Sometime ago I wrote a note in my Bible where it talks about the waters above (see CMB). You are the only other person I know of who’s made that connection. Great lecture!
I agree with Mr Faulkner on most things though I am a little concerned with his interpretation of Paul’s usage of ‘third heaven’ as being a concession to the secular cosmologies of its time. Firstly Paul was writing to Christians. Secondly it’s in the New Testament so The Holy Spirit inspired the usage of this distinctive phrase. Moreover this is the same kind of argument that is currently popular with Christian anti-Creationists who dismiss the creation narrative as scientifically inaccurate and written in concession to the incorrect secular cosmology of its first readers
If we as mere mortals can create a rocket ship by manipulating the ground beneath our feet, how can one be so arrogant to say that somewhere in this universe that there isn't someone smarter than us that created us?
Because there is no NASA universe and this man worships his education which indoctrinated him and lied to him for his field of esteem of the heady patting each other on the head! Fools, the heady and scripture says so! The earth is flat and he’s never tested if it’s flat or not, rather spin into colluded topics to shutdown facts and thought.
Job 38:14 The earth takes shape like clay under a seal; its features stand out like those of a garment. How do you get a spinning ball in outer space out of this verse? When you press clay down as a seal, how does it form a ball or globe?? Also, when Joshua commanded the Sun and Moon to stand still for a day, how did he get the extra Sun if the Earth was still spinning? Job 38:6 What holds up the pillars that support the earth? Who laid the cornerstone of the world? How many NASA photos of Earth from 'space' show pillars attached? 1 Chronicles 16:30: "He has fixed the earth firm, immovable."
Satan has manipulated the truth from the first word. His plan... discredit the word of God so everybody thinks it's just a fairy tale. If people don't believe what is said about creation how would they believe anything else written in the word... I believe the word above any so called science. If the word says the sun moon and stars are INSIDE the firmament and they move not the earth, then it's true. Trying to disprove these facts is despicable.
"Like clay under a seal" does not mean flat but rather it has bumps that have been molded. Like a garment, the final shape is not given, it may be flat, cylindrical or globe-ish. Could the maker of the whole universe have A) a second bright light in the sky or B) move the Sun as we know it or C) stop the Earth spinning without causing a huge disaster? Yes. Which did He use.... I don't know, maybe something I haven't thought of. Pillars? or support? Did the word pillars get inserted because of the "science" of the time? What words exactly were the original text? What do pilings look like? From the original pilings to today's? And what "earth" are they supporting? The earth they are supporting is the surface, not the globe. So these supports would be inside the globe not "under" it. I am not sure which translation you used for 1 Chronicles 16:30, (which is poetry BTW) but anything I read uses "the world" rather than "the earth", Considering the parts of the verse you did not quote, it would seem to be talking about the political world of the time. Referring to the David's power base that God had given him. This is common usage meaning all the people someone knew about. (all the Earth, All the world). Very hard to take any one English translation and extrapolate some grand theory from it. The speaker in the video is pretty careful to call what he says a theory and is saying that so far it makes sense with both scripture and what we can see physically. The main message of Job was that we as people do not really understand the "whole thing". Most honest scientists will generally agree that "the more you know, the more you know you don't know."
@@lenwhatever4187 No "seal" that i have ever seen has been spherical. Bumps? sure, i.e mountains, hills, etc. Cleary, the Bible states Earth has a foundation, like a house or building . And nowhere can you find in the Bible Earth is spinning, moving, wobbling. Joshua commanded the Sun, Moon to stand still, why not command Earth to stand still? Seems to me this is pretty clear that everything above is moving around, a stationary Earth plane, and how would Joshua get that extra" sunlight" to fight the battle if he had commanded the Sun n Moon to stand still yet "Earth" was still spinning? Something to think about.
Awesome lecture. Thank you. As a carpenter, I create my design one step at a time, but my steps are the process of my creation. Try not to overthink. I have two hands. I can do more than one thing at a time : )
[Wow, this comment section is more of a mess than usual for this channel.] I'm fairly happy with the scriptural interpretation to end up with "waters above" meaning there's water beyond the edge of the universe. I'm just not sure that the expected absorption/emission artifacts from that water actually show up in the CMB. Everywhere I look, the claim is that the CMB is a perfectly smooth black-body spectrum. Although, there is a _strong_ incentive/assumption that it is so. I wouldn't be surprised that the cleanup process washes out any features as anomalies. Dr. Faulkner also claims that it might be in a part of the spectrum we haven't probed yet. As I can't even _find_ anything other than a perfectly smooth illustration of the spectrum, I have no clue where the actual limits of the sampling are, or whether there could be emission/absorption artifacts that get smoothed out in the usual processing. If this theory is true (or at least closer to the truth), then the Hubble relation combined with the upper and lower bounds of liquid water temperature should give us an estimate of the distance to the edge of the universe, no? And any variation of the redshift and water features of the spectrum could tell us how far we are from the edge in certain directions, allowing us to find the "center". It's a fascinating conjecture, I'm just a bit skeptical about the necessary predictions as they seem rather outrageous given the current data. Anybody know someplace I can find raw (or mostly unprocessed?) CMB data? I'd like to investigate this.
There is no edge to get to, no NASA space for they can’t get there and every astronaut leaks that occasionally along with bill nye and the rest of NASA goons! We are in a locked realm system and they’ve never been to the moon, never been to space because it’s blocked by the firmament in scripture and the waters above where the stars are within. Christian scientists are fools on this topic
I have read that Halton Arp also postulated a reason for the CMB based on black body radiation. His reasoning was not water but rather all the combined matter in the universe.
Amazing lecture. Some points: 1. One time the speaker critics the greek formation of Paul, other time he argues that the Bible says or not something about pre-flood rain. Once the Epistles are in the Bible, so Paul and Moses were guided by the Holy Spirit. Or you embrace everything or not. 2. I'm tired to see evangelic brothers blame the greeks for everything. Once Pythagoras had most of his instructions with the Hebrews, the Cosmology of Plato, Aristotle, etc. is the same that we have nowadays, at least in the core. God Bless and the Holy Spirit guide us to the Truth!
I think it talks about a mist that watered the garden and the oxygen had to of been richer or compressed to keep those huge animals alive and the huge insects aloft
@Michael Fritsche there was a canopy of of water or ice (most probably ice because of the low temperature that high in space) about ten miles above the earth 's surface which created a much denser atmosphere.
OK, I have been enjoying this lecture, but I have one major beef; when he said the Bible didn't really say it had not rained before the flood. Wrong; it's right there in Chapter 2, verses 5 & 6. From verse 5; for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. (6) But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. It plainly states it right there. I don't know how he could make such a statement. I really hope he corrects it (at 30 mark right now), if he does I'll post a correction.
I was somewhat confused by that assertion as well. The only way I can make sense of it is that the passage doesn't explicitly prohibit rain _after_ the creation of man. The claims that God had not sent rain and that the ground was watered by mist are a parenthetical phrase: "When no bush of the field was yet in the land and no small plant of the field had yet sprung up -- [above note about rain and mist] -- then the Lord God formed the man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature". The comment about the lack of rain is a sidenote, seemingly in order to explain the lack of crops when man was created. Given that the next verse is God planting the garden of Eden, and a few verses later the garden is explicitly watered by a massive river, the crucial role of irrigation of some type to produce the edible plants is emphasized. As it's a parenthetical clause, giving reason for the state of the world on day 6, perhaps it's a bit of a stretch to insist that it describes the state of Earth for the 1500 or so years until the flood? Also, how long would it take for the water cycle to produce rain after day 2? God just separated the waters below from the waters above. To get rain, we need to start getting water back into the near side of the expanse as vapor, condensing to produce clouds, and enough cloud and dust buildup to trigger precipitation over the land. That could take a few days, so God might have been keeping the day 3 plants happy and healthy with a daily mist until the atmosphere He designed started operating at full capacity and took care of worldwide irrigation. It's speculation, and it'd take some work to confirm, but on the face it doesn't seem unreasonable to me, though I'm no meteorolgist.
Tim H. : The vegetation could have been kept watered by dew. All that would be required for dew to form would be the heat of the sun during the day followed by the cooling effects of the moon at night as that causes condensation to form upon the earth's surface. .
@@ATinyPillow Your username gives me pause to even reply, but I shall. I'm not saying there wasn't a mist, the text clearly states there was. I was noodling through how that agrees with there being rain before the flood.
Tim H. : It does say in Genesis that God caused rain to fall once He had created man and placed him in the garden. The flood occurred long after that. btw, the username is my son's account that I share with him. Anyway, have a nice evening. .
Encouraging to see you address the so called "Axis of Evil". For a bible believing Christian who believes in intelligent design this is a courageous stance as many have been reticent to admit the possibility of Geocentricity due to a stated concern they may bring ridicule upon the Christian scientific community. 39 minutes into video.
@R-Calling regarding your question about starlight reaching earth at the point of creation, there might be a different answer, but the first and obvious one would be that the stars and their fruit (light) were created fully mature, just like everything else recorded in the creation passages. Adam was never a baby, the trees were full grown, the chicken had to come before the egg or else nobody would've sat on it, and he had food to eat from plants only days from the land appearing. The beams of starlight were already there.
@@NicholasChorba I think you're missing a lot, especially the scientific. We live in a simulation, it's basically like a computer. Think about it closely, your life means a lot to the Creator, and your soul means nothing, to the devils
@@donnybarns I'm responding to the guy's comment in the live chat. The stream cut off before I could finish. It was the typical "if the earth is only 6000 years old, then why can we see starlight that takes millions of years to arrive" type of a question.
@@donnybarns if you are going to go with the "we're in a simulation" answer to him, then maybe that's another answer, and I'm not comfortable commenting on that, because I don't know that it is true. It sounds like the philosophical argument of Plato's cave blown up to massive proportions.
But the Septuagint was a translation made by Hebrew scholars sent to Alexandria. You would expect them to have a Hebrew mindset not Greek. The same would apply to St Paul. There's a lot of imponderable presuppositions in this content.
The ‘canopy’ model may be anathema within the scientific community but I don’t feel that the model has largely been rejected within layman circles, as it’s still well taught and received by many believers including myself.
1. The water can’t come from it because it increases atmospheric pressure on the ground 2. If it was in the troposphere, it would fall out as rain 3. If it was above the atmosphere then there’s no way to make it fall down, so it should still be there There is no reason to believe it
The word SHAMAIM in Hebrew should be read as two words: SHAM YAM - which means Overthere (SHAM) Sea (YAM). This explains why no single for the "word" SHAMIM as no word like that, it is two words, which explains OVER THERE THERE is WATER, that simple.
Using eastern (non-pagan) thinking, we might want to consider a micro-expanse and a macro-expanse; rather than horse racing them against each other. Both have their reflections in the Hebrew text, and I've not yet heard a good reason that we must choose between the two concepts. The atmosphere of earth would bound the micro-expanse---the limits of the known universe which contain the heavenly bodies would bound the macro-expanse. QED.
I don't think that is a healthy perspective. It's great to recognize that God made you out of the dust of the Earth, and to have a humble attitude about it, but it also says come let us reason together. Your comment kinda detracts from this teaching, it implies an attitude that it doesn't matter. And it really does.
Where did the water come from when God opened the windows of heaven if it was on the edge of the universe? To me it raise more questions than it answers. The Bible states that a mist came up out of the ground and watered. There would be no significance to a rainbow if they had been before, that would also imply that God lied. A rainbow is God's covenant with the earth that He will never flood it again, so if rainbows had appeared before the flood, saying He would never flood the earth again, then God lied, pure and simple.
I think you missed the point of the Bible that thank you missed the verses in the Bible that said the waters came from the great deep, think of Earth how do you say popcorn basically.
@@donnybarns The Bible states that God opened the fountains of the deep AND the windows of heaven. I was replying in connection to where the waters from heaven came from. Please read the biblical account again and you will see it was you who missed it, not I. Haven't got a clue about popcorn, can you show me where that is in the Bible?
@Carl Jones .... You know where else God made even greater COVENANT with people? or should I say NEW COVENANT? Yes at the focal point in history, at the CRUCIFIXION of Jesus... So totally based on your logic I can effectively conclude that God "lied" since nailing people to cross was in use couple hundreds of years (if not thousand) old practice, waaayyy before Jesus, yup, there you go, as rainbow as the cross ... ehhm ..." I have set MY RAINBOW in the clouds, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and the earth" (Genesis 7)... I have set MY CROSS >> "the blood of the everlasting covenant" (Mark 14:24)
@@noitnettaattention God has made a number of covenants with man. Yes the cross is the greatest covenant He has ever made with man, sealing it with His very own blood, but great as it was, it does not negate any other covenant He has made, God has never nor will He ever lie. You seem to confuse God promising He would never judge the earth again by a flood, with His redemptive work on the cross. Crucifixion was not a method of execution carried out by Jews, but it was the death suffered by Jesus and predicted by God. Could you explain your hostility in your reply to me, as I am at a loss?
I am glad you are changing your mind and researching to back up the change. I learned a lot from this lecture. I am still displeased with the sloppy nature of your ufo talk, but glad to see you are trying here.
We're not here to judge, many false prophets have made Marion's off of us it's not even our right to call film out. Let the Creator judge Doom here on Earth.
I propose that heaven means elevated place, which includes continents above oceanic crust, air above continents, and finally space. The beginning is before the first day, so by the first day all the celestial bodies existed. The darkness was on rhe sea floor not the sea surface. In the first three days a smooth with water covering it transformed into an earth with continents and ocean basins causing dry land to appear. As the ocean basins were opening up the elevated place of the continents were in the midst of the water. Then finally after dry land appeared the continents divided the fresh water from the salt water. The then there was light was when the oceans which covered the continents became shallow enough for the preexisting sun to break through. Sometimes things that are lists are interpreted as sequences. The fourth day is a day that the purpose and authorship of the celestial bodies was announced, not the day they were created and placed. And it was so is not and then it became so. Therfore the Bible cannot run up against any time periods established by isotope ratios or the time required for light to come from the edge of the universe.
Funny how you try to make fun of the Septuagint translators for "explaining the Bible using the cosmology of their day" yet that's EXACTLY what you're doing.
I think this is tenth time I have watched this, or something like that. KJV - "Gen 1:6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters." First God calls there to be light. (light is matter/energy ) and then God divides light from darkness ( darkness is the absence of matter / energy ). Light is day and darkness is night ( he starts time on the first day with the evening and morning ) At this point light and darkness are in the midst of the waters. God divides the waters to create a firmament called Heaven ( an expanse or space ) This is the space needed for the universe to begin along with the medium and the rules for creation, in my opinion. We find balance in the God's creation. For a universe to be built, building blocks need to be made, light. I can only assume what the dividing is but it seems to follow Newton's wonderful observation in that for every action there is an equal and or opposite reaction. God seems to be setting the pattern of the physical relationships that we observe at every level in this moment. ( Yin and Yang - seems the most descript ) God creates time with the division and sets the pattern. I do not truly understand the importance of water to the Lord. It is the power of the Blood, and it surrounds everything. It was divided at the beginning to create Heaven. Water is so vastly important and I know there is no way for me to properly describe this but in so many ways we are all connected in water right now. Why is that and what does it mean? I don't know yet and maybe I am not supposed to know. It just feels important. I find it so hard to try and fit the world's ideas in the God's words. This explanation makes the most sense to me and fortunately it appears to follow scripture, maybe.
what do you mean, when? You're still a kid. Now, the problem with long ages evo is, it can't compete with science. Proof of that is how they mock, sneer, whine and shriek hate. Any psychologist will tell you, the louder they get, the less they have. for a thinker, that means long-ages is a fairy tale and long-agers are mad because we deny then Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. Stay a kid. Your enthusiasm makes any subject interesting because you share that excitement. Walk in beauty!
Flavius Josephus aka Matityahu Ben Yosef the Jewish historian says that the firmament was comparable to crystal. No doubt the ancients believed in a geocentric system. Also interesting point is that the word in Hebrew for water is mayeem. It is also a plural with no singular form and the word for heaven came from the word water. Mayeem: waters, water. Shamayeem: heavens, heaven. Nasa is a sketchy organization to say the least but even man must do his own research. We must never laugh at geocentric believers because we never know, someday in the future we may find out that we have been mislead. Water always takes the path of least resistance and always finds its level. Hence sea level. It's interesting to go against the grain and see how people are holding onto spheres. Isaiah says in chapter 40 that the earth he saw in his vision was a hhug: circle..later in chapter he uses the Hebrew word for globe, durr: Sphere. Modern day Jews call it Kadurah which literally means: as a sphere, ball. This is a modern adaption of terminology. There are lots of this in the bible that don't line up with the copernican model. It's very suspect that everything copernicus theorized, nasa confirmed. I think I will stay very open minded on this topic and not be dogmatic because one day we may be finding new facts the just happen to be old. Deducing from the word of God is missing the point of its purpose.
Heliocentrism is a complete fraud; the same goes for it's first faked proof: Bradley's explanation for the star's aberration; it cannot be the yearly motion of the Earth around the Sun because it is 3 months late and the small axis dissipears at the ecliptic. It proves that it is a (solar) yearly motion of the universe around the Earth and that the light from the stars comes to Earth in 3 months ... not millions of years. But worse, if the Earth was orbiting the Sun with an axis of about 23.4 degrees, it would be impossible for two observers on the same longitudinal meridian to observe simultaneously the passage of the Sun at the same time every day of the year. For example, an observer at Gdansk, Poland can observe the passage of the Sun almost simultaneously with an observer at the Cap, South Africa, everyday of the year.
Pavel Pulukchu : fyi, the oldest book of Isaiah ever found "the Great Isaiah Scroll" found amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls states that the earth is a disc. .
The statement of stars being created in Genesis 1 is a parenthetical statement. There is no reason to say that the Bible claims that the stars were made during the creation week. He created the sun and moon (BTW - He also created the stars).
Tracking God : In my Hebrew Bible it says that He created the stars/angels on creation day two. The book of Enoch says that the stars are angels and the planets are wandering stars. .
ozowen : As you wish. Enoch is considered scripture even though it was removed from the bible, however 2 Timothy 3:16 states that "ALL scripture is inspired by God and useful in teaching, correcting". That would imply that the scripture contained in Enoch IS inspired by God and therefore also useful in teaching and correcting. You really ought to ask yourself why Enoch and many other books were removed from the bible by the Romans in the third century in 325 via Constantine's council of Nicea. Have a nice evening. .
ozowen : There is no such thing as a Hebrew canon, it is the Roman canon which is why it was accepted by the Nicean Council. You do realize that the Council of Nicea was created by none other than Constantine, emperor of Rome, don't you? As for the earth, the oldest known complete copy of the book of Isaiah, the "Great Isaiah Scroll" found amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls states that the earth is a disc. Please feel free to verify that fact at your leisure. Furthermore, a study of Isaiah in the Greek manuscripts also shows that Isaiah was not describing a ball shaped earth. While we're on this subject, the scriptures state multiple times that the earth is "fixed and immovable". Does spinning and hurtling through space sound remotely as "fixed and immovable" to you? Or how about Job where it says "the earth takes shape as clay to the seal", go look at some clay or wax seals and see if any of them look anything like a globe. (spoiler alert - they don't). Have a nice evening. (btw, I happen to be a priest) .
ozowen : How you ascertained that I'm am paranoid in any way from anything that I have said here is simply stunning and has no semblance of truth given that I made you aware that I am a priest and therefore am not paranoid in any way. You refer to it as exegesis as you have no other way to refute what I'm imparting to you. I'm also not surprised nor dismayed by your responses to me. In my humble opinion, you're simply another deceived soul as the bible has foretold of. Please excuse me for saying "have a nice EVENING" although it is simply a polite gesture that was in no way related to the fact that you say it is night where you are as anyone (besides yourself) would easily grasp. Seems that you're only seeking to argue, that's your unbridled ego talking. In closing I'll simply sum it up as I did earlier on and state "as you wish" with respect to whatever you wish to believe. In the age of information, remaining ignorant is a choice. Have a nice NIGHT, I shall not be responding further to you. .
@@ATinyPillow Or does it say that he made the sun and moon on the second day and as a separate phrase, "He made the stars also."? You have to connect those two statements to imply that they were made on the second day. But there are other places in the Bible that indicate there were other places in the universe prior to the creation week.
I stopped listening to this man at 1:16 because at 1:14 he said "all right many Christians today accept the big bang." , WELL THEN NOT ME, I DON'T ACCEPT THE BIG BANG.
False, the light we observe from stars is only 3 months old, not millions or billions years old. This can be verified by the true geocentric explanation of the aberration of stars. The yearly motions of the stars describing an almost circle at the north star, becoming an ellipse with its smaller axis going smaller and smaller when the star is closer to the ecliptic and the small axis is nul when the star is on the ecliptic. And the full yearly motion of the eclipse reaches Earth in about 3 months, no matter which star you pick.
I'm l disappointed that other people are using the wrong terminology, and you've given up using the correct term. If you don't want to spend your life arguing with them, fine. But we're partly in the mess we're in, because we cave to them and do it incorrectly also. Just to save the trouble. Just do it the right way and say no, when they want us to tell them, there's 5 lights, when there's only 4. We need to learn to quit arguing with them and just do it the correct way and let them be damned. We need to learn, to tell them NO, and move on.
The waters above are clouds. Proverbs 8:28, Job26:8. The first expanse is where the sun, moon ect are and the second is as Proberbs 8:28 points out, between the oceans and the clouds, where the birds fly.
2 minutes into this and I'm guessing this is gonna be a god can do what he wants approach. Whatever this guy was he's no scientist now. Basically trying to scatter gun and shoehorn his beliefs into an impossible model for astronomy. So god created light in transit from things that never existed so that we might see this light and think that they did exist and the universe is really old ,but then gives us a book that says it is not that old I actually made it all up.Really!!..Pretty sad to see a waste of what was once a good mind. Pascals wager in full view here I feel.
Genesis states that God created "the stars" during "creation week". But it doesnt really delve any deeper than that on the matter. There are many times when the Bible states things that can be easily misconstrued and/or uses expressions to illustrate a point, I believe this may be one of those circumstances. WHY could the description of God creating "the stars" not simply be a reference to the other planets in OUR solar system???? They ARE in fact stars to us! And if that is the case, it immediately solves the mystery of how stars can exist many millions of light years away. Personally I think it is the epitome of arrogance to think that WE are the center of the Universe. Besides, if it took God a week to create our world, wouldn't it stand to reason that the rest of the entire UNIVERSE may take him just a little longer than a single day?? We are clearly insects in the grand scheme of things. I don't know about 13.8 billion years, although I do know that secularists are often wrong about many things. But I do NOT have a problem with considering that God himself has been around far longer than OUR world has. Yes the Bible indicates that OUR WORLD is roughly 6000 years old. Im fine with that. But give God a little more credit, I am convinced that HE has been around creating worlds far longer than that. And the stars in the sky testify to it.
Day: we must use context to infer what time the speaker is talking about, so it's similar to phrases like long time ago and some time ago. Heavens:. Denotes multiple?
@lieslceleste3395 yet still described in a way we can understand. Moses wouldn't understand what a galaxy is....or a vapour canopy. But would have understood what water was.
We know that we originate with God, but the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one.(1John 5:19) The church learned from those angels.... I know that after my going-away oppressive wolves will enter in among you and will not treat the flock his tenderness.(Acts 20:29,30)
@@Ray-wl3oy Jde 1:6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.
As far as the Big bang theory I'm told that energy can either be created or destroyed. So one day nothing exploded the Big bang and everything was created doesn't make sense
pretty good of "god" to write all this down and pass it on to whom ever scribbled that compendium of books now colloquially known as the bible. making sure that nothing got garbled up in time and translation of course
Why do you keep posting the same videos over & over again ? This one is one of the most embarrassing of the lot. The rubbish this guy comes out with to try to make the age of the Universe fit into the creationist story is absolutely comical !!! I wonder if he really believes what he's saying or is he just protecting his creationist job ?
@@rossrosco4544 Hi Ross, Next time you see a ship go over the so called horizon get out the zoom lens. And I could ask you for a globe proof. Please no fake NASA images.
@@ronvandam1712 Why do flat earthers use that pointless analogy ? I do astronomy & live on the south coast of Australia. I see ships sail over the horizon every day & have watched them disappear through my telescope. Why do you think Lighthouses are built high on cliffs & are tall ? Why do you think Radar towers are on the tops of ships & even this does not give them enough protection so they use AEWACS planes with radar to see over the curve That stands for Airborne Early Warning and Control. Check out a photographer called Dazza the cameraman, he has lots of videos on youtube showing ships sail over the curve using a Nikon P1000. Do you know how Geodetic Surveying works ? You have a highly accurate tool is used to measure both elevations & triangular areas. When they measure point to point, they always get a zenith angle of more than 180 degrees. To explain this, on a flat earth, if 2 points were looking at eachother, regardless of elevation, the sum of the 2 angles would always be 180 degrees. Even if one person is looking up at 5 degrees, the other is looking down at 95 degrees. When these measurements are taken every day by surveyors, IT ALWAYS comes to more than 180. When they triangulate between 3 points, the internal angles of the triangles ALWAYS add up to more than 180 degrees as well. This ONLY applies with spherical geometry. Would you like say 5 more proofs that are measurable & repeatable ?
@@rossrosco4544 we must be neighbours. When I see a ship go out of site with my eyes then see the whole ship with lenses its prove that its flat. It eventually disappears because of perspective and the atmosphere. We must live on dif earths and nothing is going to change so lets just leave it shall we. Have a good day.
@@ronvandam1712 Are you blind ? As well as stupid ? Every ship in the history of humanity disappears from the bottom up. The sun rises from the top down & sets from the bottom up. How brainless are you idiots ?
As far as the Big bang theory I'm told that energy can either be created or destroyed. So one day nothing exploded the Big bang and everything was created doesn't make sense
Sometime ago I wrote a note in my Bible where it talks about the waters above (see CMB). You are the only other person I know of who’s made that connection. Great lecture!
Danny Faulkner was once a guest in my home when he spoke at Calvin College now a University. Welcome to TH-cam, Danny!!!
Did he ask for seconds? loll
@@iamcedricpowell8051 Danny Faulkner = GLOBE GOBBLER
I agree with Mr Faulkner on most things though I am a little concerned with his interpretation of Paul’s usage of ‘third heaven’ as being a concession to the secular cosmologies of its time. Firstly Paul was writing to Christians. Secondly it’s in the New Testament so The Holy Spirit inspired the usage of this distinctive phrase. Moreover this is the same kind of argument that is currently popular with Christian anti-Creationists who dismiss the creation narrative as scientifically inaccurate and written in concession to the incorrect secular cosmology of its first readers
This is the comment I was looking for. Hearing him make that argument disappointed me.
There is no NASA space, only the levels of the heavens that we can’t go too but they keep trying…!
Ezekiel 1 22 has a vision of heaven and God’s throne above an Icy expanse.
If we as mere mortals can create a rocket ship by manipulating the ground beneath our feet, how can one be so arrogant to say that somewhere in this universe that there isn't someone smarter than us that created us?
Because there is no NASA universe and this man worships his education which indoctrinated him and lied to him for his field of esteem of the heady patting each other on the head! Fools, the heady and scripture says so!
The earth is flat and he’s never tested if it’s flat or not, rather spin into colluded topics to shutdown facts and thought.
Thankyou for addressing the possibility of Earth being at or close to the centre.
Job 38:14 The earth takes shape like clay under a seal; its features stand out like those of a garment.
How do you get a spinning ball in outer space out of this verse? When you press clay down as a seal, how does it form a ball or globe??
Also, when Joshua commanded the Sun and Moon to stand still for a day, how did he get the extra Sun if the Earth was still spinning?
Job 38:6 What holds up the pillars that support the earth? Who laid the cornerstone of the world? How many NASA photos of Earth from 'space' show pillars attached?
1 Chronicles 16:30: "He has fixed the earth firm, immovable."
The big mystery... why do most Christians still believe the earth is a globe?
@@ivanbotha5165 Because they have been indoctrinated to believe what so called 'science' says, and that they have not read their Bible.
Satan has manipulated the truth from the first word. His plan... discredit the word of God so everybody thinks it's just a fairy tale. If people don't believe what is said about creation how would they believe anything else written in the word... I believe the word above any so called science. If the word says the sun moon and stars are INSIDE the firmament and they move not the earth, then it's true. Trying to disprove these facts is despicable.
"Like clay under a seal" does not mean flat but rather it has bumps that have been molded. Like a garment, the final shape is not given, it may be flat, cylindrical or globe-ish. Could the maker of the whole universe have A) a second bright light in the sky or B) move the Sun as we know it or C) stop the Earth spinning without causing a huge disaster? Yes. Which did He use.... I don't know, maybe something I haven't thought of. Pillars? or support? Did the word pillars get inserted because of the "science" of the time? What words exactly were the original text? What do pilings look like? From the original pilings to today's? And what "earth" are they supporting? The earth they are supporting is the surface, not the globe. So these supports would be inside the globe not "under" it. I am not sure which translation you used for 1 Chronicles 16:30, (which is poetry BTW) but anything I read uses "the world" rather than "the earth", Considering the parts of the verse you did not quote, it would seem to be talking about the political world of the time. Referring to the David's power base that God had given him. This is common usage meaning all the people someone knew about. (all the Earth, All the world). Very hard to take any one English translation and extrapolate some grand theory from it. The speaker in the video is pretty careful to call what he says a theory and is saying that so far it makes sense with both scripture and what we can see physically. The main message of Job was that we as people do not really understand the "whole thing". Most honest scientists will generally agree that "the more you know, the more you know you don't know."
@@lenwhatever4187 No "seal" that i have ever seen has been spherical. Bumps? sure, i.e mountains, hills, etc. Cleary, the Bible states Earth has a foundation, like a house or building . And nowhere can you find in the Bible Earth is spinning, moving, wobbling. Joshua commanded the Sun, Moon to stand still, why not command Earth to stand still? Seems to me this is pretty clear that everything above is moving around, a stationary Earth plane, and how would Joshua get that extra" sunlight" to fight the battle if he had commanded the Sun n Moon to stand still yet "Earth" was still spinning? Something to think about.
Awesome lecture. Thank you. As a carpenter, I create my design one step at a time, but my steps are the process of my creation. Try not to overthink. I have two hands. I can do more than one thing at a time : )
We're in a simulation, we can do a million things at once if we're brains allows us to. Hope that makes sense.
Chuck Missler (digital simulation)
Universe from Latin meaning "a single spoken sentence",
Shhhhh.. They Will Want To Call It Something More Politically Correct.
[Wow, this comment section is more of a mess than usual for this channel.]
I'm fairly happy with the scriptural interpretation to end up with "waters above" meaning there's water beyond the edge of the universe. I'm just not sure that the expected absorption/emission artifacts from that water actually show up in the CMB. Everywhere I look, the claim is that the CMB is a perfectly smooth black-body spectrum. Although, there is a _strong_ incentive/assumption that it is so. I wouldn't be surprised that the cleanup process washes out any features as anomalies. Dr. Faulkner also claims that it might be in a part of the spectrum we haven't probed yet. As I can't even _find_ anything other than a perfectly smooth illustration of the spectrum, I have no clue where the actual limits of the sampling are, or whether there could be emission/absorption artifacts that get smoothed out in the usual processing.
If this theory is true (or at least closer to the truth), then the Hubble relation combined with the upper and lower bounds of liquid water temperature should give us an estimate of the distance to the edge of the universe, no? And any variation of the redshift and water features of the spectrum could tell us how far we are from the edge in certain directions, allowing us to find the "center". It's a fascinating conjecture, I'm just a bit skeptical about the necessary predictions as they seem rather outrageous given the current data.
Anybody know someplace I can find raw (or mostly unprocessed?) CMB data? I'd like to investigate this.
There is no edge to get to, no NASA space for they can’t get there and every astronaut leaks that occasionally along with bill nye and the rest of NASA goons! We are in a locked realm system and they’ve never been to the moon, never been to space because it’s blocked by the firmament in scripture and the waters above where the stars are within. Christian scientists are fools on this topic
I have read that Halton Arp also postulated a reason for the CMB based on black body radiation. His reasoning was not water but rather all the combined matter in the universe.
Amazing lecture. Some points:
1. One time the speaker critics the greek formation of Paul, other time he argues that the Bible says or not something about pre-flood rain. Once the Epistles are in the Bible, so Paul and Moses were guided by the Holy Spirit. Or you embrace everything or not.
2. I'm tired to see evangelic brothers blame the greeks for everything. Once Pythagoras had most of his instructions with the Hebrews, the Cosmology of Plato, Aristotle, etc. is the same that we have nowadays, at least in the core.
God Bless and the Holy Spirit guide us to the Truth!
I think it talks about a mist that watered the garden and the oxygen had to of been richer or compressed to keep those huge animals alive and the huge insects aloft
@Michael Fritsche you started going wrong by being. Ha
@Michael Fritsche there was a canopy of of water or ice (most probably ice because of the low temperature that high in space) about ten miles above the earth 's surface which created a much denser atmosphere.
@Michael Fritsche I explained it perfectly.
@Michael Fritsche the Bible.
@Michael Fritsche bless your soul because where your heading your going to need it.
OK, I have been enjoying this lecture, but I have one major beef; when he said the Bible didn't really say it had not rained before the flood. Wrong; it's right there in Chapter 2, verses 5 & 6. From verse 5; for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. (6) But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
It plainly states it right there. I don't know how he could make such a statement. I really hope he corrects it (at 30 mark right now), if he does I'll post a correction.
I was somewhat confused by that assertion as well. The only way I can make sense of it is that the passage doesn't explicitly prohibit rain _after_ the creation of man. The claims that God had not sent rain and that the ground was watered by mist are a parenthetical phrase: "When no bush of the field was yet in the land and no small plant of the field had yet sprung up -- [above note about rain and mist] -- then the Lord God formed the man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature". The comment about the lack of rain is a sidenote, seemingly in order to explain the lack of crops when man was created. Given that the next verse is God planting the garden of Eden, and a few verses later the garden is explicitly watered by a massive river, the crucial role of irrigation of some type to produce the edible plants is emphasized.
As it's a parenthetical clause, giving reason for the state of the world on day 6, perhaps it's a bit of a stretch to insist that it describes the state of Earth for the 1500 or so years until the flood?
Also, how long would it take for the water cycle to produce rain after day 2? God just separated the waters below from the waters above. To get rain, we need to start getting water back into the near side of the expanse as vapor, condensing to produce clouds, and enough cloud and dust buildup to trigger precipitation over the land. That could take a few days, so God might have been keeping the day 3 plants happy and healthy with a daily mist until the atmosphere He designed started operating at full capacity and took care of worldwide irrigation. It's speculation, and it'd take some work to confirm, but on the face it doesn't seem unreasonable to me, though I'm no meteorolgist.
Tim H. : The vegetation could have been kept watered by dew. All that would be required for dew to form would be the heat of the sun during the day followed by the cooling effects of the moon at night as that causes condensation to form upon the earth's surface.
.
@@ATinyPillow Your username gives me pause to even reply, but I shall.
I'm not saying there wasn't a mist, the text clearly states there was. I was noodling through how that agrees with there being rain before the flood.
Tim H. : It does say in Genesis that God caused rain to fall once He had created man and placed him in the garden. The flood occurred long after that.
btw, the username is my son's account that I share with him.
Anyway, have a nice evening.
.
He’s a heady who esteems his own headiness taught by the prior heady who were liars!
Encouraging to see you address the so called "Axis of Evil". For a bible believing Christian who believes in intelligent design this is a courageous stance as many have been reticent to admit the possibility of Geocentricity due to a stated concern they may bring ridicule upon the Christian scientific community. 39 minutes into video.
@R-Calling regarding your question about starlight reaching earth at the point of creation, there might be a different answer, but the first and obvious one would be that the stars and their fruit (light) were created fully mature, just like everything else recorded in the creation passages.
Adam was never a baby, the trees were full grown, the chicken had to come before the egg or else nobody would've sat on it, and he had food to eat from plants only days from the land appearing.
The beams of starlight were already there.
Or they are really close, like God said
@@P.H.888 I don't think he is prepared for that answer
@@NicholasChorba I think you're missing a lot, especially the scientific. We live in a simulation, it's basically like a computer. Think about it closely, your life means a lot to the Creator, and your soul means nothing, to the devils
@@donnybarns I'm responding to the guy's comment in the live chat. The stream cut off before I could finish. It was the typical "if the earth is only 6000 years old, then why can we see starlight that takes millions of years to arrive" type of a question.
@@donnybarns if you are going to go with the "we're in a simulation" answer to him, then maybe that's another answer, and I'm not comfortable commenting on that, because I don't know that it is true. It sounds like the philosophical argument of Plato's cave blown up to massive proportions.
A great lecture, I enjoyed it. I wish I can help you with the pronunciation of the word : RAQIA
DR. Carl Baugh has teachings on The Canopy Model.
But the Septuagint was a translation made by Hebrew scholars sent to Alexandria. You would expect them to have a Hebrew mindset not Greek. The same would apply to St Paul.
There's a lot of imponderable presuppositions in this content.
The ‘canopy’ model may be anathema within the scientific community but I don’t feel that the model has largely been rejected within layman circles, as it’s still well taught and received by many believers including myself.
1. The water can’t come from it because it increases atmospheric pressure on the ground
2. If it was in the troposphere, it would fall out as rain
3. If it was above the atmosphere then there’s no way to make it fall down, so it should still be there
There is no reason to believe it
The word SHAMAIM in Hebrew should be read as two words: SHAM YAM - which means Overthere (SHAM) Sea (YAM). This explains why no single for the "word" SHAMIM as no word like that, it is two words, which explains OVER THERE THERE is WATER, that simple.
Wow! Awesome!!
Awful.
In the Beginning- Time
God- Power
Created- Motion
the Heaven- Space
and Earth- Matter
The five fundamentals of existence in the first verse.
"The five fundamentals of existence in the first verse"
"God- Power"
No.
"Created- Motion"
Also no.
Using eastern (non-pagan) thinking, we might want to consider a micro-expanse and a macro-expanse; rather than horse racing them against each other. Both have their reflections in the Hebrew text, and I've not yet heard a good reason that we must choose between the two concepts. The atmosphere of earth would bound the micro-expanse---the limits of the known universe which contain the heavenly bodies would bound the macro-expanse. QED.
I’m made of dust, I’m not going to question how he made the rest.
That’s just your Earth suit unless you’re not born Again From Above
I don't think that is a healthy perspective. It's great to recognize that God made you out of the dust of the Earth, and to have a humble attitude about it, but it also says come let us reason together. Your comment kinda detracts from this teaching, it implies an attitude that it doesn't matter. And it really does.
Pretty simple, the Creator gave us everything we have. And he only works through it, meaning if she said grass was blue it would turn blue instantly
Your physical body yes, but The spirit is The same as God , & children ask their Daddy question after question!
That’s our nature! 🙏🏻
name here why do you call Almighty He & then change His gender?
If you drop a bible it will hit the ground, it tells you about gravity, and that is about as much use it is.
The snow globe effect
explained fairly well by Kent hovind is interesting
LOL
There has never been nothing since before "everything" God is
Does the canopy model have something to do with the Heliosphere? sounds like a similar model.
No. The heliosphere is just a geometric extent of the sun’s solar wind at the point where interstellar wind matches it
I'm not taken in by this guy!
......."Time" is very elusive to define......
If the SUN was created on the fourth day…then what was the sphere ball earth orbiting for days 1-3 in your Freemason heliocentric model!?
Who said anything about Freemasonry? Stop tossing red herrings.
Who said it had to orbit anything?
Is there any means of contacting Dr. Faulkner?
Where did the water come from when God opened the windows of heaven if it was on the edge of the universe?
To me it raise more questions than it answers.
The Bible states that a mist came up out of the ground and watered.
There would be no significance to a rainbow if they had been before, that would also imply that God lied. A rainbow is God's covenant with the earth that He will never flood it again, so if rainbows had appeared before the flood, saying He would never flood the earth again, then God lied, pure and simple.
I think you missed the point of the Bible that thank you missed the verses in the Bible that said the waters came from the great deep, think of Earth how do you say popcorn basically.
@@donnybarns The Bible states that God opened the fountains of the deep AND the windows of heaven.
I was replying in connection to where the waters from heaven came from. Please read the biblical account again and you will see it was you who missed it, not I.
Haven't got a clue about popcorn, can you show me where that is in the Bible?
@@donnybarns Forgot the 40 days & nights of rain?
@Carl Jones .... You know where else God made even greater COVENANT with people? or should I say NEW COVENANT? Yes at the focal point in history, at the CRUCIFIXION of Jesus... So totally based on your logic I can effectively conclude that God "lied" since nailing people to cross was in use couple hundreds of years (if not thousand) old practice, waaayyy before Jesus, yup, there you go, as rainbow as the cross ... ehhm ..." I have set MY RAINBOW in the clouds, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and the earth" (Genesis 7)... I have set MY CROSS >> "the blood of the everlasting covenant" (Mark 14:24)
@@noitnettaattention God has made a number of covenants with man. Yes the cross is the greatest covenant He has ever made with man, sealing it with His very own blood, but great as it was, it does not negate any other covenant He has made, God has never nor will He ever lie. You seem to confuse God promising He would never judge the earth again by a flood, with His redemptive work on the cross.
Crucifixion was not a method of execution carried out by Jews, but it was the death suffered by Jesus and predicted by God.
Could you explain your hostility in your reply to me, as I am at a loss?
I am glad you are changing your mind and researching to back up the change. I learned a lot from this lecture. I am still displeased with the sloppy nature of your ufo talk, but glad to see you are trying here.
Don't be uninformed about Pierre Marie Robitaille's critique of the CMB and questionable Planck claims.
We're not here to judge, many false prophets have made Marion's off of us it's not even our right to call film out. Let the Creator judge Doom here on Earth.
@@donnybarns What?? He said microwaves can leak in to the receiver locally. Where do you see a prophet?
I propose that heaven means elevated place, which includes continents above oceanic crust, air above continents, and finally space.
The beginning is before the first day, so by the first day all the celestial bodies existed. The darkness was on rhe sea floor not the sea surface. In the first three days a smooth with water covering it transformed into an earth with continents and ocean basins causing dry land to appear.
As the ocean basins were opening up the elevated place of the continents were in the midst of the water. Then finally after dry land appeared the continents divided the fresh water from the salt water.
The then there was light was when the oceans which covered the continents became shallow enough for the preexisting sun to break through. Sometimes things that are lists are interpreted as sequences.
The fourth day is a day that the purpose and authorship of the celestial bodies was announced, not the day they were created and placed. And it was so is not and then it became so. Therfore the Bible cannot run up against any time periods established by isotope ratios or the time required for light to come from the edge of the universe.
Funny how you try to make fun of the Septuagint translators for "explaining the Bible using the cosmology of their day" yet that's EXACTLY what you're doing.
I thought it was let there be light that sounds like it could be a big bang
I think this is tenth time I have watched this, or something like that.
KJV - "Gen 1:6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters."
First God calls there to be light. (light is matter/energy ) and then God divides light from darkness ( darkness is the absence of matter / energy ). Light is day and darkness is night ( he starts time on the first day with the evening and morning )
At this point light and darkness are in the midst of the waters. God divides the waters to create a firmament called Heaven ( an expanse or space ) This is the space needed for the universe to begin along with the medium and the rules for creation, in my opinion.
We find balance in the God's creation. For a universe to be built, building blocks need to be made, light. I can only assume what the dividing is but it seems to follow Newton's wonderful observation in that for every action there is an equal and or opposite reaction. God seems to be setting the pattern of the physical relationships that we observe at every level in this moment. ( Yin and Yang - seems the most descript ) God creates time with the division and sets the pattern.
I do not truly understand the importance of water to the Lord. It is the power of the Blood, and it surrounds everything. It was divided at the beginning to create Heaven. Water is so vastly important and I know there is no way for me to properly describe this but in so many ways we are all connected in water right now. Why is that and what does it mean? I don't know yet and maybe I am not supposed to know. It just feels important.
I find it so hard to try and fit the world's ideas in the God's words. This explanation makes the most sense to me and fortunately it appears to follow scripture, maybe.
Your premier notification gets lost. Too far ahead.
what do you mean, when? You're still a kid.
Now, the problem with long ages evo is, it can't compete with science. Proof of that is how they mock, sneer, whine and shriek hate. Any psychologist will tell you, the louder they get, the less they have. for a thinker, that means long-ages is a fairy tale and long-agers are mad because we deny then Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.
Stay a kid. Your enthusiasm makes any subject interesting because you share that excitement. Walk in beauty!
Flavius Josephus aka Matityahu Ben Yosef the Jewish historian says that the firmament was comparable to crystal. No doubt the ancients believed in a geocentric system.
Also interesting point is that the word in Hebrew for water is mayeem. It is also a plural with no singular form and the word for heaven came from the word water. Mayeem: waters, water. Shamayeem: heavens, heaven.
Nasa is a sketchy organization to say the least but even man must do his own research. We must never laugh at geocentric believers because we never know, someday in the future we may find out that we have been mislead.
Water always takes the path of least resistance and always finds its level. Hence sea level. It's interesting to go against the grain and see how people are holding onto spheres.
Isaiah says in chapter 40 that the earth he saw in his vision was a hhug: circle..later in chapter he uses the Hebrew word for globe,
durr: Sphere.
Modern day Jews call it Kadurah which literally means: as a sphere, ball. This is a modern adaption of terminology.
There are lots of this in the bible that don't line up with the copernican model. It's very suspect that everything copernicus theorized, nasa confirmed. I think I will stay very open minded on this topic and not be dogmatic because one day we may be finding new facts the just happen to be old.
Deducing from the word of God is missing the point of its purpose.
I believe & trust God.
Heliocentrism is a complete fraud; the same goes for it's first faked proof: Bradley's explanation for the star's aberration; it cannot be the yearly motion of the Earth around the Sun because it is 3 months late and the small axis dissipears at the ecliptic. It proves that it is a (solar) yearly motion of the universe around the Earth and that the light from the stars comes to Earth in 3 months ... not millions of years.
But worse, if the Earth was orbiting the Sun with an axis of about 23.4 degrees, it would be impossible for two observers on the same longitudinal meridian to observe simultaneously the passage of the Sun at the same time every day of the year. For example, an observer at Gdansk, Poland can observe the passage of the Sun almost simultaneously with an observer at the Cap, South Africa, everyday of the year.
Pavel Pulukchu : fyi, the oldest book of Isaiah ever found "the Great Isaiah Scroll" found amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls states that the earth is a disc.
.
The statement of stars being created in Genesis 1 is a parenthetical statement. There is no reason to say that the Bible claims that the stars were made during the creation week. He created the sun and moon (BTW - He also created the stars).
Tracking God : In my Hebrew Bible it says that He created the stars/angels on creation day two. The book of Enoch says that the stars are angels and the planets are wandering stars.
.
ozowen : As you wish. Enoch is considered scripture even though it was removed from the bible, however 2 Timothy 3:16 states that "ALL scripture is inspired by God and useful in teaching, correcting". That would imply that the scripture contained in Enoch IS inspired by God and therefore also useful in teaching and correcting.
You really ought to ask yourself why Enoch and many other books were removed from the bible by the Romans in the third century in 325 via Constantine's council of Nicea.
Have a nice evening.
.
ozowen : There is no such thing as a Hebrew canon, it is the Roman canon which is why it was accepted by the Nicean Council. You do realize that the Council of Nicea was created by none other than Constantine, emperor of Rome, don't you?
As for the earth, the oldest known complete copy of the book of Isaiah, the "Great Isaiah Scroll" found amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls states that the earth is a disc. Please feel free to verify that fact at your leisure. Furthermore, a study of Isaiah in the Greek manuscripts also shows that Isaiah was not describing a ball shaped earth. While we're on this subject, the scriptures state multiple times that the earth is "fixed and immovable". Does spinning and hurtling through space sound remotely as "fixed and immovable" to you?
Or how about Job where it says "the earth takes shape as clay to the seal", go look at some clay or wax seals and see if any of them look anything like a globe. (spoiler alert - they don't).
Have a nice evening.
(btw, I happen to be a priest)
.
ozowen : How you ascertained that I'm am paranoid in any way from anything that I have said here is simply stunning and has no semblance of truth given that I made you aware that I am a priest and therefore am not paranoid in any way. You refer to it as exegesis as you have no other way to refute what I'm imparting to you. I'm also not surprised nor dismayed by your responses to me. In my humble opinion, you're simply another deceived soul as the bible has foretold of. Please excuse me for saying "have a nice EVENING" although it is simply a polite gesture that was in no way related to the fact that you say it is night where you are as anyone (besides yourself) would easily grasp. Seems that you're only seeking to argue, that's your unbridled ego talking. In closing I'll simply sum it up as I did earlier on and state "as you wish" with respect to whatever you wish to believe. In the age of information, remaining ignorant is a choice.
Have a nice NIGHT, I shall not be responding further to you.
.
@@ATinyPillow Or does it say that he made the sun and moon on the second day and as a separate phrase, "He made the stars also."? You have to connect those two statements to imply that they were made on the second day.
But there are other places in the Bible that indicate there were other places in the universe prior to the creation week.
I stopped listening to this man at 1:16 because at 1:14 he said "all right many Christians today accept the big bang." , WELL THEN NOT ME, I DON'T ACCEPT THE BIG BANG.
The same old in-group/out-group trope rearing its ugly head again. Such misguided teaching saddens me.
@Michael Fritsche that's how it's supposed to work. Mixing faith with science is always fraught with issues.
“Accept”
@@denismguitar1552 thanks Denis, yeah Wars started because of miscommunications LOL.
Totally agree, that explains why we see light from objects millions of light years away...awesome.
False, the light we observe from stars is only 3 months old, not millions or billions years old. This can be verified by the true geocentric explanation of the aberration of stars. The yearly motions of the stars describing an almost circle at the north star, becoming an ellipse with its smaller axis going smaller and smaller when the star is closer to the ecliptic and the small axis is nul when the star is on the ecliptic. And the full yearly motion of the eclipse reaches Earth in about 3 months, no matter which star you pick.
@@VeilleuxMarc not sure I understood, but thanks for sharing, I will investigate further.
@@VeilleuxMarc , You might sound like a genius to someone with an IQ of 65, but people of normal intelligence know it’s just gobbledegook.
I'm l disappointed that other people are using the wrong terminology, and you've given up using the correct term. If you don't want to spend your life arguing with them, fine. But we're partly in the mess we're in, because we cave to them and do it incorrectly also. Just to save the trouble.
Just do it the right way and say no, when they want us to tell them, there's 5 lights, when there's only 4. We need to learn to quit arguing with them and just do it the correct way and let them be damned. We need to learn, to tell them NO, and move on.
The waters above are clouds.
Proverbs 8:28,
Job26:8.
The first expanse is where the sun, moon ect are and the second is as
Proberbs 8:28 points out, between the oceans and the clouds, where the birds fly.
The water is on the other side of the solid firmament.😂
How this guy ever got a Ph.D in astronomy is the greatest mystery.
2 minutes into this and I'm guessing this is gonna be a god can do what he wants approach. Whatever this guy was he's no scientist now. Basically trying to scatter gun and shoehorn his beliefs into an impossible model for astronomy. So god created light in transit from things that never existed so that we might see this light and think that they did exist and the universe is really old ,but then gives us a book that says it is not that old I actually made it all up.Really!!..Pretty sad to see a waste of what was once a good mind. Pascals wager in full view here I feel.
Genesis states that God created "the stars" during "creation week". But it doesnt really delve any deeper than that on the matter. There are many times when the Bible states things that can be easily misconstrued and/or uses expressions to illustrate a point, I believe this may be one of those circumstances. WHY could the description of God creating "the stars" not simply be a reference to the other planets in OUR solar system???? They ARE in fact stars to us! And if that is the case, it immediately solves the mystery of how stars can exist many millions of light years away. Personally I think it is the epitome of arrogance to think that WE are the center of the Universe. Besides, if it took God a week to create our world, wouldn't it stand to reason that the rest of the entire UNIVERSE may take him just a little longer than a single day?? We are clearly insects in the grand scheme of things. I don't know about 13.8 billion years, although I do know that secularists are often wrong about many things. But I do NOT have a problem with considering that God himself has been around far longer than OUR world has. Yes the Bible indicates that OUR WORLD is roughly 6000 years old. Im fine with that. But give God a little more credit, I am convinced that HE has been around creating worlds far longer than that. And the stars in the sky testify to it.
Day: we must use context to infer what time the speaker is talking about, so it's similar to phrases like long time ago and some time ago.
Heavens:. Denotes multiple?
It’s a plural word
Genesis 1: 14...the stars shall be for signs...
Google, the Northern Cross, by Aquilla Fleetwood, youtube!
Writting came from God!
Bounded universe, water at the edge of the universe-sounds similar to Russ Humphrey’s model.
Surely, the word, shamayim is not plural, but dual.
no next
0:03 / 44:16
What Can the Bible Tell Us About Cosmology? Not a single thing.
I think the bible speaks for itself. Canopy model is what the text says.
No it doesn’t. It says the sun is in the expanse. Is the sun in our atmosphere?
@Cosmic Treason what? Is the sun in the sky? Yes. It is. Did you not know genesis was written from the writers viewpoint, I.e. on earth.
@@lepterfirefall it’s not in the atmosphere
@@lepterfirefall Genesis was given to Moses from god. It wasn’t from a human’s point of view. God should be a better cosmologist.
@lieslceleste3395 yet still described in a way we can understand. Moses wouldn't understand what a galaxy is....or a vapour canopy. But would have understood what water was.
No Christians I know except the Big Bang theory.
I'm a Christian, and I understand the Big Bang Theory. It's coming to us soon
, Then you must think all Christians are creationists.
@@davidgardner863 they are
@@yeshualionofjudah7107 , I’m Christian but not a creationist, meaning the Genesis type.
You should get out more.
the fallen Angels taught everything
Or did they give technology and act like gods which caused the flood?
We know that we originate with God, but the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one.(1John 5:19)
The church learned from those angels.... I know that after my going-away oppressive wolves will enter in among you and will not treat the flock his tenderness.(Acts 20:29,30)
Where's that in the Bible, Please show us
@@Ray-wl3oy Jde 1:6
And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.
As far as the Big bang theory I'm told that energy can either be created or destroyed. So one day nothing exploded the Big bang and everything was created doesn't make sense
The moment you attempted to delegitimize Paul's claim to be in the third heaven is the moment your presentation went downhill.
The bible belongs on the shelf with Odin, Zeus and the Kraken, and nowhere else.
pretty good of "god" to write all this down and pass it on to whom ever scribbled that compendium of books now colloquially known as the bible. making sure that nothing got garbled up in time and translation of course
Nothing has been “garbled up.” The Bible is true and reliable.
Why do you keep posting the same videos over & over again ? This one is one of the most embarrassing of the lot. The rubbish this guy comes out with to try to make the age of the Universe fit into the creationist story is absolutely comical !!! I wonder if he really believes what he's saying or is he just protecting his creationist job ?
Lots of prove of a flat earth. No prove of globe. Please use a concordance and fit the stars into your cosmology.
Would love to hear just one proof of a flat Earth ? Just one please !!!!
@@rossrosco4544 Hi Ross, Next time you see a ship go over the so called horizon get out the zoom lens. And I could ask you for a globe proof. Please no fake NASA images.
@@ronvandam1712 Why do flat earthers use that pointless analogy ? I do astronomy & live on the south coast of Australia. I see ships sail over the horizon every day & have watched them disappear through my telescope. Why do you think Lighthouses are built high on cliffs & are tall ? Why do you think Radar towers are on the tops of ships & even this does not give them enough protection so they use AEWACS planes with radar to see over the curve That stands for Airborne Early Warning and Control. Check out a photographer called Dazza the cameraman, he has lots of videos on youtube showing ships sail over the curve using a Nikon P1000.
Do you know how Geodetic Surveying works ? You have a highly accurate tool is used to measure both elevations & triangular areas. When they measure point to point, they always get a zenith angle of more than 180 degrees. To explain this, on a flat earth, if 2 points were looking at eachother, regardless of elevation, the sum of the 2 angles would always be 180 degrees. Even if one person is looking up at 5 degrees, the other is looking down at 95 degrees. When these measurements are taken every day by surveyors, IT ALWAYS comes to more than 180. When they triangulate between 3 points, the internal angles of the triangles ALWAYS add up to more than 180 degrees as well. This ONLY applies with spherical geometry.
Would you like say 5 more proofs that are measurable & repeatable ?
@@rossrosco4544 we must be neighbours. When I see a ship go out of site with my eyes then see the whole ship with lenses its prove that its flat. It eventually disappears because of perspective and the atmosphere. We must live on dif earths and nothing is going to change so lets just leave it shall we. Have a good day.
@@ronvandam1712 Are you blind ? As well as stupid ? Every ship in the history of humanity disappears from the bottom up. The sun rises from the top down & sets from the bottom up. How brainless are you idiots ?
As far as the Big bang theory I'm told that energy can either be created or destroyed. So one day nothing exploded the Big bang and everything was created doesn't make sense
That is not the model