the fossil record and the fact that species (kinds really ) appear fully formed in the fossil record with no previous "ancestors" and many still exist as "living fossils" today! I could go on!!
A big NO on the 'polystrate' stuff.
That's not even a term related to geology or any field of science. It only shows up in creationist publications. In other words, it is completely made-up and meaningless.
Please don't take my word for it; just take a few seconds and do some quick online research and you'll see 👍
@@travisbicklepopsicle so, how does a fossil of a tree standing through many (poly) layers (strata) happen? How old is the tree if it isn't contained within in one strata? can it be two or five or ten ages all at once? What does it matter if it's a creationist term? Use a different word if you like.
Chaffey’s presentation is a perfect example of what happens when you don’t spend the time to educate yourself on an extremely complicated topic. Nearly every argument he made needed further argumentation. While you can’t answer every objections possible in a live stream, he didn’t even scratch the surface. I would mention one of them but this comment would be too long. If you want a hint, feel free to check out my playlist on the Young-Earth evolution debate.
The main reason I commented was because he argued that YEC is the belief in literal 6 days, a global flood, historical Adam, etc. He then says that all early church fathers were YEC. This claim is flat-out wrong. There were plenty of people throughout church history who didn’t believe in a literal creation week and very few of them even commented on any of it so we have pretty much no idea what they thought about modern-day YEC. Most scholars on the topic think creation out of nothing didn’t even exist prior to the 2nd century. Most early church fathers MIGHT have thought the earth was young based on a metaphorical reading of Genesis 1 anyways and there’s good reason to think they weren’t actually concluding the age of the earth based off this reading.
So happy you said this! I am not nearly well versed enough on this topic, but I KNEW that was true
When God said to Moses in Exodus 20 and 31 that God created the world in 6 days and rested on the 7th was He not telling the truth?
"They didn't comment on it so we don't know what they thought"
Argument from silence. Wouldn't it make more sense to assume that they believed the Bible when it describes a literal 6 day creation week and a young earth
@@danielwarton5343 1. No, I didn’t say anything like that. 2. That verse doesn’t mean what you think it means.
@@bobbyfischersays1262 That’s not an argument from silence but arguments from silence still have evidential weight so it doesn’t matter if it is. If nobody comments on something, we have no way to know what they thought. We can’t assume that our 21st century way of reading the Bible is the same as it was 2,000 years ago. An obvious reason for that is that many of the church fathers spent a lot of time reading scripture figuratively while today, we spent much more time reading things literally. What Tim Chaffey won’t tell you is that the few people that he is citing as being Young Earth Creationists in history didn’t do it based off of the genealogies. It was based on a figurative reading of Genesis where they assumed each day lasted for 1,000 years and therefore thought that the world will end in 6,000 years just like creation supposedly ended in 6,000 years. We know of others that rejected this view. If that was their only reason to be YEC, and we have someone rejecting that view, that’s good justification to think they weren’t YEC.
One thing to consider is that science keeps changing on what is held up as the truth. The word of God never changes.
However people also read their own assumptions into the text based on their cultural context.
Genesis isn’t trying to prove or disprove science. The problem is people trying force the Bible to defend what it isn’t trying to. Genesis is an account of creation not a timeline of events or of How we should scientifically approach geology.
@@bobs8005why don’t you think it’s a timeline? It’s very specific in terms of day 1, day 2 etc.
We see chronology in the text and also in Revelation. To e consistent we read the Genesis account in the same way we do the rest of the Bible.
Huh??
Nothing in science is about 'truth', as everything in science is provisional and subject to change in light of new information.
This is one of the *strengths* of science, and it is how, and why, science works.
Oh my gosh! “In the last days” is not referring to the last 2000 years of history! Peter was speaking about what all the prophets had predicted in the last days that surrounded the coming of the messiah, and the end of the Old Covenant! This is a misapplication of the phrase “in the last days”.
You should have on Ben Stanhope or look at his book (Mis)interpreting Genesis.
Good grief, Josh. You now live in Kentucky where the Ark is at. Would love for you young men to do a session, on location, from the Ark! That would be wonderful.
"Assumes that the same processes observed today have always been in effect" - that's a crucial statement made by Tim Chaffey, with his implication being that the witness of the stars have been, paraphrasing, built with contradiction or an "appearance of age.
The Bible is not silent about whether God fixed the laws of his creation when he made it. I encourage every believer to look that up for themselves.
On the issue of whether God creating a world with animal predation, decay, etc. Augustine made some very interesting points about whether that is the way God created or was all caused by the fall.
What an incredible discussion! I am an old earth creationist who believes in the inerrancy of scripture and a flood over the whole earth. I just think science hasn't yet caught up with scripture, so I am open to interpretations which fit the Bible. I've heard we started as vegetarians before, but missed how Genesis 1:29, incredible! The speed of light is the same in different directions. We know how to measure the speed of light in different directions, I do it all the time. Radio waves are light. Maybe it's a young earth, but the creation story isn't a science text book and doesn't specify whether the days are from a human perspective only, God only or both. Maybe the 7 days are God's timeframe only which is not the same as for humans (2nd Peter 3:8). Maybe it's the same timeframe for both. How long were Adam and Eve in the garden? The Bible doesn't exactly specify at all. It's a terrible sin to add your own words to the Bible and in so doing poison others on the gospel message.
Great conversation. And while I’m currently still an Old-earther I enjoy the heart of Tim here and the method with which he expressed the young earth position. I have not cared for the judgmental and accusations from people like Ham and Hovind against others in the past. But when we frame this as a friendly in-house discussion within the Body of Christ we can have unity in majors and diversity of opinions in the minors.
Dr. Frank Turek. Likes to say, "Science doesn't speak scientist do."
He also likes to say that he believes in the Big Bang, he just knows who banged it. So take what he says with a grain of salt. He's willing to compromise with vogue science to reach a wider audience with his apologetics.
< Forensic scientist who is a Young Earth Creationist and Worldwide Flood believer. When God said, "Let there be light." Do you believe He had to wait?
Literally: "Light be!" Created or appeared (out of the darkness?
I feel like Tim misrepresents the old earth view when he claims that the issue comes down to the hermeneutical difference of whether we take what the Bible says, or we try to reconcile what the Bible says with what we learn from science. I came to my old earth creation views entirely through studying the Biblical text. I honestly don’t know the science on either side, so that didn’t influence what brought me to my old earth beliefs. And I know there are many others that have come to their beliefs for the same reasons.
Thank you, Tim. I'm grateful for those who take God's word seriously. I'm grateful for bible teachers who act like Bereans.
Y’all need to have someone on to explain biblical cosmology
I think they have a video from a couple years on it actually!
No, they wouldnt have gotten Exodus 20 before Genesis 1. Genesis is their family history. Their cultural identity. The stories that were told over and over again about the past and how they got to where they were, then (excluding the mixed multitude at Sinai) Different cultures but still people just like us. They would be aware of the creation story, Noah, and all that. We just look at it as the Bible, but it was their not that distant history. Check your perspective. Decent interview tho.
I believe he meant they were given the 10 commandments on stone before Moses wrote down the entire Torah and later gave them Genesis. Yes, I'm sure they had been told about creation orally through Noah and his descendants. But not written.
Excellent, balanced and Biblical discussion. There will always be questions on all sides of this topic that can’t be fully answered in this life, but I really value the Word of God being allowed to speak to it so fully. The questions raised by an old earth creation are huge for me, and so I appreciate that this was touched on a little in the discussion.
Young earth creationists can't solve the heat problem, the earth is not young.
We’re going to the ark encounter and creation museum on our way to the RR conference!!!
Has anyone heard of the cosmic days. Like if 1 day is 1000 years and 1000 years is like a day. So if we stay consistent with this thought then we our in the 6th cosmic day meaning that there is still a sabbath rest to enter which would be the seventh cosmic day coming soon which would be the 1000 year kingdom on earth and then from there we will move into the 8th cosmic day which in biblical numerology constitutes new beginning which will be eternity. Such a beautiful structure of God and his plan from the end to the beginning to be with his people and he will be their God. Thoughts on this and has anyone else come across this idea.
Yeah, I've heard of it. Don't think it has much merit. It's already been over 6,000 years since creation. And that's a woodenly literal interpretation of the verse that says 1000 years is like a day to the Lord. The key word is "like". He's eternal, we're not. That's the point. Cheers
We will sure miss Dr. Michael Heiser.. now he knows as we will!
The irony of both young and old earth is that they both pursue the “science” or genesis 1. Instead it’s Gods answer to the other creation stories from the ancient near east. The story says more about Gods character than it does science. Arguing science into it is missing the point.
Genesis 1 is not a polemic. It's a historical account of a six day creation, like it or not.
@@bobbyfischersays1262 agree to disagree my friend.
@@EricSwegman ok, fair enough. God bless.
Around 2900 BC there was a catastrophic flood of the Tigris/Euphrates Valley (that is geologically evident), and it seems that this episode triggered the 4 or 5 flood legends extant in the Near East....all of these have similar things in common, unlike other flood stories from around the world....
Yes praise Dr. Heiser and more so praise God for guiding him to his purpose for the body of Christ and getting believers and non alike to dig into the scriptures
Did he just say he wasn't a scientist. Well he makes alot of scientific statements. I don't see any proof of a young earth in the bible. I believe this view does injustice to Christianity and drives many people to not believe or trust the bible. I'm gonna take John Lennox's view over this guys.
There are sometimes detrimental interpretive problems related to both YEC and (especially) to flat Earth because we have two words in English that modern Bible readers confuse:
"earth (not capitalized) = older usage (means: land, country/territory/region or its people, ground, soil, and is used to render 'eretz'and 'ga' in scripture); its frame of reference is GROUND LEVEL. Outside of the Bible, this usage is NEARLY ARCHAIC today.
"Earth" (capitalized) = the name designating our planet, typically in the celestial mechanics sense (DOESN'T APPEAR in English Bibles); its frame of reference is HIGH ALTITUDE. This is the usage most contemporary people know and use.
The big problem comes when people read a passage that mentions "earth"--the land or a region--but fail to recognize the significance of the lack of capitalization and mistake it for "Earth." When this happens passages that are actually talking about the land or a region are mistakenly thought to be talking about the PLANET and/or its celestial mechanics.
When the Bible talks about the water covering "the earth" it means THE LAND or THE REGION--that's what 'eretz' means. But people are so used to "Earth" in their everyday discourse that when they see "earth" in the Bible their brain registers 'planet Earth' instead which, in this case, sounds convincingly like a WORLDWIDE flood. See how this can affect interpretation?
Are you saying you don't think the flood was worldwide?
@@bobbyfischersays1262 I think the biblical text ALLOWS FOR an enormous regional flood instead of a global flood because 'eretz' in biblical Hebrew means 'land' or 'region.' I think what Genesis describes is Noah's personal EXPERIENCE of the Flood--i.e., in terms of what Noah experienced there was flood water AS FAR AS THE EYE--his eye--COULD SEE. The water's depth was measured by a sounding that Noah/family took off the ark. The mountains/hills that were covered by the flood waters were those of the landscape where Noah lived, perhaps knew from travel, and around which the ark floated. 'Ararat' pins down the location where the ark finally ran aground as the Middle East (Turkey) and this region was indeed the cradle of early human habitation and a regional flood there would have sufficed to accomplish God's purpose in judging the ancient world with an anthropologically 'universal' flood. So, yes, I think a large regional flood is a clear possibility given the wording of the text, plus a large regional flood also solves the 'Where did all the water go afterward?' and 'But a global flood doesn't fit with worldwide geology!' types of objections.
Also unexplained - From Genesis, we have firm references to the Flood, but no one writes about fitting in the Theia impact (evidenced by the Moon and by large unmelted chunks down near the core) plus the ancient Deniliquin impact crater ( highly weathered), Vredefort impact crater, and then the better known Chixculub impact crater. Each of these events is clearly seen in God's natural record and all of these events dwarf the Flood, so why don't ancient texts mention these catastrophes, especially as each would have caused an impact winter decades long.
How do we fit all of these events, into the YE timeline? Yes, we have God's unerring scripture, but we also have God's timeline written in God's unerring geological record.
Possibly since this video was posted, we have detected gravitational wave disruptions from a pair of colliding neutron stars, which coincided with Gamma rays arriving from this event. After a journey of 130 million years, there was a discrepancy of 1.7 seconds in arrival time, indicating that the 'speed of gravity' is also C.
It seems like every few months, there is a new problem for YEC advocates to explain.
Why didn't anyone ask about carbon dating? Or any other radiometric dating method?
Isa 40:22. The Earth is round.
That says the earth is a circle, not a sphere. Isaiah knows the difference between the two, see 22:18. The flat earth is a circle, not a sphere. Your prooftext works against your position. Also this video is not about flat vs globe earth.
Curious if it occurs to any YE creationists, that for some, it's a reverence for what the text (Gen 1 & 2) actually says which motivates a non-dogmatic stance on "the age of the earth".
This is what I hold too. Just came across a great Christian teaching from the dead sea scrolls and the teaching of the essences and Xtra biblical text that shows that these lines of jews who John the Baptist and Jesus learned from that about 4000bc the earth was created for human life. I don't concierge this a huge issue for Christians as long as if they hold to evolution doesn't effect how they view life and the law of Christ.
Questions for Tim Chaffey: 20:30 You say the "plain reading" of the text tells you that the earth was created in six 24-hour periods, and so we should accept that. So, why are you not a "flat earth creationist", for the "plain reading" of the text gives us a "firmament" above our heads? 20:45 You suggest that the ancient Israelites would have received Exodus 20 before Genesis 1: What evidence do you have to support that? There are even other Young Earth Creationists who would disagree, by saying that Genesis was part of an oral tradition that predated Exodus 20 by a long period of time. 21:55 Claiming a 6,000 year old earth assumes that the numbers associated the genealogies are not symbolic, and that there are no gaps. Do we really have evidence that the numbers are not symbolic, and that there are no gaps? 22:40 Tim asserts that there would be no reason to have birds on board on the ark if there was a local flood. Why would he say that? If the flood covered a large area, where birds would not be able to survive without a place to land, the exact opposite would be case, right? Some birds can fly hundreds of miles. Others can not. Dr. Heiser's argument is that none of the things that Tim Chaffey brings up gives us any conclusive insight into the mindset of the ancient Israelite. We can appreciate Tim's efforts to uphold the truth of Scripture, and generous positive disposition towards Michael Heiser, but this do not indicate that Tim has grasped the thrust of Dr. Michael Heiser's argument for a more nuanced view of inerrancy.
He said they believe an ice age occurred after the flood. Also, they believe the genealogies are precise and mostly without gaps. Where do we place an ice age in the stories after the flood? We have Noah releasing the animals back into the world, he works the soil and plants a vineyard, etc… Where is the ice age and how does everyone survive? And why cleanse the earth of evil, keep the people and animals that deserve to be saved just to subject them to an ice age?
The ice age was in the polar areas and northern southern extremes. As he explained there was a lot of precipitation which would have fallen as snow in these areas. The book of Job mentions the ice. And it is thought he lived after the flood, possible during the exodus. So it could have been several hundred years. As the ice melt it ran off and filled up the ocean basins created during the flood when the continents rose.
@@ws775 Cool. Thanks for the response.
@@ws775thank you! I had the same question and this makes sense to me.
20:46 great point on young/old earth
18:13 "Church throughout the history has been young earth"... how about Origen, Cyprian, Clement of Alexandria etc.? But hey... let us see what Jewish tradition tells us... written between 300 and 500 CE (same as Early Church period) "Bereishet Rabbah" states that the words “and it was evening, and it was morning” indicate that “there was a series of epochs before then; the Holy One created worlds and destroyed them, approving some and not others.”... Anyway, sure, there were a lot of literalists back then but to claim it was an only ancient view is just wrong. And we are talking about a time when you could claim that Earth is flat and not be ridiculed by everyone. What Hugh Ross claimed, and Mr. Chaffey twisted is that if science showed that Earth was young it would be clear that the Bible in this particular segment was literal, that some words that have multiple meanings have the meaning Young Earthers claim they have. Since science clearly is not supporting YEC, as with Flat Earth, we can conclude that the meaning of the words and expressions are not those YEC claims to be, just as everyone knows that Sun does not revolve around Earth abandoning the literal interpretation of Psalm 18 because of science!
I would love to see the comment section if you had flat Earther on here.
I've never heard anyone claim this I believe the world was created in 6 literal days with the appearance of age just like Adam and eve were created with the appearance of being adults if you were to do a study of them you would estimate them to be adults even though they were just created you can do the same with the earth when you study it you can guess the age it must have taken this long to creat this but God can do that in one literal day
Wisconsin native here !
The Flood was a particularly catastrophic deluge of the Tigris/Euphrates Valley sometime around 2900 BC....there is all sorts of geologic evidence for this.....and to the denizens of that Valley...it would have seemed as if the whole world was flooded. There are at least 4 other "Noah" stories from the Tigris/Euphrates valley that tell pretty much the same story....
How did Adam even conceptualise DEATH if death did not even exist before his sin? This is a real conundrum....Genesis is just the Hebrew version of Pandora's Box
But NOW we realize that plant life and animal life are very much the same.....RNA, DNA, life cycles...etc.....
Thank you, Gentlemen 🌹🌹🌾🌹🌹
Scientists HAVE settled the matter with at least 10 different scientific disciplines agreeing on ages and times of the Earth.....10 DIFFERENT DISCIPLINES.
John 15 is the very HEART of the New Testament (maybe NOT in a Psalm 118 sense - I don't know that!) but chapters 12 through 17 should be required reading for all. Ezekiel 1-10 is good medicine! The Jewish people started drifting, too. Make your theological knots tight to the dock, or trouble will follow.
I really don’t think Dr. Heiser affirmed inerrancy as affirmed by the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy.
A question. If all the species of dinosaurs were in the ark according to the young earth theory, why are they extinct and not preserved. They had a short joy ride.
Same reason every other kind of animal is extinct.
I was taught that God brought the animals He wanted on the Ark and allowed the dinosaurs to become extinct at that time. I have not made up my mind as to which camp I’m in, but I like hearing all the theories. I just thought I’d add another.
30:36, solid arguments! Good job!
Sorry, this guy doesn't know what he's talking about, which shows by the fact that he constantly had to clarify that he's "not a ____". He probably knows the plain text version of the Bible well, but he's ignoring all context and that's not how it's meant to be read.
Firstly, the Bible isn't a science textbook, and it doesn't forbid the study of the universe outside itself. To go by his method of study, I would have to deny my own existence because I'm not mentioned in the Bible. That is _not at all_ what the Bible is for.
Secondly, experts on Herbrew literature know that the first part of Genesis is poetic. It's actually very obvious when you put yourself in the shoes of the ancient Hebrew. You know, the _people that wrote the book._ The hyper literal interpretation is something that comes from imposing modern sensibilities on an ancient text. He accused OEC's of "reinterpreting" (very backhanded btw) but reading an ancient text without considering the ancient context is doing just that.
He also basically accused Hugh Ross of trusting science more than the Bible. No, Hugh Ross trusts science more than _your_ hyper literal interpretation of the Bible. That's where this gets bad, because we can agree to disagree, but all these little backhanded snipes at OEC's is doing nothing but dividing the church, and I think shows his bias. It's not about finding truth, it's about proving OEC's wrong.
So well said. I also challenge everyone to go and listen to the Hugh Ross/Eric Hovind conversation that Tim references here.
Tim simplifies the entire context of the question Mr. Hovind asked Dr. Ross. First, he said "all" scientists - not the majority (he even reiterates - "Everyone"). And then Dr. Ross gives a thorough explanation of why he would have to reassess what he believes to be true, if ALL scientists came to reverse their position on the age of creation. Tim makes it sound like Hugh is just going along with the majority opinion and admits it... That's not the case. I don't know if Tim purposely misrepresented this dialogue, but the end result is just that. A misrepresentation of Dr. Ross's words. Sadly, I find this to be par for the course when listening to a YEC explain their point of view.
And what you said about the way YEC's use backhanded comments to question OEC's faith, without coming right out and saying it (although I have heard more dogmatic YEC's do just that)... Dr. Ross essentially tells Eric Hovind the same thing - that he's doing that - in their conversation.
Is it your opinion that the Biblical authors were intending to communicate an old earth? Or that by using poetry they weren't actually trying to communicate truth at all?
Biggest issue with worldwide flood and young earth from my perspective in the first geologists expected to find it due to their reading of scripture and couldn't find the evidence. Oil companies and mining companies employ normal geologists to find oil and minerals, if young earth creationists had the more insightful perspective you would expect them to make useful predictions of where fossil fuels and minerals would be found, and a mining company/oil company based on young earth science should outperform others.
No disrespect here, but how do you know all geologists are old earth?
Also to describe how it happened doesn’t mean you can then know the exact lay of the land.
@@danielwarton5343 the first geologists weren't old earth they expected to see evidence of a worldwide flood, and originally interpreted some of thr features created by ice as flood features until they realised they looked like the features in areas currently glaciated. The science of geology as taught in universities is based on processes that take more than a few thousand years, if some geologists are young earth it would be based on the assuming that old earth methods could be used because God created a young earth with the illusion of being old (which would work in terms of explaining all the evidence other than the lack of evidence for a world wide flood but seems a bit unnecessary).
How are you guys right and let’s say, the hindus wrong? Or is it just different ways to undertand the same divine “presence”. Or are they just plain wrong? I’m very new to this, I want to understand.
Thank you for seeking! God has revealed himself to us through nature, through divine revelation as YAHWEH and Jesus in Scripture, and through changed and redeemed lives. We'd recommend reading Lee Strobel's The Case for Christ and C.S. Lewis's Mere Christianity. Both Strobel and Lewis were prior atheists who came to believe in God and Jesus and provide their reasoning in their books. You may also want to check out GotQuestions.org. Also, God says to seek, ask, and knock. If you seek Him and ask the Holy Spirit to reveal himself to you, He will. God is all around us. Seek and you will find Him!
But that doesn’t help. Those are just guys who became Christians and wrote about it. There are guys who became Hindus and wrote just as convincingly about that. Why are your guys right and the others wrong? And don’t tell me it’s in the book. They have a book too. If there is just one god, why did he (or it or I don’t know the pronouns) create Buddhism and Hinduism and Scientology (I’m kidding about Scientology of course, everyone knows that’s just a pyramid scheme). Is it the devil? Did lucifer create Buddha?
Firstly I would like to commend Tim's posture - being able to present both sides of the arguement fairly and then positioning what he believes is quite different to how I have heard his boss speak. And I say that as a fellow Aussie.
Could a young earther explain a couple of points to me?
1) I dont get the incongruence between old earth and a global flood. The grand canyon can still show the sediment lines from the flood, with that sediment created billions of years ago.
2) Death came to man, through sin according to Paul. We were contingently eternal in the garden, and sin brought death to Adam and Eve. Doesnt mean death didnt exist in the chaos state outside the garden. We were to subdue the earth to the state of the garden. But we fell and were exiled. That's why Jesus died for us, not for all creatures on the planet
3) The generations coming to 6-12k years, is from Adam and Eve. Check Joshua Swamidass work. Adam and Eve can be the ancestors of every homo sapien, and also co-exist with neanderthals and other hominins (e.g where did Cain get his wife). That geneology shouldnt be the measure of the age of the earth. This arguement conflates 2 different things.
4) Do young earthers also beleive in a flat earth?
Answer to 4: no. There might be some out there but AIG does not hold to flat earth
@@HELPMENOW150 thank you. Flat earth seems to be a result of highly literal exegesis, so I thought it may be the majority of young earthers as well. Appreciate the response
@@TeRongo it's largely a response to evidence. Not all flat earthers believe in the Bible.
Miller you came to South Dakota and I missed it? Where?
Good episode. While I think the creation account(s) have a more theological meaning, I enjoyed this episode.
Both sad and glad to hear about Michael Heiser. I thank the Lord profusely for him as he had a huge impact on me and my faith.
Cats are obligate carnivores. This seems to lead to a dichotomy of either 1) cats of all types ate other animals before Adam's fall or 2) God recreated the digestive systems of felines (even though He declared the initial creation as good).
God could have changed animal genomes at the fall
@@j7489 I will grant that He could have. However, that is the sort of thing YEC must wrestle with and have solid answers to the questions. Similarly, did dinosaurs exist 6k-10k years ago?
@@benjaminmeyer2564 did dinosaurs exist at all is a better question
Hi, the Bible does not say that Adam was the first to sin. Before Adam could sin, Lucifer had sinned and had become Satan who was thrown down from heaven. So Satan, the first sinner was present to tempt Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden in their sinless state. 1John 3:8b "for the devil sinneth from the beginning. John 8:44a, Isaiah 14:12-15, Ezekiel 28:13-17. The bible says "let there be light " on an earth already created by HIM but turned into "without form and void and darkness upon ....Gen 1:2. Because of the fall of satan from heaven. Luke 10:18.
What a humble and reasonable guest to have on your show. Sometimes there is a lot of arrogance around this debate.
You lose me when you try to prove the scriptures by using science. I have a hard time believing the Noah story but because Jesus said it happened, I believe it 💯. If you believe the world was created in 6 day, that’s great, you have the best reason why you believe that. Because the Bible says so. Why bring science into an issue of faith?
Light years are measurements of both distance and time!!!!! YOu are bending the science of cosmology and contorting it is bizarre ways!
What nonsense! Young earth creationism is so stupid! Ignore the evidence to protect your precious belief, but don't expect others to!
Interesting. Young earth is Interesting
"We start with the Bible" well then you're not doing Science, but pseudoscience, and that kinda kills the whole "appeal to alternative scientific analysis" :T
No...Evolution requires a CHANGE of information....your assertion of loss of information is fatuous...
2 Peter 2:5 and 3:5-6 suggest a regional flood.
Checked multiple translations and an interlinear. Not sure how regional can be derived from those passages. Peter uses "Kosmos" in the global sense in his epistles. That's not always the case in the NT though. John for example is all over the place with it; from groups of people to the whole universe.
@@detached3:6 uses Kosmos tote--the world at the time. 2:5 says the world of the ungodly. That seems to mean the part of the world that had been settled by humans, as there would have been no need to flood the rest.
Did anyone ask him what he thinks about dinosaurs and if they fit into a young earth perspective?
He does lots of work with answers in genesis and they cover this hundreds of times on their channel.
Probably in his book he would
That’s an extensive part of the ministry he is involved in with AiG. The answer is yes dinosaurs got perfectly into biblical history.
I watched Tim Chaffey on young earth creationism as he justifies his theory on the contents of Genesis. He also admits that he is not a scientist so he takes his belief system about creation without any science to back up his claim.
His belief then rests solely on the bible which is a form of brain-washing because facts reside in science. He has left his reason at the doorstep of entering Genesis. He has been practically brainwashed.
Older conservative believers will use Genesis in spiritual matters relating to the fall and will use science to explain how the creation was made. To try and reconcile science with the description of man’s fall and the subsequent plan of God to restore man’s image is a feat that will cause frustration and division among believers.
Faith and Reason are compatible. Both work together to make my beliefs practical. Reason makes Faith rational and Faith makes reason useful for God’s purposes.
God speaks to us in the Bible and God also speaks to us in His Creation.
You say the flood created the millions of fossils and you would say that because your leader Ken Ham says there could be no death before man sinned when the bible clearly says that death passed on to all men only….not to the animal world.
Your version of Creation is irrational because your faith in a few verses insists that God created perfection and therefore there could be no death before man sinned. When God clearly says that when Man sinned death passed on to all MEN….it did not say animals also. Outside the garden there was no access to the Tree of Life. Barred from reentry, the cherubs prevented man from eating of the tree of life. So now he joins the rest of creation outside the garden where there is death which has always been. God’s perfection in your interpretation says that there could be no death with perfection. That is your definition…man made I might add. God’s perfect plan called for a thinning out of the animal population so that each species could survive.
The problem with the Church today is that the leaders are uneducated in other disciplines other than the bible. In the late 1800’s and early 1900’s many of England’s ministers were well educated in Religion, History, Literature and Science. And most of them knew the ancient languages. I bring this up to compare with what we are putting out today.
I would not want to sit under an old earth believing pastor.
Same. I wouldn’t.
Gen vs 2. Explain how the Spirit of God hoovered over that which was not here at all. Thanks
Do you ever tell a story where you give details in an order that isn't quite the sequence of events? You mention things that seem most important to you and then have to go back and fill in details.
The picture of the Holy Spirit hoovering is quite amusing.
Verse 1 says God made the Earth before verse 2.
@@ReLair88 is this your impression of how God relates history to us?
Young Earth is bunk!
God reveals Himself through His Word. And adding even one more hour to the six days of creation inspires a form of evolution and deception, contradicting the Biblical genealogy and prophecies of God's word.
What if God, in eternity past, conceived the cosmos fully complete, in a form that is billions of years old? Then when he spoke each day into existence, everything He made, formed and created proceeded forward, including light in real time. That would satisfy the six days of creation and not contradict Biblical genealogies and prophecies of God's word.
Can this be proven scientifically? Perhaps some evidence may exist. In a recent discovery within the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation, the Planck data confirms what the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe data reveals, that our Earth and solar system may be cosmically aligned. And according to cosmologists, one thing is evident, the alignments with our Earth and solar system somehow exist! Moreover, because these features do not fit the Standard Model of Cosmology, scientists dubbed it the Axis of Evil because it can destroy everything in their Big Bang hypothesis. However, instead of an Axis of Evil. Could these alignments show an actual Axis of Beginning of a completely new cosmological theory, conceivably, leading to our Creator guiding the exploration?
"And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:" ACTS 2:17.
The Earth is where the Biblical story begins. Our Salvation is what His story is about, and Jesus, the Word of God, is the story's hero.
The Bible is the revelation of God. It is not a science book nor does it try to be. Moses' original Torah was more than likely lost or destroyed after the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem and the destruction of Solomon's temple. The Torah as we have it today was written in hindsight by 2nd Temple Jews following exile in Babylon and servitude under the Assyrians and Greeks. Their writing was influenced by their time in captivity ( Hence the similar stories in other ancient civilizations' writings), but always maintained the original revelation and prophecies of God. Genesis 1-11 establishes a sovereign and omnipotent framework of God's creation, not a scientific one.
Young Earth Creationism is nothing more than an admission of poor exegesis.
Please explain how to exegete genesis differently. It’s a continuous narrative from Eden and Adam to Noah and on to the dispersion and Israel.
@@christiantompkins6423 It is not a continuous narrative in nature. Genesis 1-11 are distinctively different writing styles than Genesis 12-Deuteronomy.
Genesis 1 and 2 are even distinctively different genres. Genesis 3 through Noah is similar in style and genre but that genre is not a historical narrative. That genre is what is known as "Primeval Narrative." Primeval Narrative's purpose is to paint a picture or to give a reason for what succeeds it. The story of Noah in general is not a story about a flood but a story about God re-establishing Holy Rest (Noah's name literally means rest). But Rest, not in the sense of relaxation, but Rest in the sense of order and purpose. Similar to what Jesus says when he said "Come to me...and I will give you rest" that rest is not comfort but divine purpose.
To read a document that was written over 4000 years ago with a modern understanding of history, the cosmos, and philosophy is idiotic. You must go back to how it was initially understood. And I promise you that when you look into it truthfully, you will find out that it is not what you think it is.
Great books to consider are "The Lost World" series by John Walton. "Lost world of Genesis One," "The Lost world of Adam and Eve," The Lost World of the Torah" and "The Lost World of the Flood."