วีดีโอ

I used to believe in soul sleep theology, but after studying the context of the scriptures better I don’t accept it anymore. I have always struggled to understand where do our souls go when we die as believers and as non-believers while waiting for the judgement. I now believe I know the answer to that. All true believers are allowed into the Kingdom of Heaven while waiting for the resurrection. All non-believers are not allowed into the Kingdom and are cast into “OUTER DARKNESS” while waiting for the resurrection. Aka, outside the city. Three times this is mentioned in Mathew. No lake of fire mentioned. Non-believers will be outside the gates and never allowed in. And yes I believe you will be conscious. This is the afterlife that awaits non-believers. After this comes the judgment where their final destination will be the lake of fire to be consumed and die the second death!

This was a good debate and has given me some more to consider, thank you both. This is something that I’ve thought about a lot, not from a salvation perspective obviously, from an apologetic perspective. I have a non-believer friend who asked me about heaven about a year ago (what we do in heaven etc.), and I was fumbling around for an answer that could give him any reason to want to even go to heaven. He left the conversation unsatisfied and I felt like an idiot. So I’m trying to get more information to give a better, more confident response next time. God bless you guys

Logic will also tell you that we sleep in the grave awaiting the resurrection.

Great debate! Adam, this was my first time ever watching you, and you were absolutely on fire! You are very well versed and are able to clearly elaborate your point, and press a point. You 100% killed it, Praise had no case. One of the first times if seen him sound completely lost. Great job brother, keep it up ❤

This was a great debate! Thanks for doing it!

Interesting debate, however: 1.Soul sleep or sheol is a concept applicable to the period before the church era. This period runs from the beginning to when Peter dies and resurrects because Peter is the rock on which the church is built on. Specifically, church era begins at Rev 13:12 During this pre church period, there's 2 resurrections already; christ's and some of the partriach's, the rest awaited the church era. 2. Church era; Peter died and resurrected and this marks the beginning of church era. In this era, believers don't actually die but transitions from this life to the next life. Their spirits immediately indwell the hearts of other living believers where they guide them and also judge them.

Very good something to think about. Do u have time to do a presentation or discussion on Genesis 1-5 on one if the YT channels

Good points might listen again. I had my ideas as to 3:14 but now it might be traveling on ur belly to reproduce in man. Side note, i know its not a animal but God uses animals like sheep, lion, birds, crocodile to explain things, so serpent is a spcific description of the devil with a spcific meaning like destroyer or aversary.

Good points the only tihing i would add is that consuming the fruit with the seed in it is the same thing as touch so there was no adding.

Very good. There is no way we are all children of the devil until we are adopted. The adoption is legal adoption. God created all the souls not the devil. I don't see any dominance in 3:14, if u say there is it might have to akso apply to the dominice in 3:16. Ur right let there be spiritual light bc there was already a spiritual darkness and the deep.

Also angels as stars is an established thing in revelation, in context, its gonna be hard to change that one. Ill give u sons of God, ill buy that.

Gaaaap Therooooy

2 corections: For those who dont read greek, the word used for man is ἀνθρώπους, which means human kind. Paul say a ἀνθρώπους The same word used in Matthew when he says "Man shall not live by bread alone". I dont think he's referring to animals, and he is including women in that verse! So hovinds intreptations in incorrect. Second Romans 5 is talking about spiritual death To make the point clearer, the emtire point of Romans 5 is about spiritual life in Christ. Lets look at Romans 8 Romans 8:13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live. Yet you still die if you mortify the deeds of the body? No, because it's not talking about physical death.

I look at cused above all cattle as woman finding this supposed greatest tree in the garden less apealing than cattle. And eating dust definitely works for destroying people im sure thats part of it. But if u analogize the serpent, he will never rise up and strike agian, being on his belly and eating dust and not meat. Now that i think sbout it there is no more dust of the earth for man after the thousand years when satan is loosed for a short time.

The part I'm not buying is that Eve thought she was giving birth to The Son of Man in 4:1. I would have to be clearly stated and it's not, I think that's reading into it too much. Plus the Mother of all living refers to being the Matriarch of Christ, The Son of Man Because u can say Mother or Father many generations before the actual birth mother or father. It's like calling Christ the Son of David.

YEC arguements fornyoung earth still dont point to a young earth: 1. Salt in ocean: According to AIG, at maximum it would be 43 million years old, using the reverse math that Hovind memtioned. Not close to 6k years 2. Coral reefs: They can form in 5k uears, whoch would make sense of you believe in Global, something which OEC like myself dont deny. Question is how long before the flood were coral reefs around? Obviously a lot longer than 1000 years according to how many fossils of them we have. Could be much less more than 6k years 3. Moon dust (As discussed) 700k-1 milllion years. Not close to 6k. 4. Natural selection? Anyone do math on how long it would take for 70 different large reptilian ceratopsidae species to diversify in a perfect world pre flood? Taking into accoint no need to adapt if predetors werent involved and tempatures were universally the same? Way more than 2k years. At mimimum 15000 based on post flood crocodilian species alive. Only arguement that is close is the magenetic field. And AiG says 20k years.

The man child part makes sense where as husband really did not but the anguish in child bearing I would place on the two seeds.

I'm glad someone else can realize that what comes from the ground and thorns and thistle are relating to people.

I have to believe that seraph or seraphim has to be referring to the shinny glistening part of a snake, the glistening skin, not that it is a snake, just that clear crystal look.

What if time is over for everyone who dies, so each goes forward to the judgment immediately. 🤔

@40:00 Adam addresses if Adam was created "In the beginning". Then applies a very specific literal understanding of that, IE "on day 1? Certainly not." The problem is, if the universe is in fact billions of years old before Adam was created, there is no sense in which Adam was created "in the beginning". This leads to my issue of "margin of error". If something is within the margin of error, we consider it correct (making really just a margin of imprecision. The problem is things like "in the beginning" are far outside any margin of error if the world is billions of years old. This applies also to the "Moon dust" point. That the idea of the :"best" evidence for a "young" earth is one of 700k to 1m years. Which adam says is inconsistent with a young earth model. But that evidence is really much more in line with a young earth than one of billions of years. In reality, we have a bunch of extrapolated data points. None of which agree on a specific age, but rather lend to wildly varying ranges. With no control group and no ability to repeat the process.So moon dust is interesting but it isn't a clock. So we shouldn't treat it as one.

Last note about Adams intro. "Old Earth" here seems to be appealing to a more general application. IE older than 6-10k years. Without a definite date or at least range to be defended.. It isn't really a "scientific" claim at all. Science does not support an "old earth", it is going to make claims to specific dates, times and ranges and then we consider them old or young. So in the intro, focus was on Pre-day one age of the earth being the source of the "oldness". But the description of this is not supported by science. Science doesn't claim that the earth was formless and void for millions of years. My point is, I am not seeing a good connection between the claim of science and fitting that in the bible. -No evidence for young earth- The first is the eyewitness testimony. So discounting the bible is really just to throw out evidence without justification. Requiring pure scientific evidence is also unjustified because science is not the only field that would apply and may not be the best field anyway. As science must be testable and repeatable. Bottom line, science has not been really good at the "repeatable" portion of age claims. The age claims of science are almost all extrapolations, and often unprovable ones.

Adam point #2 - Regarding animal death.. I agree with him. ending around @19:00

@9:20ish Adam puts forward the idea that there was some material before creation started. As I understand it "formless and void" phrase is translating Hebrew that means nothing. It is not a claim to substance existing, but a description of Nothing. Also there is supposed to be a whole lot of Jewish writing on the idea how how nothing the nothing was. I am no Hebrew Scholar, so I can't speak to it. But i think this point Adam is making is coming from a misunderstanding and a deviation of the text and especially how it has been understood for a long time.

This is sooo good. ❤ The Bible has the same message throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Beginning to the end.

I think the first trees did not have any rings.

I think it is good to remember who the audience for Genesis is. This is mankind's beginning. So this is a written description of how his world began.

I think I missed the part where you gave warrant for reading Mk.10:6 the way you do. It seems to me that you're simply refusing to read it the YEC way. But at least you've moved on from saying "I just don't understand the YEC argument from this verse." Thanks for sticking it out for the long debate.

Both of you are wrong on animal death or immortality. Death came by Adam, not only for mankind but also for animals; not only living things but also non living things. Paul affirms this in Rom 8

The statement 'there's no young earth science' is itself unscientific.

🎉Congratulations Trump🎉

You can't repeat past sins. 1 john chapter 1 v 8-10. Anyhow you reading a Jewish book. Holy does not mean sinless it means to be set apart.

Be fully aware of Satan’s tactics!! He is out to destroy! I can trust my husband, but it’s Satan I don’t trust. He will use anyone to destroy our marriage.

Yep that’s usually how it happens…boundaries aren’t set up bc the church might think the staff is being extreme if they have boundaries like not hugging someone of the opposite sex, or texting them without adding someone else for accountability. Pastors need to care more about protecting their families than being worried about the congregations reaction to the new boundaries being put up. Be extreme!!

Thank you🌷

That was fun and insightful! Thanks for having me

I think I'd like to read a AI generated colab on the Bible to see the translation to English from the original texts. I'm not sure if it's in Hebrew that words are squished together. Over the years, there have been plenty of examples, especially in English classes where we are asked to separate words and punctuate a sentence. Godisnowhere. Is it, "God is now here, or God is nowhere." It was only recently that I learned that Joseph wasn't a carpenter. He was a builder/stone cutter. Lumber was extremely rare.

Everything accomplished in 6 days Exodus 20:11 ❤

If you believe the plain teachings of the Bible … there was no death of souls before the fall… I specify souls because plants were eaten before the fall

Get laid at least once a month buddy, this will help your mind stabilize itself to worry about your own life and not about people's conceptions😢😮😅 Stop being a light attention seeker

It took a long way into this video tho find out he believes the same way I do. Just some of his definitions are different. 🧡

Galatians chapter 5

I watched the debate - I'm not so concerned about old Earth, young Earth, but I have to say, you did really well brother. You both did, but your line of thinking is interesting about the topic. I enjoyed it - thanks, keep it up - to God be all the Glory Amen!!

Really interesting discussion, but i was disappointed by Ryan's response to the problems posed by relativity, where he just muddied the waters with psychology.

Genesis 4:16-24 gives us a detailed account of the people that Cain’s descendants married and NONE OF THEM married anyone in Seth’s lineage. Genesis 4:16-24 refutes the Sethite view. Also read Jude 1:6-7 in the NASB 2020, the New English Translation, and the Amplified Bible 2015 and you’ll see the Sethite view get debunked there too.

Of course, that's why God created all animals again in Genesis 2.

So good.

“THE ASSYRIAN - THE ANGEL WHO RULED THE PREFLOOD WORLD” th-cam.com/video/2MdV390lpJM/w-d-xo.html

Ryan Pittersons book “JUDGMENT OF THE NEPHILIM” utterly destroys the Sethite view. It’s the most comprehensive biblical study on the nephilim ever written. He has a TH-cam channel named after his book.

My thoughts didn't change about YEC but I'm suddenly more post millennial than I was this morning.