In my view the problem is the fact that the millions of years fabrication has been push as fact so hard for so long that most people have no idea that it is in fact a fabrication, NOT fact. The truth is that we have all been sold a bill of goods for decades that in many instances is downright preposterous and far from the infallible wisdom that we have been led to believe. I am so grateful for the Creation scientists who are finally setting the record straight and getting the truth about these things out there for us to learn. May God bless them in their endeavors.
***beestoe993 finnaly "the Creation scientists reach the conclusion that those 6000 years was a fabrication and got everything straight that Creation of the earth was billions years ago and life after that, my congratulations for their discovery of the truth.***
"And there was evening, and there was morning the first day. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day." Yes, amen. If it were anywhere else in scripture there'd be no question!
***for God there are no time as for a SPIRIT time has no meaning, is irrelevant, reason why the writers not knowing it wrote that way, we have to know how to read in any language past or present language, even so you must go to school to learn the language you speak, read or write in order to be able to communicate.***
@@adelinomorte7421 The Bible is God's word, the writers of scripture were guided by Holy Spirit when writing the scriptures. Genesis is about creation on Earth so the days being 24 hrs long is correct.
@@technicianbis5250-ig1zd ***some one told you that, but how can you be sure? yes you can be sure, meditate, dig for the truth, study the atributs of God, let God speak to you to inspire you, only God can do it no body else, for me it was a life time search, but wen you get it, there are not anymore doubts , you know by yourself .***
I once heard someone say that Gid made man not a baby. He made man fully grown with wisdom knowledge, have you ever thought about Gods ability to create the universe with age also? I felt like that’s a fair statement.
Yes, that is an especially relevant consideration in the realm of starlight already being visible on earth for the majority of the stars in the universe, if one assumes that interpreting rainbows from an astral mass spectrometer delivers dependable distance conclusions for millions and billions of light years. I'm not at all persuaded of such color interpretations given that they cannot be confirmed by any other means of determination in deep space. Not to mention the incongruent discrepancies in assumed distance results that can occur between two or more stars of the same galaxy, which should instead put them in galaxy of far different distances. There is also the hypothetical possibility that before emitted light reflects off of a mirror its speed from source to whatever material it reaches is instant. Because the only way the speed of light has ever been measured is via reflective mechanized processes. So all that to say, despite there being no such thing as a newborn star ever observed as newborn, it may not be in fact necessary for God to have dragged forth billions of light years of emitted starlight travel to make those we can see now visible to us from the beginning. There are abundant reasons not to consider astral spectrometry a settled dependable science.
@Feraeond while I personally don't buy into the theory of instant light reflection, there are a slew of other possible natural reasons why the light would be here outside of its expected age. There are a lot of forces that could account for the starlight, and when physicists look back, they can point to a time and place (essentially) when matter exploded into existence (through God's actions). Who is to say that God didn't create the stars close to earth, and they continued to cascade light backwards as they accelerated away? Or that the passage of time was different for these other parts of the universe than the earths, since space and time are relative? These are just some of my personal musings, I don't have enough of a science background to know whether that is possible or not, but frankly there are plenty of alternative possibilities out there.
@aaronadamson7463 Amen, brother. Openness to what God reveals and letting it remain an unknown for whatever cannot thus far be established as fact is the key to understanding science properly. By the way, even experiments supposedly proving time relative are making assumptions when their molecular clocks sent through the supercollider alter electron exchange rates based on how fast they are going. That could just as easily be a response of molecular activity to speed like the excitement of molecules under heat. It doesn't necessarily mean time flows differently for faster matter than slower matter. Throughout history mankind has presented alternative myths about universal origins and cause/effect concepts. In every era our arrogance thought we reached the correct conclusions compared to predecessors. But the only religio-historical doctrine that has surpassed any conflicting claims that arose to discredit its truth was the scriptures of the Bible. Which is why you don't see atheists so ardently railing against any other opposing doctrine. This is the only one that knows better.
We have the same problem with the Red sea crossing. Instead of accepting that the parting of the sea was a MIRACLE, we tend to look for a natural explanation. Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. With God ANYTHING is possible. We either fully believe it or fully reject it outright. There is no compromise whatsoever.😊
@@byrondickens Now that you mention it, I just love the following metaphor: Matthew 13:30 KJV Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn. ## I wonder how an insane person would interpret this?
Then you believe incorrectly...common around here. Understand that this is not a discussion, it's like discussing whether "2+2=4". There is no "authority" in scripture when it comes to science. You should marvel at all we have learned from science over the past 2k years. Imagine what we'll have learned if we're around another billion years...
As a pastor you should know that the Hebrew word for day is defined as a period of time with a set beginning and a set end. Day and days are the same Hebrew word. Prove me wrong.
I agree, the 6 days were not millions of years long because Moses intended it to be a model for the work week, not a scientific statement about the age of the earth.
I used to believe all that as a student of natural sciences … but since being born again through faith in the blood of Jesus Christ when I see that millions of years stuff now I just tune it out. I know it’s nonsense that’s being regurgitated. It was amazing visiting the Grand Canyon a couple of years ago with my kids and knowing the Biblical account while seeing all these park service signs talking about how many billions of years ago each layer is from and all. It was pretty ridiculous seeing all that but I was glad my kids saw through that nonsense too.
@@richardbarry04553: Do you know that Christian scientist Dr. Andrew Snelling of ICR already confirmed the presence of more than 500 million years of nuclear decay in the Grand Canyon that you visited? They’ve known this for the last 19 years.
@@richardbarry04553 : Do you know that Christian scientist Dr. Andrew Snelling of ICR already confirmed the presence of more than 500 million years of nuclear decay in the Grand Canyon that you visited? They've known this for the last 19 years.
@@richardbarry04553 : Do you know that Christian scientists already confirmed the presence of more than 500 million years of nuclear decay in the Grand Canyon you visited. They've known this for 19 years.
A 6,000-year-old earth doesn't bother me. I try and filter all truth from the Bible. I've always leaned more on history than science in my interest in my study's at school. Ty for the work you do Ken Ham! I've been able to defend the Faith so much better after finding your ministry. May God continue to bless you and you work. Trying to teach my daughter Answers in Genisis has been a huge help in raising her to both understand biblical truth and authority.
If the church would return to remembering the Sabbath each week. It may do a better job of remembering what it points back to (the creation week) and what it points to (his coming kingdom).
Too bad many people are over when the Sabbath was whether it was Saturday or Sunday. To me, I just say WHO CARES?! If someone only has Tuesday off in the week, let them find a way to fellowship with other believers on Tuesday. That is your Sabbath. Sheesh, I hate it when everyone gets caught up on when is the Sabbath rather than the why do we have a Sabbath?
For Christ has already accomplished the purpose for which the law was given as a result all who believe in him are made right with God Romans 10 for New Living Translation
I love how passionate this man is about the infallibility of God's WORD. If our esteemed theologians are touting their unbelief of the creation story, no wonder so many of the younger generations don't believe the very words that God dictated to Moses, letter by letter. My heart is grieved at the very thought. I'm so grateful for the foundation in God's Word, given to me as a child. You all can spout your pseudo-intellectual arguments, but it's a child-like faith that God seeks, not some lofty intellectual, scientific mumbo-jumbo. The real debate is a matter of the heart, and that determines your eternal destiny.
You can be passionate about anything....and still be dead wrong. That's what Ham is, dead wrong. None of what he's saying is true. It's really shameful.
chachadodds5860 ***God is a Spirit, do you accept it? do you know what a spirit is? Well, I assume you know, for a spirit the time and space has no meaning, so it can be anywhere and at anytime even inside of us. You as a human being know the battles we endure due to our soul where the Spirit of God may reside and our material body accept or reject. That acceptance or rejection is what religions are all about, a believe is a personal affair in between any individual and his creator, GOD. Different religions can dialog, cooperate and join, at mutual consent but not impose as it is trespassing, we all have to be aware of our individual rights, our freedom to accept or reject the spirit of God, wen It is within us, it is harmonic with our creator, it is very good.***
@@adelinomorte7421 Adelino, you're just inventing the notion of "spirit". Nobody has really seen anything of the sort. And if you say "well, it's a personal affair", then you're not adding anything interesting to the conversation. All you're saying is "we're free to make up whatever we want...so there". Pointless.
@@Feraeond Yeah, I don't think anybody is going to see any kind of god (or son) any time soon...You have a better chance of seeing Harvey, a 6ft white rabbit.
@@johnelliott5859key word “word of god,” not the Bible. The word of god is the commands the Lord gives to us. While the Bible does contain the word of god, it also contains the history you are pertaining to. You are attempting to discredit the Bible due to its unbiased nature, which is inherently flawed.
@@johnelliott5859 of whom? The Canaanites? The Canaanites were in no way shape or form innocent by any means. God has the full right to do so, as we are his subjects. We are naught but ants to him. Also, god has a higher judgement system than us, and knows more than us. Who is to say that God did not have a perfectly sound reason for the order?
Our pastor showed us this in confirmation class, goodness, ten years ago. I truly believe God used this to cultivate my love His word and help me see it as the ultimate authority.
With all due respect to Dr. Ham, still waiting for his response to the issue of millions of cubic miles of flood basalts on top of coal layers in Siberia. Not to mention the Deccan Traps, and Saharan basalts. How can those geologic features exist in a 3000 year time frame?? Gotta have an answer or a discussion.
Thanks for the clarity, Ken. Nobel Prize winner, George Wald, once indicated that there were only two possibilities for the origin of life on Earth: Biblical Creation and evolution. Since "spontaneous generation" was disproved 150 years ago, that leaves only Biblical Creation. We cannot accept that on philosophical grounds (personal beliefs) therefore we believe in spontaneous generation (evolution). (Not "objective" science!)
Great summary as always, Mr. Ham! Your message only becomes more vital as time goes along and I'm increasingly inclined to put Answers in Genesis as my sole beneficiary once I fall asleep. In response to the supposed gaps in New Testament genealogies, I'd like to mention that I did a deep dive into this a couple of months ago with a couple of other very scholarly Bible zealots because this is arguably the most apparent theological contradiction in scripture that has not been widely reconciled, and our digging surfaced some compelling evidence for the possibility that gaps/discrepancies between Matthew and Luke come down to Matthew mistranslating Mary's father as her husband, assuming they were both named Joseph. Hence the specified 14 generations from captivity in Babylon to Jesus only amounting to 13 by a simple count in the text when Joseph is translated as the husband rather than father like two different preserved Hebrew copies of Matthew from middle ages Italy record it. So either Matthew miscounted on the third set of 14 generations or there is an unlisted gap of one generation there. The fact that Luke's genealogy leads in a very different direction for the Joseph of that list, much more clearly specified as the supposed father of Jesus, leads me toward the likelihood that Matthew's Joseph is indeed Mary's father, not husband. This would then have the thematic nature of Matthew describing Jesus as the rightful divine King being offset by His human ancestry through the mother's line, and Luke's theme of Jesus as a human being offset by ancestry of His royal lineage from David through His adoptive father's line. It was such a fascinating deep dive and if anyone is interested, I'd be happy to discuss it further.
Okay here's the deal, I worked in Public Health Microbiology for almost 40 years, and have been involved in The Laity for about 20. A scientist is willing to admit that they are wrong, if research proves another way of thinking. And now the BIG question; if somehow, someone could conclusively prove that you were wrong, would you Ken Ham admit it. Because if you won't, then you are not peddling "truth" my friend.
1 Timothy 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: 21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.
What about the literal three days and three nights between the crucifixion and the resurrection? So many, including Ariel Ministries, are still insisting on a Friday crucifixion and saying any part of a day counts as a full day. Do we take God's word on this matter as fact or do we bend it to fit tradition? What is your view?
I heard this somewhere by Voddie Bauchman. The way the Jews measured days back then was basically if the sun had not dipped below the horizon, it still counts as 1 day. Any length of time between dusk and dawn was 1 night. It could be 4 AM to us and still be considered night because the sun hadn't come up yet. Basically, we today measure days by 24 hour periods. The Jews back then looked up at the sun and said "yep, still day time."
I never understood WHY....Nobody listens when in Exodus 20.. God, with His own voice, describes His creation as being 6 literal days as he hallows the 7th day a Holy day of rest. If you want conformation...Go read what He God verbally spoke with His voice. Then try and tell God He's a liar. 😮
@hongotedesco8931 Why do you consider that a shame? People who don't believe the Bible would miss out on such a reliable sense of meaning in life if there were no Bible adherents to bash.
I do as well. But I won't study Genesis the same way I do the Psalms or Revelation or the Gospels. Different genres require different interpretations. But all Scripture is God breathed. (2 Timothy 3:16).
Mr Ham, your comment about the Gap Theory suggested you don't believe in it, but what you failed to do was explain why you discredit it. Please explain in Genesis chapter 1 verse 1 to verse 2 how the Earth became empty and void?? We know that God would not have created the Earth in that way... So if God didn't do it, who did? And how? And why?......
@@Feraeond I didn't explain why because the answer is obvious if you understand God's attributes. God is absolutely perfect, which would mean he would not ever create anything that is imperfect. Whatever comes for from the hand of God is going to perform exactly what God created it to perform. No where in Scripture does the Bible ever suggest that God created anything with flaws....hence the statements later on in Genesis where the Bible says God created this and that and "It was good"... Anyone who would believe that a perfect God would create something that is imperfect only means you don't understand the nature of who he is.
@dorahngarman3188 If you are referring to the Creator as the Bible describes Him, there is no jump to be made from the fact that God is perfect to the idea that He would never make something imperfect. Perfection is not synonymous with flawlessness scripturally, but rather something more akin to completeness in a process. For example, the king of Tyre, presumably Satan, is described as the signet of perfection until unrighteousness was found in him, but Jesus is described as made perfect through suffering. Paul encourages the Philippians that he is sure He who began a good work in them will be faithful to perfect it until the day of His appearing. So just because God is complete from eternity doesn't automatically entail that what He makes will also be that way in finite space. But the major snuck premise of your claim is that the newly formed earth was flawed while a void ball of water and whatever else it may have contained upon first materializing. By whose definition of flawed? God did not call the formless earth good at the time, but does that mean it was flawed or can we still allow that God had it at precisely the state He wanted at that point in its process? What about the delineation between good and very good in later creation? If it was all perfect because it was all from His hand then how could any of it be more good than good? Thank you for taking the time to discuss with me, brother. I trust we both love God with a great fervor and are doing our best to understand Him more perfectly with every day He has given us to grow. Blessings and peace to you always. Ezekiel 28:12 [12] “Son of man, raise a lamentation over the king of Tyre, and say to him, Thus says the Lord GOD: “You were the signet of perfection, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty. Hebrews 2:10 [10] For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the founder of their salvation perfect through suffering. Philippians 1:6 [6] For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus.
The problem is that rationality is valued today more than belief. Science encourages rationality, not belief. And science has been incredibly successful since the enlightenment. Religion refuses the rational when it conflicts with their belief. That is not the way to truth.
One cannot reject the reality of the expanding universe. But no one can explain creation apart from God's word. When God spoke, "Let there be light." everything began. Whether we call it a Big Bang or any other description the evidence we see is that everything came from nothing. God spoke and it began. Recorded human history gets very murky past about 4,000 years so either we accept the Biblical account or we believe the latest "discoveries" of science, which have been wrong many times. I appreciate your devotion to The Word!
So many Christians don't take the word of God seriously! So many believe in the gap theory and millions of years and theoretical evolutionists but if we look at all these concerns through the lense of the Bible instead of the other way round we will know the truth!! Praying
I love it! I love it! I love it! I will always stick with the truth of God's word. And a literal six days of creation. On the seventh day He rested. Praise God.
i personally believe there are two books in the bible that Satan hates the most GENISIS AND APOCALIPSE; Genisis because it describes his condemnation, and Apocalipse because it describes his destruction, and these Mercenaries who calls themselves pastors but in fact are wolves in sheeps clothing are deceiving the naive. Shalom.
Ken, you open the video by stating what you BELIEVE to be six literal earth days for all creation, not what you KNOW to be. Question.., The Bible describes that in the beginning the earth was formless and void. How can there be a 24 hour earth rotation period, when something is empty and has yet to be formed into any shape? How were all the elements that God created, placed in order to make a 24 hour rotation that we now currently observe? Also scripture mentions the heavens prior to the formless and empty earth, is this an indication that the heavens were set in place first? Could it possibly be that the first two days of creation were longer than you BELIEVE them to be? What human can answer the multitude of questions that can be brought forward from the Genesis account with such assertion as to claim certainty over it's chronological order. Respectfully submitted. Please respond, I would like to hear your opinion, thank you
This appears to be a sane and logical argument. GOOD LUCK WITH GETTING AN ANSWER FROM KEN. I wonder how much money this guy has made from his platforms.
Why are there dinosaur bones and other evidence of the earth being millions/billions of years old if God made EVERYTHING in 6 days 6 thousand years ago?? So why did God put those million year old bones there 6 thousand years ago?That is dishonest and deceitful but God is perfect and CANNOT deceive us as Ham might have us believe. I have actuallly heard a minister try to explain this away by claiming that God was testing our faith. So he tests our faith by lying to us and deceiving us? Then according to Ham, you have to believe this deceit to be a Christian? Really? Not done by my perfect God! Remember, the Bible was translated from ancient writings by English scholars, not Americans. In 1644, Day and age would mean someting different in old England . Look up apologetics Christian teachings.
The word translated as day comes from the Hebrew word “Yom” which means period, it’s not a specific length of time, it’s used in the Old Testament on number of occasions for varying periods of time, but most often for a day. However I always wonder why it would take God so long, it could have been femto-seconds, with the evening & morning indicating a definite beginning and end.
Evening to morning is not 24s it’s just night. Also the sun was not there till later in creation history. So what is a day? My comment on creation clearly implies that the power of God is boundless. The whole of scripture, hangs or falls on the very first verse, which could be considered a chapter title “in the begging God created the Heavens and the Earth”. So what is your complaint.
@@robertjohnsontaylor3187 It isn't evening to morning, it is evening and morning. "Evening and Morning" is a colloquialism for the 24hr day. You can appeal to the miraculous, at the expense of what the Bible clearly says. Popular science always acts like it was there when the earth began to exist. But whatever they affirm contradict what the Bible plainly says. We accept the Bible or live in dillusion. BTW, the text doesn't necessarily say the sun wasn't there before the earth was created though. The word used there is "asah" which can also mean assign. In a sense, the sun's light wasn't used until the 4th day. That's where I differ from Ken Ham.
Guys, I just wanna say, believe it or not, you can believe in old earth and still be bible believing christian. The view of old earth is completely compatible with the bible because the creation story in genesis is classified as semi-poetic historical narrative meaning that it is not a clear cut retelling of the past but rather a poetic means of telling something that happened in the past. That claim he made at the beginning was very sly because he implied that if we dont take the word of God literally, we are adding to Gods perfect word but I would argue that he isn't respecting the authors literary style which was inspired by the holy spirit. And believe me, Id love to believe in young earth because it just feels so much cooler to believe in a God who made the earth in 6 days but there is so much evidence for evolution over billions of years, it doesnt disagree with scripture, and it doesnt undermine that God made all this, simply using this mechanism of evolution over a long time.
Romans 5:12-14 Death in Adam, Life in Christ [12] Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned-[13] for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. [14] Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come. If billions of years of death and suffering before sin was in the world is not controverting fundamental theology of scripture, then what would qualify in your book?
I would like to challenge you to separate yourself from the sayings of liberal theologians inventing claims about literary styles in order to tell you what is true or not in scripture. Also examine that abundance of evidence for evolution you claim exists for yourself, not just because the labcoat consensus cult says it exists. Look into the radiometric dating assumptions using superposition and relative age theory as their baselines that were already decided back in the 1800's before any of these dating theories had the technology to test them. It is all smoke and mirrors to persuade you that they know better than you ever could and therefore you should just take their word for it. That is what any cult of falsehood relies upon to keep its following.
Dear Mr. Ham, you clearly say that nothing may be added to God's word. But why do you add that creation is 6 thousand years old? It is not stated anywhere in the Bible that this is the case, only people have concluded this from adding up the ages of generations. In line 3 of Genesis 1 the 6 day creation begins, but in line 1 God created the heaven and the earth and there no time period is indicated. Unfortunately I have never had a clear answer to this.
It’s not even until day 4 that the sun moon and stars are NOW designated to serve as time markers to mark days seasons and years . And if you look at the text closely you will see that the greater light that separates day from night also was what separated light from darkness on day 1.
I can understand unbelievers telling us the earth is millions of years old but when true Christians start telling us this too then I would say that either they are not true Christians or they don't know or believe what their Bible's teach?
YES AGREED but that is the whole point of what Ken was trying to say for example there are parts of scripture that are meant to be taken literally and also parts that were not but I don't believe there is anything in the early chapters of Genesis that is not meant to be taken literally
@@jameslowry1 : The creation narrative is literal in the sense that Moses' intention was to provide a model for the work-week. He didn't write it that way so we can extrapolate earth's age. Do you believe a serpent literally spoke to Eve? That's what Moses literally wrote.
It was not a serpent but the Devil that was speaking to eve although what the serpent looked like and whether or not it had the power of speech pre fall we are not told because it could have been and YES I do take the scripture literally most of the time and make no apology for that even if you think I am a fool for doing so because the only parts of scripture I don't take literally are the parts that are clear from the context that are not meant to be taken literally and I don't have a problem with that approach even if you do?
Perhaps we simply take from the Bible only what we are supposed to. Christ came not to unite us all but to divide us. This is sobering. I came finally and fully to the faith at 57yrs old. Keep your mind and heart open and may God come to save us all. We may not believe in God… He may not believe in us. We die as individuals - fully alone - ever thought why this is?
So that explains that the earth was created in 6 days as we know them. But I'm unfamiliar with the argument that explains the millions of years theory. Was it the great flood? Is there a video that explains why people think there was millions of years?
Pastor Allen Nolan provides a strong case that God did in fact create the sun, moon and stars....and that is what it states in the original text. He uses bother proper translation of the text, and he uses an example from scripture to back up his claim.
The reason why the majority of church leaders, pastors, apologists, seminary professors don't take a stand on six literal days is not due to fallibility of scriptures or some taboo subject to avoid. Genesis obviously is an important book because it details the beginning of the universe, God as creator and the fall of man. But the quandary of exactly how old the six days of creation will not save anyone. The gospel saves. And pastors in particular are going to center their sermons around the gospel message. The real purpose of the six-day creation account was to let the Israelites know after they left Egypt who the real God of universe was (Yahweh) as well as for the generations to come to learn about.
@Disciple793 this seems to be making the same argument that only the gospels matter, because they lay out the message of salvation. Nothing else matters except salvation. But if that is the case, why did God give us so much more than just Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John? I would argue that the integrity of all Scripture should be defended, because if we can just pick and choose what parts of Scripture we like and through out the parts of Scripture we don't like, then why should we trust any of it?
@@aaronadamson7463 Your missing the point of my post. Of course, the rest of Scripture is important. Ken Ham was asking the question as to why church leaders, pastors, professors rarely speak on the six-day creation account. And I gave my answer. Sermons for the most part are going to centered around the gospel message. But with Ken Ham the same can be said. What are the majority of his presentations about? The age of the universe. Sorry for the confusion. Now I have edited my poste for clarification. Happy Easter!
Happy Easter brothers! Christ and His redemptive work is indisputably the central theme of all of earth's history. The work that saved us from the death brought about by Adam when he sinned and death came by that sin. To misunderstand that concept as something merely poetic or literary for the sake of feeling closer to God, as opposed to being the literal reality, is where the outlook of most of the church now is in regard to scripture. And looking at the history of the decades since New Evangelicalism first arose in the 1950's and ceded the territory of ancient history to a labcoat consensus cult, it is easy to trace the submission if scripture interpretation to the claims of secular institutions back to that. If whatever secular experts claim about ancient history is proven science and whatever the Bible contradicts it with is misinterpretation, then it should be no surprise when the resurrection of Christ itself is scoffed at as impossible because the only supernatural thing that ever happened was the spontaneous and immediate explosion of the universe into existence from some unknown cause which for sure wasn't a supernatural entity. Pastors in the hope of saving more people have been bowing to whatever seculars claim about science even when it is unverifiable historical claims, and letting fester unhindered the boast that the Bible is not to be taken seriously any time it describes something other than naturalistic material processes. So how much longer will we keep pounding away at the same drum of the basic gospel message absent the relevance of its backstory being taken seriously before we accept that we were wrong as a church to bring nature worship back into tolerance adulterating the body of Christ? May your joy become more complete with each passing day closer to when He appears again!
Many thanks Ken, I was aware of this decades ago and I’m very grateful to you for broadcasting this information again. Do people understand that the Hebrew day is divided into 4 equal parts of 6 hours equaling 12 hours of Darkness and 12 hours of Daylight ergo - Evening and Morning, the 1st day. I have always followed AIG for decades. God Bless All of You. English Phil 🇺🇸👀🙏
The usage of day in Genesis 2, "...in the day that..." is actually confirming contrast to its different usage in chapter one. Chapter 2's usage is an indeterminate amount of time like "in my grandmother's day" and chapter one's usage is a literal day just like wherever used similarly in the rest of the Bible. Moses knew how to specify a literal day as well as a nonliteral day.
@@scienceandbibleresearch Lol. Moses didn’t exist. These two creation myths are by the Priestly source and the Jahwest source. Feel free to google it and you’ll see that I’m right.
@@phaxad How is that related at all? What kind of analogy is that? I think his point is that because galaxies are billions of light years away, they are billions of years old, meaning the universe must obviously be at least billions of years old.
There are a couple of theories but the question is really irrelevant since we weren't there. Nowhere does it say that GOD is limited by space, time and matter. Why not just accept that when it says He created the stars they were created with visible light from earth? The problem with Christians today is that they have no foundation of the framework of Scripture. For example, in Genesis 1-2 the Bible creates a biblical worldview whether we fully understand it or not isn't as important as understanding it exists. Creation was a literal 24 hours we see this in Exodus 20 8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it. Second, even if the day was a longer period of time the maximum would be 1 day =1000 years. See in Genesis 2 it says 15 Then the Lord God took [d]the man and put him in the garden of Eden to tend and keep it. 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.” Now we know Adam ate, so did he die in the subsequent 24 hour period? No. So was GOD a liar? No. 5 So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died. Adam never lived to the next "day" past year 1000 2 Peter 3: 8 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. So from year 1- year 930 Adam lived (almost to the end of Day 1) Abraham lived about year 2000 (end of Day 2), David year 3000 (end of Day 3). The Destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple (70 AD year 4000 end of Day 4) the year 2070-2075 (depending on who you talk to) year 6000 (end of Day 6) +1000 years the reign of Jesus, aka the Messianic age, aka the Millennial Kingdom. Early Christian writings: Barnabas, AD First Century “Therefore, children, in six days, or in six thousand years, all the prophecies will be fulfilled. Then it says, ‘He rested on the seventh day.’ This signifies at the Second Coming of our Lord Jesus, He will destroy the Antichrist, judge the ungodly, and change the sun, moon, and stars. Then He will truly rest during the Millennial reign, which is the seventh day.” Epistle of Barnabas 15:7-9 Commodianus, AD 240 “We will be immortal when the six thousand years are completed.” Against the Gods of the Heathens 35 “Resurrection of the body will be when six thousand years are completed, and after the one thousand years, the world will come to an end.” Against the Gods of the Heathens 80 Victorinus, AD 240 “Satan will be bound until the thousand years are finished; that is, after the sixth day.” Commentary on Revelation 20.1-3 Methodius, AD 290 “In the seventh millennium we will be immortal and truly celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.” Ten Virgins 9.1 We have biblical calendars found in the Dead Se Scroll caves. See my study here which is made for skeptics th-cam.com/video/3oCU2eQAJ0c/w-d-xo.html We even see Jews with Judiaism from the Old Testament see the biblical framework as 6000 year + 1000 years. www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/607585/jewish/Significance-of-the-year-6000.htm So we are in the biblical year 5,949 or so give or take 4 years. Now either 2020 was the last Jubilee before the end of the age or 2025 is the last Jubilee. Either way we are entering the last section of time on the biblical calendar. Now Jesus reduces the timeframe of His return in Matthew 24, to about 2050 AD at the latest because if He waits to the year 2075AD or year 6000 we would have already caused our own self-extinction. Matthew 24:21-22. Now in this last section of time (2024-2050) there are over 500 prophecies predicted to come to pass. We are seeing many already on the horix\zon. So by understanding the biblical framework and that these prophesies are on the horizon at the specific time in history they were to occur, it allows us to see the truth of the past, even if we can't understand everything about it. At least we can have a framework in how it might have happened. I hope this helps. Take care.
@@mbfrommb3699 How do you know the bible is correct, you weren't there when it was written. How do you know God exists, you've never seen him. How do you know the world existed 100 years ago? You weren't there. See how idiotic that argument is? Hearing Ken say "How do you know, you weren't there" in a video, among a lot of other crazy ideas is what proved to me that Christianity is nothing more than a fairy tale like Santa and the Tooth Fairy.
I don't, know of anyone saying million years but 6000 years as a day in our time equals 1000 years in God's time so when God says he created the earth in 6 days that actually means 6000 years in our time and a 1000 years of peace for life on earth to grow
I believe God created the earth in six literal 24-hour "days" but not necessarily in a strictly chronological order back-to-back, God initiated and completed acts of creation in six 24-hour periods as scriptures say, but with significant time gaps or intervals between each creative act possibly spanning millions or billions of years, which may help explain various scientific evidences like the fossil records, radiometric dating etc.
Here is a mathematical, logical argument I've just thought of, today. It never entered my mind before. Let's hypothesise the creation account for each day as 1000 years or 1 million years. So 6 days of 1000 years would be 6000 years. Then on the 7th day, God rested, which was 1000 years. But God created Adam and Eve on the 6th day (6th period of 1000 years, say the last day of that period). Then, on the "8th day" (period of 1000 years), Adam and Eve would be at least minimum of 1002 years old after God rested for 1000 years. But later in Genesis 5, it says Adam lived for 930 years. And Seth lived for 912 years and so on. Do we now not take those numbers literally? If we take the age of Adam, Seth, Enosh as literal (930, 912 and 905), then Adam should've lived through the God's rest day on the 7th day as 1 day or at most as 100 years. Even 1 day as 100 years isn't a plausible argument, it's because Adam had Seth when he was 130 and Adam and Eve had Cain and Abel before Seth. So Adam and Eve would've been younger than 130 years old. The Bible also says Adam and Eve sinned before they had any children, So Adam and Eve would've been even younger than 100 years old or something. Adam couldn't have roamed around the earth or Eden on the 7th day as 1000 years or 1 million or 1 billion years before the fall. The key here is that God rested on the 7th day. God doesn't need resting, does he? That day is there to give us a real timeline that there was only 1 day gap after God created Adam and Eve and as a pattern for the rhythm of life with 7 days a week. So the only plausible explanation of the creation account is literally one day at a time. Otherwise, the later account in Genesis wouldn't make any sense or be nullified.
@@swamprat22 I'm not telling you that God is wrong, just that you don't NEED to stick to a litteral interpretation of Genesis! God didn't say in Genesis "take this description as litteral".
Honest question here...if God made Adam as an adult (he obviously wasn't a child who can't take care of himself) is there a possibility that God created the universe as a 2 million year old universe?
Sure, but to be correct, you'd say "a 13.8B year old looking universe" since that's what we observe. Or you could also say "god created everything 5 seconds ago: humans of every age with fake memories, fake fossils, etc". See where that gets you? Nowhere...
The James Webb telescope by the same logic of observation now suggests the universe being four times that old. Similar to how DNA sequencing of humans and their supposed closest ancestor now shows only about 85% similarity, not 98%. And by current evolutionary models the assumed time required to make that random leap would be about 69 billion years. Gotta keep up with the science as it develops, not stick with dogmatic numbers!
@@Feraeond And? That's just science at work. We change/correct things as we get new data/evidence. Although I don't know what you're referring to when you say "that random leap".
Man it is so nice and enjoyable to find someone who actually preaches-teaches the Word of God based on the actual Word! What a great, creative idea 🙄😂. And I love all the videos I have watched of yours and am subscribed to the youtube channel. But I do have a question. And Im being 100% honest, sincere and humble by asking it. I fully agree that so much brainwashing secular ideology, that is totally not scriptural, has been allowed into the church teachings and philosophy that have greatly damaged the church and its following. Wouldn't it be fair to add to this list an Earth along with 8 other planets circling the sun, a neverending, expanding universe full of infinite planets, galaxies...etc.? I understand that the Bible doesn't list every single detail of creation but I would think that God would have mentioned something relating to it? Like how God clearly states that He made TWO greater lights which He placed in the firmament, one to rule the day and one to rule the night. He did NOT say He created 1 great light to rule the day and that also bounces its light off another object to rule the night. Again, I am not asking this to be controversial. I just really believe in truly following the Bible and not adding to or take away from its Word. And I firmly believe, based on scripture, logic and common sense, that the lies and brainwashing go much further and deeper than most want to accept or believe. Anyways, thank you for ALL you do sir in spreading the Truth of the Word and our Lord. God bless you.
Can anyone tell me how long the spirit of God was hovering over the face of the Waters in Genesis 1:2? Hovering implies that there’s a wave length. A wave length requires amplitude and hertz frequency. Who can say whether the spirit of God was hovering for half of a second or 6 trillion years?
Couldn’t have hovered long enough for the star’s light to reach the Earth? Are the stars parts of the heavens? Seems like stars could mean heavens. People don’t go to this heaven, or that heaven, or that heaven. That particular heaven, with God, the father seems like it would be singular.
@@PLSpinalthe text clearly specifies where the darkness is. It is on the face of the waters,not the entire universe. The atmosphere was too thick for light to penetrate to the surface. Job 38:4-11 tells us when God laid the foundations of the earth it was wrapped in thick clouds.
One topic I can’t get over are dinosaurs. On day 6 God created man and land animals (dinosaurs). But it’s not possible that dinosaurs lived with modern human beings. They faced extinction millions of years ago. From what I’ve heard, the Bible also claims that the earth is 6000 years old but that has been disproven greatly by radiometric dating. I just don’t understand how this is all true. Someone please enlighten me
In six days God renewed the Earth after Lucifer rebelled with his fallen angels and hurled asteroids throughout all the universe including a massive asteroid towards Earth that caused the extinction of the dinosaurs. “And darkest was on the face of the deep.”
The same hermeneutic disallows Jesus being resurrected as the Bible depicts. All three issues necessary to make resurrection after 3 days require 'day' to be understood in the 3 ways it is used in the first versus of the Bible. (the period not darkness, and 1 rotation, and light). This solves the issue of Jesus being in the tomb for a little over 24 hours and it being called 3 days. Then there are the issues with Paleo Hebrew and the semantic range... making it more like a pre-incarnate gospel rhema.
Ok now what about fossils? We’ve found other things besides fossils that have been dated millions of years old. And I think the reason they don’t press on this is because age of the universe or the world has nothing to do with your salvation and following Christ. If it does someone please correct me.
This is not a hill (of doctrine) to fight and die on. Your salvation depends on Jesus, not Moses' metaphors used to tell pre-scientific people the story of creation.
Fossils and other real things are about reality. Genesis was written by some primitive people, who swore with their hand on the phallus and it reflects their level of understanding. At that time people had no idea about the fact that the Sun gives us light, they didn't know what the stars were, they didn't know what the Sun and the Moon were... Let's stop pretending that we are idiots....
There are no fossils that can date older than a theoretical 100k years due to the half-life cycle of carbon dating reaching an undetectable depletion level.
@ancataut7891 They didn't know the sun gives light? That's awfully presumptuous to denigrate the intellectual potential of humans possessing far fresher genes than the mutated and depleted pool of the current time. The only advantage we have over them is the technological and psychological advancements made thanks to a progression of record-keeping and passed on knowledge from what was discovered prior. A simple glance at the effects of inbreeding on mental deficiency and disease prevalence indicates a far more capable time of faculties for the human species prior to gene pool depletion.
The most amazing thing is the pyramids. They say there stone moved there by something. The Bible teaches the Egyptians had the Hebrew slaves make bricks. Don't say how big them bricks were. That's how they made them .
I just left a church where the pastors would not say that the world was created in 6 days. I had been going there for years I was just convicted that they claim the Bible is the word of God but disregard it when they don’t like what it says. How can they teach this is beyond me. How can you claim to be Christian but not believe the word of God.
It's just about interpretation. Hermeneutics is a complex topic, especially for books written 2k years ago. Not to mention the fact that it's not the word of god, it's the word of man, many men in fact; mostly anonymous. And by no means should one use the bible as a science textbook...it isn't.
@@hongotedesco8931 where the Bible is not clear interpretation is a fair discussion. Where the Bible is very clear it is not a question of interpretation. The Bible is very clear that God created in 6 days. This is obviously true. No one would ever question this if they didn’t think that science says something else. The fact that you should believe God above what men say is absolute. The further fact that science has no way of measuring age and radiometric dates are based on pure assumption make questioning Gods word even more foolish.
@@hongotedesco8931 the Bible is 66 books written by 40 men over thousands of years with a message that comes from beyond time. It is the word of God, and denying this is to choose to spend eternity in punishment.
@@beefsupreme4671 Sorry, but no. I understand the bible is very clear "that God created in 6 days", and it's wrong. It's obviously false. And it's obviously false if you have any common sense at all; it's just a story that ancient people made up. Sheesh.
@@hongotedesco8931 what is the obvious story is millions and billions of years. The only evidence for vast ages is the belief of people that were not there.
Hi, hope you don’t mind me asking, but what do you think regarding Einstein’s Relativity? - A proven theory,.. ( atomic clocks, GPS, moon times zones, gravity etc). It’s generally true, yet people talk as if your going against God’s word for mentioning it. I don’t know why this is, because one could almost believe relativity without evolution, (at a pinch, or maybe just some evolution of the planets, ( Rolling Spheres). 3:48
The Hebrew word for "die" there more literally translates as "dying die" in English. Just as Adam died spiritually as soon as he had disobeyed, yet the physical death was delayed, so anyone accepting Christ's redemption from that curse is made alive immediately in their spirit but with delay in the redemption of the body. John 5:24 [24] Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life. Romans 8:23 [23] And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. 1 Corinthians 15:22 [22] For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. 1 Corinthians 15:53-55 [53] For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality. [54] When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written: “Death is swallowed up in victory.” [55] “O death, where is your victory? O death, where is your sting?”
There are two Hebrew words for death used in a row for the occasion of Genesis 2:17. "Mowd tamut" more literally translates to "dying die" or "assuredly die" depending on different translation takes. So that is where the notion of an immediate spiritual death and gradual physical death is sourced.
Whoever eats from the forbidden tree will surely die on that day. Adam indeed did at 930 proving that the days were indeed a thousand years. It days in the first book.
The usage of day in Genesis 2, "...in the day that..." is actually confirming contrast to its different usage in chapter one. Chapter 2's usage is an indeterminate amount of time like "in my grandmother's day" and chapter one's usage is a literal day just like wherever used similarly in the rest of the Bible. Moses knew how to specify a literal day as well as a nonliteral day.
Ken Ham gets everything correct except he doesn’t believe in the Biblical flat stationary Earth with an overhead firmament truth as expounded in Genesis Chapter 1.
Ken! A deep study of the Holy Scriptures reveal clearly that Gen CHP 1 does not talk about 24 hour days. Also, Gen 1:1 tells us that the earth is not 6000 years old. The minimum time per day is provided, but there is room for longer periods. This in no way means that the atheistic viewpoints need to be accepted. However, we should strictly go by the Bible.
Correct . How long are the days in Genesis is an interpretation debate. In Hebrew the definition for day has 4 different time lengths. I hold to an old earth view and in no way embrace any evolution. It’s always the YEC who drag in evolution. How old the earth is , is a science debate because the Bible simply does not say how old the earth is.
@@Terrylb285 I believe in a global flood, but I'm an extreme fundamentalist and find all churches in error. The Earth's age is undefined in scripture, not this 6000 year claim of some. We are even told that this is kind of an eternity in human terms. The 6 terra-forming days have a minimum per day of 7000 years (6000+ alpha)while their max also remains somewhat unknown(n/able)😏
@@Terrylb285 terra-forming six days. Paul tells that the 7th day hasn't finished yet. Since we should include Christ's thousand year reign in that cacl, the minimum given per Tday is 7000 years. There is nothing in Scripture indicating whether this is true or if each day is much longer. My own preferred length is 42,000 years per day. This is not supported by Scripture, but is my preference. My choice has to do with the Earth's axis rotation relative the galaxy.
@@Grandliseur Wouldn't it make sense for the creative week to total 49000 years? 1k years is a day to him so his week would be one "creative day". 7 of those equals 49k years. I'm curious how you arrived at the 42k years per day.
I dont even accept there was 6 days of creation so the whole debate of was 6 days or 6 millions years is irrelevant. There were no eyewitnesses to creation so i dont know how this would be known. We don't even know for sure who wrote Genesis but has been attributed to Moses.
I feel like Ken Ham is just about the only voice out there who continues to stand on God’s Word, to keep pointing us back to the accuracy and inerrancy of Scripture when it comes to the book of Genesis and Creation. What’s wrong with so many Christians today who aren’t getting it???
How about William Lane Craig, Sean Mcdowell, James White, Michael Brown, Ray Comfort, Mike Winger, John Macarthur, and Frank Turek just name a few. (Romans 12:6-8) "We have different gifts, according to the grace given to each of us ect...teaching, serving, prophesying, encouraging, leading." The purpose of Genesis answers the existential questions of life. Is there a God? Who created the universe? Who created mankind? What is sin? Doctrines of justification, atonement, depravity, wrath, grace and sovereignty are also addressed. The Israelites coming out of Egypt to whom Genesis was written to were not trying to figure out the age of the earth. They wanted to know is Yahweh true the God. No offense to Ken Ham. The Gospel saves. It is the foundation of Christianity. (1 Corinthians 15:17)
@Disciple793 sure, but if you can say that one part of the scripture is wrong, why should we trust any of it? If God indeed lied about how he created the earth in the very beginning, then why are we to believe Him when He says this is how you approach me, through my Son? It is paramount that we trust the Bible fully. But this shouldn't just be a blind faith either. Ken is equipping us to defend the faith against those who would subtly chip away at it.
@Disciple793 Aside from the observable sciences pointing to millions of years being the least likely of all historical posits, as of that alone is not enough reason to dismiss such unbiblical claims, the fundamentals of theology must also be reinterpreted regarding death and suffering. Romans 5:12-14 Death in Adam, Life in Christ [12] Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned-[13] for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. [14] Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come. If there were millions of years of death and suffering before Adam brought sin into the world and death through sin, then Jesus no longer deals with physical death as a negative consequence, only spiritual death. Ok then. Try telling anyone who lost a son or daughter to cancer that it is a natural aspect of what God called good in creating everything. And if the chaotic, tortured nature of evolutionary processes are all so good, why should we look forward to an afterlife which will not have any more physical death and suffering? Everyone knows in their soul that physical death and suffering are part of the curse, not part of what God called good from the start. So is it any wonder that atheists who start from an evolutionary position of origin scoff at the idea of a good God? I don't disagree that people who ignore or even accept evolutionary precepts can still believe and espouse the work of Jesus Christ. They just miss a significant aspect of what it is for and adulterate their faith just as Israel often did with Baal. A bonus consideration to challenge you with. Would Jesus have said God made Adam and Eve in the beginning if it is true that all of human history has been a sliver of time compared to all else that transpired since the actual beginning? Matthew 19:4-5 [4] He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, [5] and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?
- the word(s) in as too meaning in both the world(s) and that as one day :the description as in and of both -as has been written so in and of Genesis chapter 2 :and the worl d s as to u nderstanding the ages of the ear t (h)
Why would any religious person try to obtain confirmation and endorsement from science? How insecure are they? You can believe that god made the world in 6 days, or that there are unicorns, or that Harry Potter is quiddiching on a broom, I don't care. But don't imply that you are right, and that science is wrong.
According to Genesis 1, the plants on earth were created one day before the sun was created. However, the plant need the sun. They could live one day on their reserves before taking in the first sunlight, but they could not have lived millions of years waiting for that first ray of sun. It's as easy as that 👍
@@Robert-vh2cl You mean at first the plants could live in starlight? Actually, even the stars were created after the plants together with the sun. Not sure where that "light" came from while Earth was speeding through space without the sun to force it into orbit. Notably, on the first Sunday there was also a "night". The answer may be that the authors of this story did not know the first thing about anything
@@Terrylb285 That's a good point. However, the "light" that was created right away on Sunday may also have provided heat. More likely, it's just a nonsense story about Elohim doing things in the wrong order. Would he really have created bats on Thursday but mice and squirrels on Friday? He does not need evolution but would he not need practice before trying a bat?
@@erikt1713 I believe the sun was there on day 1 but light couldn’t penetrate to the surface of the deep. That’s where the text says the darkness was ,not the entire universe. Job 38:4-8 tell us when God laid the foundations of the earth it was wrapped in thick clouds.
God invented the term "a day". But God invented that word before mankind existed. Much, much later mankind invented the term " a day" as meaning 24 hours, or 1 revolution of the earth. So God's idea of a day is different to our idea of a day.
In my view the problem is the fact that the millions of years fabrication has been push as fact so hard for so long that most people have no idea that it is in fact a fabrication, NOT fact. The truth is that we have all been sold a bill of goods for decades that in many instances is downright preposterous and far from the infallible wisdom that we have been led to believe. I am so grateful for the Creation scientists who are finally setting the record straight and getting the truth about these things out there for us to learn. May God bless them in their endeavors.
***beestoe993 finnaly "the Creation scientists reach the conclusion that those 6000 years was a fabrication and got everything straight that Creation of the earth was billions years ago and life after that, my congratulations for their discovery of the truth.***
Absolutely!!
"And there was evening, and there was morning the first day. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day." Yes, amen. If it were anywhere else in scripture there'd be no question!
***for God there are no time as for a SPIRIT time has no meaning, is irrelevant, reason why the writers not knowing it wrote that way, we have to know how to read in any language past or present language, even so you must go to school to learn the language you speak, read or write in order to be able to communicate.***
@@adelinomorte7421
The Bible is God's word, the writers of scripture were guided by Holy Spirit when writing the scriptures. Genesis is about creation on Earth so the days being 24 hrs long is correct.
@@technicianbis5250-ig1zd ***some one told you that, but how can you be sure? yes you can be sure, meditate, dig for the truth, study the atributs of God, let God speak to you to inspire you, only God can do it no body else, for me it was a life time search, but wen you get it, there are not anymore doubts , you know by yourself .***
I once heard someone say that Gid made man not a baby. He made man fully grown with wisdom knowledge, have you ever thought about Gods ability to create the universe with age also? I felt like that’s a fair statement.
Ok, it's all fantasy. God did not create anything, because we have zero evidence for god.
Yes, that is an especially relevant consideration in the realm of starlight already being visible on earth for the majority of the stars in the universe, if one assumes that interpreting rainbows from an astral mass spectrometer delivers dependable distance conclusions for millions and billions of light years. I'm not at all persuaded of such color interpretations given that they cannot be confirmed by any other means of determination in deep space. Not to mention the incongruent discrepancies in assumed distance results that can occur between two or more stars of the same galaxy, which should instead put them in galaxy of far different distances.
There is also the hypothetical possibility that before emitted light reflects off of a mirror its speed from source to whatever material it reaches is instant. Because the only way the speed of light has ever been measured is via reflective mechanized processes.
So all that to say, despite there being no such thing as a newborn star ever observed as newborn, it may not be in fact necessary for God to have dragged forth billions of light years of emitted starlight travel to make those we can see now visible to us from the beginning. There are abundant reasons not to consider astral spectrometry a settled dependable science.
That's more than a fair statement- it actually contends that God, if likened to an artist is using a brush that paints matter and space-time!
@Feraeond while I personally don't buy into the theory of instant light reflection, there are a slew of other possible natural reasons why the light would be here outside of its expected age. There are a lot of forces that could account for the starlight, and when physicists look back, they can point to a time and place (essentially) when matter exploded into existence (through God's actions). Who is to say that God didn't create the stars close to earth, and they continued to cascade light backwards as they accelerated away? Or that the passage of time was different for these other parts of the universe than the earths, since space and time are relative? These are just some of my personal musings, I don't have enough of a science background to know whether that is possible or not, but frankly there are plenty of alternative possibilities out there.
@aaronadamson7463 Amen, brother. Openness to what God reveals and letting it remain an unknown for whatever cannot thus far be established as fact is the key to understanding science properly. By the way, even experiments supposedly proving time relative are making assumptions when their molecular clocks sent through the supercollider alter electron exchange rates based on how fast they are going. That could just as easily be a response of molecular activity to speed like the excitement of molecules under heat. It doesn't necessarily mean time flows differently for faster matter than slower matter. Throughout history mankind has presented alternative myths about universal origins and cause/effect concepts. In every era our arrogance thought we reached the correct conclusions compared to predecessors. But the only religio-historical doctrine that has surpassed any conflicting claims that arose to discredit its truth was the scriptures of the Bible. Which is why you don't see atheists so ardently railing against any other opposing doctrine. This is the only one that knows better.
It doesn’t get any better than this as far as an explanation on what the Bible says. Thank you, Ken.
I, so Agree.
We have the same problem with the Red sea crossing. Instead of accepting that the parting of the sea was a MIRACLE, we tend to look for a natural explanation.
Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
With God ANYTHING is possible. We either fully believe it or fully reject it outright. There is no compromise whatsoever.😊
Or, instead of accepting that the parting of the read sea was miracle, we can just say it was a made up story?
@@hongotedesco8931
Correct. As I have stated, we either believe it through faith or reject it as a fable.😊
Or a sane person could read it as metaphor and allegory....
@@byrondickens
Now that you mention it, I just love the following metaphor:
Matthew 13:30 KJV
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.
## I wonder how an insane person would interpret this?
*** so ! beleiving that way you never need to compromise right? oh!!! yes much easier that way hein!!! ***
If something just came from God speaking, He has no problem doing exactly what He says. 💯
I believe in six ordinary days of creation. I am a pastor who preaches from the authority of Scripture. Praise God for your faithfulness in ministry.
Then you believe incorrectly...common around here. Understand that this is not a discussion, it's like discussing whether "2+2=4". There is no "authority" in scripture when it comes to science. You should marvel at all we have learned from science over the past 2k years. Imagine what we'll have learned if we're around another billion years...
That’s degrading, just as calling 1 1st AllMightY Pure Living Spirit manually he or she is.
As a pastor you should know that the Hebrew word for day is defined as a period of time with a set beginning and a set end. Day and days are the same Hebrew word. Prove me wrong.
@@oldsalty8562 And the evening and morning were the ________ day
@@hongotedesco8931
What do you base your belief on?
I agree, the 6 days were not millions of years long because Moses intended it to be a model for the work week, not a scientific statement about the age of the earth.
I have seen them say millions of years ago, and i just stopped there, for they were calling God a liar to His face, and that i cannot accept. Shalom.
I used to believe all that as a student of natural sciences … but since being born again through faith in the blood of Jesus Christ when I see that millions of years stuff now I just tune it out. I know it’s nonsense that’s being regurgitated. It was amazing visiting the Grand Canyon a couple of years ago with my kids and knowing the Biblical account while seeing all these park service signs talking about how many billions of years ago each layer is from and all. It was pretty ridiculous seeing all that but I was glad my kids saw through that nonsense too.
Amen Friend..
@@richardbarry04553: Do you know that Christian scientist Dr. Andrew Snelling of ICR already confirmed the presence of more than 500 million years of nuclear decay in the Grand Canyon that you visited? They’ve known this for the last 19 years.
@@richardbarry04553 : Do you know that Christian scientist Dr. Andrew Snelling of ICR already confirmed the presence of more than 500 million years of nuclear decay in the Grand Canyon that you visited? They've known this for the last 19 years.
@@richardbarry04553 : Do you know that Christian scientists already confirmed the presence of more than 500 million years of nuclear decay in the Grand Canyon you visited. They've known this for 19 years.
A 6,000-year-old earth doesn't bother me. I try and filter all truth from the Bible. I've always leaned more on history than science in my interest in my study's at school.
Ty for the work you do Ken Ham! I've been able to defend the Faith so much better after finding your ministry. May God continue to bless you and you work.
Trying to teach my daughter Answers in Genisis has been a huge help in raising her to both understand biblical truth and authority.
Greetings dearly beloved in the name of Jesus Christ our Saviour and Lord Amen!
If the church would return to remembering the Sabbath each week. It may do a better job of remembering what it points back to (the creation week) and what it points to (his coming kingdom).
I rest on Jesus Christ, who also happened to break the sabbath (John 5:5-18)!
Mark 2:27: “And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath:”
Do you ever go out of your place on the Sabbath? Ever read Exodus 16?
Too bad many people are over when the Sabbath was whether it was Saturday or Sunday. To me, I just say WHO CARES?! If someone only has Tuesday off in the week, let them find a way to fellowship with other believers on Tuesday. That is your Sabbath.
Sheesh, I hate it when everyone gets caught up on when is the Sabbath rather than the why do we have a Sabbath?
For Christ has already accomplished the purpose for which the law was given as a result all who believe in him are made right with God Romans 10 for New Living Translation
When Jesus healed and raised the dead it was instantaneous. With God all things are possible!!!
👍❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️👍 six hearts for six days.
I like that, God Bless Friend.
I love how passionate this man is about the infallibility of God's WORD.
If our esteemed theologians are touting their unbelief of the creation story, no wonder so many of the younger generations don't believe the very words that God dictated to Moses, letter by letter.
My heart is grieved at the very thought. I'm so grateful for the foundation in God's Word, given to me as a child.
You all can spout your pseudo-intellectual arguments, but it's a child-like faith that God seeks, not some lofty intellectual, scientific mumbo-jumbo.
The real debate is a matter of the heart, and that determines your eternal destiny.
You can be passionate about anything....and still be dead wrong. That's what Ham is, dead wrong. None of what he's saying is true. It's really shameful.
chachadodds5860 ***God is a Spirit, do you accept it? do you know what a spirit is? Well, I assume you know, for a spirit the time and space has no meaning, so it can be anywhere and at anytime even inside of us. You as a human being know the battles we endure due to our soul where the Spirit of God may reside and our material body accept or reject. That acceptance or rejection is what religions are all about, a believe is a personal affair in between any individual and his creator, GOD. Different religions can dialog, cooperate and join, at mutual consent but not impose as it is trespassing, we all have to be aware of our individual rights, our freedom to accept or reject the spirit of God, wen It is within us, it is harmonic with our creator, it is very good.***
@@adelinomorte7421 Adelino, you're just inventing the notion of "spirit". Nobody has really seen anything of the sort. And if you say "well, it's a personal affair", then you're not adding anything interesting to the conversation. All you're saying is "we're free to make up whatever we want...so there". Pointless.
John 1:18
[18] No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known.
@@Feraeond Yeah, I don't think anybody is going to see any kind of god (or son) any time soon...You have a better chance of seeing Harvey, a 6ft white rabbit.
I choose to believe the Word of God in its entirety.
But do you follow it 100 percent?
Then you find genocide moral? Misogyny? Child sacrifice? Slavery? All actions that the god of the bible commands, condones and/or commits.
@@johnelliott5859key word “word of god,” not the Bible. The word of god is the commands the Lord gives to us. While the Bible does contain the word of god, it also contains the history you are pertaining to. You are attempting to discredit the Bible due to its unbiased nature, which is inherently flawed.
@@awesomedude906 did god command genocide? Seems like god's word to me.
@@johnelliott5859 of whom? The Canaanites? The Canaanites were in no way shape or form innocent by any means. God has the full right to do so, as we are his subjects. We are naught but ants to him. Also, god has a higher judgement system than us, and knows more than us. Who is to say that God did not have a perfectly sound reason for the order?
Our pastor showed us this in confirmation class, goodness, ten years ago. I truly believe God used this to cultivate my love His word and help me see it as the ultimate authority.
With all due respect to Dr. Ham, still waiting for his response to the issue of millions of cubic miles of flood basalts on top of coal layers in Siberia. Not to mention the Deccan Traps, and Saharan basalts. How can those geologic features exist in a 3000 year time frame?? Gotta have an answer or a discussion.
Thanks for the clarity, Ken. Nobel Prize winner, George Wald, once indicated that there were only two possibilities for the origin of life on Earth: Biblical Creation and evolution. Since "spontaneous generation" was disproved 150 years ago, that leaves only Biblical Creation. We cannot accept that on philosophical grounds (personal beliefs) therefore we believe in spontaneous generation (evolution). (Not "objective" science!)
Great summary as always, Mr. Ham! Your message only becomes more vital as time goes along and I'm increasingly inclined to put Answers in Genesis as my sole beneficiary once I fall asleep.
In response to the supposed gaps in New Testament genealogies, I'd like to mention that I did a deep dive into this a couple of months ago with a couple of other very scholarly Bible zealots because this is arguably the most apparent theological contradiction in scripture that has not been widely reconciled, and our digging surfaced some compelling evidence for the possibility that gaps/discrepancies between Matthew and Luke come down to Matthew mistranslating Mary's father as her husband, assuming they were both named Joseph. Hence the specified 14 generations from captivity in Babylon to Jesus only amounting to 13 by a simple count in the text when Joseph is translated as the husband rather than father like two different preserved Hebrew copies of Matthew from middle ages Italy record it. So either Matthew miscounted on the third set of 14 generations or there is an unlisted gap of one generation there. The fact that Luke's genealogy leads in a very different direction for the Joseph of that list, much more clearly specified as the supposed father of Jesus, leads me toward the likelihood that Matthew's Joseph is indeed Mary's father, not husband.
This would then have the thematic nature of Matthew describing Jesus as the rightful divine King being offset by His human ancestry through the mother's line, and Luke's theme of Jesus as a human being offset by ancestry of His royal lineage from David through His adoptive father's line. It was such a fascinating deep dive and if anyone is interested, I'd be happy to discuss it further.
Fantastic discussion of “day” (yom) and of Gen. 1!
Very important talk. Thanks for uploading!
Okay here's the deal, I worked in Public Health Microbiology for almost 40 years, and have been involved in The Laity for about 20. A scientist is willing to admit that they are wrong, if research proves another way of thinking. And now the BIG question; if somehow, someone could conclusively prove that you were wrong, would you Ken Ham admit it. Because if you won't, then you are not peddling "truth" my friend.
1 Timothy 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: 21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.
Amen Brother Ken !
📖 🌧 🌈 ✝️ 🕊
What about the literal three days and three nights between the crucifixion and the resurrection? So many, including Ariel Ministries, are still insisting on a Friday crucifixion and saying any part of a day counts as a full day. Do we take God's word on this matter as fact or do we bend it to fit tradition? What is your view?
I heard this somewhere by Voddie Bauchman. The way the Jews measured days back then was basically if the sun had not dipped below the horizon, it still counts as 1 day. Any length of time between dusk and dawn was 1 night. It could be 4 AM to us and still be considered night because the sun hadn't come up yet.
Basically, we today measure days by 24 hour periods. The Jews back then looked up at the sun and said "yep, still day time."
Where does it say 3 days and 3 nights?
I never understood WHY....Nobody listens when in Exodus 20.. God, with His own voice, describes His creation as being 6 literal days as he hallows the 7th day a Holy day of rest. If you want conformation...Go read what He God verbally spoke with His voice. Then try and tell God He's a liar. 😮
I believe every word of the Bible.
Now that's a darn shame...
@@hongotedesco8931Get behind us satan.
Me too.
@hongotedesco8931 Why do you consider that a shame? People who don't believe the Bible would miss out on such a reliable sense of meaning in life if there were no Bible adherents to bash.
I do as well. But I won't study Genesis the same way I do the Psalms or Revelation or the Gospels. Different genres require different interpretations. But all Scripture is God breathed.
(2 Timothy 3:16).
Mr Ham, your comment about the Gap Theory suggested you don't believe in it, but what you failed to do was explain why you discredit it. Please explain in Genesis chapter 1 verse 1 to verse 2 how the Earth became empty and void?? We know that God would not have created the Earth in that way... So if God didn't do it, who did? And how? And why?......
You yourself fail to explain why we know God wouldn't first make the earth void, to be fair.
@@Feraeond I didn't explain why because the answer is obvious if you understand God's attributes. God is absolutely perfect, which would mean he would not ever create anything that is imperfect. Whatever comes for from the hand of God is going to perform exactly what God created it to perform. No where in Scripture does the Bible ever suggest that God created anything with flaws....hence the statements later on in Genesis where the Bible says God created this and that and "It was good"... Anyone who would believe that a perfect God would create something that is imperfect only means you don't understand the nature of who he is.
@dorahngarman3188 If you are referring to the Creator as the Bible describes Him, there is no jump to be made from the fact that God is perfect to the idea that He would never make something imperfect. Perfection is not synonymous with flawlessness scripturally, but rather something more akin to completeness in a process. For example, the king of Tyre, presumably Satan, is described as the signet of perfection until unrighteousness was found in him, but Jesus is described as made perfect through suffering. Paul encourages the Philippians that he is sure He who began a good work in them will be faithful to perfect it until the day of His appearing.
So just because God is complete from eternity doesn't automatically entail that what He makes will also be that way in finite space. But the major snuck premise of your claim is that the newly formed earth was flawed while a void ball of water and whatever else it may have contained upon first materializing. By whose definition of flawed? God did not call the formless earth good at the time, but does that mean it was flawed or can we still allow that God had it at precisely the state He wanted at that point in its process? What about the delineation between good and very good in later creation? If it was all perfect because it was all from His hand then how could any of it be more good than good?
Thank you for taking the time to discuss with me, brother. I trust we both love God with a great fervor and are doing our best to understand Him more perfectly with every day He has given us to grow. Blessings and peace to you always.
Ezekiel 28:12
[12] “Son of man, raise a lamentation over the king of Tyre, and say to him, Thus says the Lord GOD:
“You were the signet of perfection,
full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.
Hebrews 2:10
[10] For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the founder of their salvation perfect through suffering.
Philippians 1:6
[6] For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus.
Excellent!
In one moment Jesus rose from the dead. Jesus didn't gradually become less dead. The work of God in creation is also not gradualism.
Although all the evidence says it is.
The problem is that rationality is valued today more than belief. Science encourages rationality, not belief. And science has been incredibly successful since the enlightenment. Religion refuses the rational when it conflicts with their belief. That is not the way to truth.
Genesis specified 24 hour days by including the morning and evening clarifications.
One cannot reject the reality of the expanding universe. But no one can explain creation apart from God's word. When God spoke, "Let there be light." everything began. Whether we call it a Big Bang or any other description the evidence we see is that everything came from nothing. God spoke and it began. Recorded human history gets very murky past about 4,000 years so either we accept the Biblical account or we believe the latest "discoveries" of science, which have been wrong many times. I appreciate your devotion to The Word!
You inspire me!
If Fod spoke everything into existence and took millions or billions of years, He would have had to talk realllly slllloooww.✝️
So many Christians don't take the word of God seriously! So many believe in the gap theory and millions of years and theoretical evolutionists but if we look at all these concerns through the lense of the Bible instead of the other way round we will know the truth!! Praying
I love it! I love it! I love it! I will always stick with the truth of God's word. And a literal six days of creation. On the seventh day He rested. Praise God.
Some people think the thief on the cross was saved!
You can tell a true Christian by the answer to this question!
You mean the thief to whom Jesus said, “I say to you today, you will be with Me in Paradise” ?
i personally believe there are two books in the bible that Satan hates the most GENISIS AND APOCALIPSE; Genisis because it describes his condemnation, and Apocalipse because it describes his destruction, and these Mercenaries who calls themselves pastors but in fact are wolves in sheeps clothing are deceiving the naive. Shalom.
No wonder people are losing faith.
Six literal days of creation is what the Bible teaches.period.
Ken, you open the video by stating what you BELIEVE to be six literal earth days for all creation, not what you KNOW to be. Question.., The Bible describes that in the beginning the earth was formless and void. How can there be a 24 hour earth rotation period, when something is empty and has yet to be formed into any shape? How were all the elements that God created, placed in order to make a 24 hour rotation that we now currently observe? Also scripture mentions the heavens prior to the formless and empty earth, is this an indication that the heavens were set in place first? Could it possibly be that the first two days of creation were longer than you BELIEVE them to be? What human can answer the multitude of questions that can be brought forward from the Genesis account with such assertion as to claim certainty over it's chronological order. Respectfully submitted. Please respond, I would like to hear your opinion, thank you
This appears to be a sane and logical argument. GOOD LUCK WITH GETTING AN ANSWER FROM KEN.
I wonder how much money this guy has made from his platforms.
Why are there dinosaur bones and other evidence of the earth being millions/billions of years old if God made EVERYTHING in 6 days 6 thousand years ago?? So why did God put those million year old bones there 6 thousand years ago?That is dishonest and deceitful but God is perfect and CANNOT deceive us as Ham might have us believe. I have actuallly heard a minister try to explain this away by claiming that God was testing our faith. So he tests our faith by lying to us and deceiving us? Then according to Ham, you have to believe this deceit to be a Christian? Really? Not done by my perfect God! Remember, the Bible was translated from ancient writings by English scholars, not Americans. In 1644, Day and age would mean someting different in old England . Look up apologetics Christian teachings.
The word translated as day comes from the Hebrew word “Yom” which means period, it’s not a specific length of time, it’s used in the Old Testament on number of occasions for varying periods of time, but most often for a day. However I always wonder why it would take God so long, it could have been femto-seconds, with the evening & morning indicating a definite beginning and end.
As regards YOM, it seems you did not even listen to what he said. He explains about YOM very clearly. Which part did you not understand?
Yom is contextually defined as evening to morning.
Evening to morning is not 24s it’s just night. Also the sun was not there till later in creation history. So what is a day? My comment on creation clearly implies that the power of God is boundless. The whole of scripture, hangs or falls on the very first verse, which could be considered a chapter title “in the begging God created the Heavens and the Earth”. So what is your complaint.
@@robertjohnsontaylor3187Which Bible translation are you quoting these exact three words from: "evening to morning"?
@@robertjohnsontaylor3187 It isn't evening to morning, it is evening and morning. "Evening and Morning" is a colloquialism for the 24hr day. You can appeal to the miraculous, at the expense of what the Bible clearly says. Popular science always acts like it was there when the earth began to exist. But whatever they affirm contradict what the Bible plainly says. We accept the Bible or live in dillusion.
BTW, the text doesn't necessarily say the sun wasn't there before the earth was created though. The word used there is "asah" which can also mean assign. In a sense, the sun's light wasn't used until the 4th day. That's where I differ from Ken Ham.
Guys, I just wanna say, believe it or not, you can believe in old earth and still be bible believing christian. The view of old earth is completely compatible with the bible because the creation story in genesis is classified as semi-poetic historical narrative meaning that it is not a clear cut retelling of the past but rather a poetic means of telling something that happened in the past. That claim he made at the beginning was very sly because he implied that if we dont take the word of God literally, we are adding to Gods perfect word but I would argue that he isn't respecting the authors literary style which was inspired by the holy spirit. And believe me, Id love to believe in young earth because it just feels so much cooler to believe in a God who made the earth in 6 days but there is so much evidence for evolution over billions of years, it doesnt disagree with scripture, and it doesnt undermine that God made all this, simply using this mechanism of evolution over a long time.
Romans 5:12-14
Death in Adam, Life in Christ
[12] Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned-[13] for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. [14] Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.
If billions of years of death and suffering before sin was in the world is not controverting fundamental theology of scripture, then what would qualify in your book?
I would like to challenge you to separate yourself from the sayings of liberal theologians inventing claims about literary styles in order to tell you what is true or not in scripture. Also examine that abundance of evidence for evolution you claim exists for yourself, not just because the labcoat consensus cult says it exists. Look into the radiometric dating assumptions using superposition and relative age theory as their baselines that were already decided back in the 1800's before any of these dating theories had the technology to test them. It is all smoke and mirrors to persuade you that they know better than you ever could and therefore you should just take their word for it. That is what any cult of falsehood relies upon to keep its following.
@@Feraeondots a letter. He is using language that they will understand
I would be very interested in a debate on this topic between you and Dr. John Lennox.
Dear Mr. Ham, you clearly say that nothing may be added to God's word.
But why do you add that creation is 6 thousand years old?
It is not stated anywhere in the Bible that this is the case, only people have concluded this from adding up the ages of generations.
In line 3 of Genesis 1 the 6 day creation begins, but in line 1 God created the heaven and the earth and there no time period is indicated.
Unfortunately I have never had a clear answer to this.
It’s not even until day 4 that the sun moon and stars are NOW designated to serve as time markers to mark days seasons and years . And if you look at the text closely you will see that the greater light that separates day from night also was what separated light from darkness on day 1.
I can understand unbelievers telling us the earth is millions of years old but when true Christians start telling us this too then I would say that either they are not true Christians or they don't know or believe what their Bible's teach?
These are more educated Christian’s who understand the science and realise it’s undeniable.
Or they are true Christians and they just interpret it differently than fallible Ken Ham.
YES AGREED but that is the whole point of what Ken was trying to say for example there are parts of scripture that are meant to be taken literally and also parts that were not but I don't believe there is anything in the early chapters of Genesis that is not meant to be taken literally
@@jameslowry1 : The creation narrative is literal in the sense that Moses' intention was to provide a model for the work-week. He didn't write it that way so we can extrapolate earth's age. Do you believe a serpent literally spoke to Eve? That's what Moses literally wrote.
It was not a serpent but the Devil that was speaking to eve although what the serpent looked like and whether or not it had the power of speech pre fall we are not told because it could have been and YES I do take the scripture literally most of the time and make no apology for that even if you think I am a fool for doing so because the only parts of scripture I don't take literally are the parts that are clear from the context that are not meant to be taken literally and I don't have a problem with that approach even if you do?
An ordinary day to God is 24 quadrillion years
Why did god create the sun on the 4th day if there was already light that he created on the 1st day?
Perhaps we simply take from the Bible only what we are supposed to.
Christ came not to unite us all but to divide us.
This is sobering.
I came finally and fully to the faith at 57yrs old.
Keep your mind and heart open and may God come to save us all.
We may not believe in God… He may not believe in us.
We die as individuals - fully alone - ever thought why this is?
I know this is a serious message but the humor in it really made my day! Thank you.....
So that explains that the earth was created in 6 days as we know them. But I'm unfamiliar with the argument that explains the millions of years theory. Was it the great flood? Is there a video that explains why people think there was millions of years?
On Day 6, too much happened for it to be a literal 24 hour day.
Pastor Allen Nolan provides a strong case that God did in fact create the sun, moon and stars....and that is what it states in the original text.
He uses bother proper translation of the text, and he uses an example from scripture to back up his claim.
The reason why the majority of church leaders, pastors, apologists, seminary professors don't take a stand on six literal days is not due to fallibility of scriptures or some taboo subject to avoid. Genesis obviously is an important book because it details the beginning of the universe, God as creator and the fall of man. But the quandary of exactly how old the six days of creation will not save anyone. The gospel saves. And pastors in particular are going to center their sermons around the gospel message. The real purpose of the six-day creation account was to let the Israelites know after they left Egypt who the real God of universe was (Yahweh) as well as for the generations to come to learn about.
@Disciple793 this seems to be making the same argument that only the gospels matter, because they lay out the message of salvation. Nothing else matters except salvation. But if that is the case, why did God give us so much more than just Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John? I would argue that the integrity of all Scripture should be defended, because if we can just pick and choose what parts of Scripture we like and through out the parts of Scripture we don't like, then why should we trust any of it?
@@aaronadamson7463 Your missing the point of my post. Of course, the rest of Scripture is important. Ken Ham was asking the question as to why church leaders, pastors, professors rarely speak on the six-day creation account. And I gave my answer. Sermons for the most part are going to centered around the gospel message. But with Ken Ham the same can be said. What are the majority of his presentations about? The age of the universe. Sorry for the confusion. Now I have edited my poste for clarification. Happy Easter!
Happy Easter brothers! Christ and His redemptive work is indisputably the central theme of all of earth's history. The work that saved us from the death brought about by Adam when he sinned and death came by that sin. To misunderstand that concept as something merely poetic or literary for the sake of feeling closer to God, as opposed to being the literal reality, is where the outlook of most of the church now is in regard to scripture. And looking at the history of the decades since New Evangelicalism first arose in the 1950's and ceded the territory of ancient history to a labcoat consensus cult, it is easy to trace the submission if scripture interpretation to the claims of secular institutions back to that. If whatever secular experts claim about ancient history is proven science and whatever the Bible contradicts it with is misinterpretation, then it should be no surprise when the resurrection of Christ itself is scoffed at as impossible because the only supernatural thing that ever happened was the spontaneous and immediate explosion of the universe into existence from some unknown cause which for sure wasn't a supernatural entity. Pastors in the hope of saving more people have been bowing to whatever seculars claim about science even when it is unverifiable historical claims, and letting fester unhindered the boast that the Bible is not to be taken seriously any time it describes something other than naturalistic material processes. So how much longer will we keep pounding away at the same drum of the basic gospel message absent the relevance of its backstory being taken seriously before we accept that we were wrong as a church to bring nature worship back into tolerance adulterating the body of Christ?
May your joy become more complete with each passing day closer to when He appears again!
There has never been a beginning
Many thanks Ken, I was aware of this decades ago and I’m very grateful to you for broadcasting this information again. Do people understand that the Hebrew day is divided into 4 equal parts of 6 hours equaling 12 hours of Darkness and 12 hours of Daylight ergo - Evening and Morning, the 1st day. I have always followed AIG for decades. God Bless All of You. English Phil 🇺🇸👀🙏
I’m curious why evening and morning isn’t used regarding the 7th day. And also what “generations” and “day” mean in Gen 2:4
Good point. It’s because Moses didn’t write the creation account to be a scientific statement, but a model for the week.
To help you out, Genesis 2:4 is the first verse of the second creation story.
@@Moist._Robot : Yes I know and Moses is summarizing what he wrote in chapter 1 in Gen. 2:4.
The usage of day in Genesis 2, "...in the day that..." is actually confirming contrast to its different usage in chapter one. Chapter 2's usage is an indeterminate amount of time like "in my grandmother's day" and chapter one's usage is a literal day just like wherever used similarly in the rest of the Bible. Moses knew how to specify a literal day as well as a nonliteral day.
@@scienceandbibleresearch
Lol. Moses didn’t exist.
These two creation myths are by the Priestly source and the Jahwest source.
Feel free to google it and you’ll see that I’m right.
So how is it we can see galaxies billions of light-years away?
We see with our eyes. My car has over 90,000 miles on it. But my car isn't 90,000 years old.
@@phaxad How is that related at all? What kind of analogy is that? I think his point is that because galaxies are billions of light years away, they are billions of years old, meaning the universe must obviously be at least billions of years old.
There are a couple of theories but the question is really irrelevant since we weren't there. Nowhere does it say that GOD is limited by space, time and matter. Why not just accept that when it says He created the stars they were created with visible light from earth?
The problem with Christians today is that they have no foundation of the framework of Scripture. For example, in Genesis 1-2 the Bible creates a biblical worldview whether we fully understand it or not isn't as important as understanding it exists. Creation was a literal 24 hours we see this in Exodus 20
8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.
Second, even if the day was a longer period of time the maximum would be 1 day =1000 years.
See in Genesis 2 it says
15 Then the Lord God took [d]the man and put him in the garden of Eden to tend and keep it. 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”
Now we know Adam ate, so did he die in the subsequent 24 hour period? No. So was GOD a liar? No.
5 So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died.
Adam never lived to the next "day" past year 1000
2 Peter 3: 8 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.
So from year 1- year 930 Adam lived (almost to the end of Day 1) Abraham lived about year 2000 (end of Day 2), David year 3000 (end of Day 3). The Destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple (70 AD year 4000 end of Day 4) the year 2070-2075 (depending on who you talk to) year 6000 (end of Day 6) +1000 years the reign of Jesus, aka the Messianic age, aka the Millennial Kingdom.
Early Christian writings:
Barnabas, AD First Century
“Therefore, children, in six days, or in six thousand years, all the prophecies will be fulfilled. Then it says, ‘He rested on the seventh day.’ This signifies at the Second Coming of our Lord Jesus, He will destroy the Antichrist, judge the ungodly, and change the sun, moon, and stars. Then He will truly rest during the Millennial reign, which is the seventh day.” Epistle of Barnabas 15:7-9
Commodianus, AD 240
“We will be immortal when the six thousand years are completed.” Against the Gods of the Heathens 35 “Resurrection of the body will be when six thousand years are completed, and after the one thousand years, the world will come to an end.”
Against the Gods of the Heathens 80
Victorinus, AD 240
“Satan will be bound until the thousand years are finished; that is, after the sixth day.” Commentary on Revelation 20.1-3
Methodius, AD 290
“In the seventh millennium we will be immortal and truly celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.” Ten Virgins 9.1
We have biblical calendars found in the Dead Se Scroll caves. See my study here which is made for skeptics
th-cam.com/video/3oCU2eQAJ0c/w-d-xo.html
We even see Jews with Judiaism from the Old Testament see the biblical framework as 6000 year + 1000 years.
www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/607585/jewish/Significance-of-the-year-6000.htm
So we are in the biblical year 5,949 or so give or take 4 years. Now either 2020 was the last Jubilee before the end of the age or 2025 is the last Jubilee. Either way we are entering the last section of time on the biblical calendar. Now Jesus reduces the timeframe of His return in Matthew 24, to about 2050 AD at the latest because if He waits to the year 2075AD or year 6000 we would have already caused our own self-extinction. Matthew 24:21-22.
Now in this last section of time (2024-2050) there are over 500 prophecies predicted to come to pass. We are seeing many already on the horix\zon. So by understanding the biblical framework and that these prophesies are on the horizon at the specific time in history they were to occur, it allows us to see the truth of the past, even if we can't understand everything about it. At least we can have a framework in how it might have happened. I hope this helps. Take care.
@@phaxad This comment wins the Charles Darwin Internet of the Day Award!
@@mbfrommb3699 How do you know the bible is correct, you weren't there when it was written. How do you know God exists, you've never seen him. How do you know the world existed 100 years ago? You weren't there. See how idiotic that argument is? Hearing Ken say "How do you know, you weren't there" in a video, among a lot of other crazy ideas is what proved to me that Christianity is nothing more than a fairy tale like Santa and the Tooth Fairy.
Chalk layers 100s of feet deep, composed of minute skeletons in one day?
Surely,we dream.there has never been a creation
100000000% Agree!!!!!!
I don't, know of anyone saying million years but 6000 years as a day in our time equals 1000 years in God's time so when God says he created the earth in 6 days that actually means 6000 years in our time and a 1000 years of peace for life on earth to grow
I think you have it backward. One of our days is like 1000 years to God. So 6,000 of our years is actually 2,190,000 God-years. :P
I believe God created the earth in six literal 24-hour "days" but not necessarily in a strictly chronological order back-to-back, God initiated and completed acts of creation in six 24-hour periods as scriptures say, but with significant time gaps or intervals between each creative act possibly spanning millions or billions of years, which may help explain various scientific evidences like the fossil records, radiometric dating etc.
The universe is 6138 years old.
... And 227 days.
@@christopheespic nope.
@@beaupierrebondurant5651 prove me wrong, please.
@@christopheespic too easy. Nisan corresponds roughly with our april...
@@beaupierrebondurant5651 lol.... And what about the 6138 years old? A reference to the Seiko watch? 🙄
Here is a mathematical, logical argument I've just thought of, today. It never entered my mind before.
Let's hypothesise the creation account for each day as 1000 years or 1 million years. So 6 days of 1000 years would be 6000 years. Then on the 7th day, God rested, which was 1000 years. But God created Adam and Eve on the 6th day (6th period of 1000 years, say the last day of that period). Then, on the "8th day" (period of 1000 years), Adam and Eve would be at least minimum of 1002 years old after God rested for 1000 years. But later in Genesis 5, it says Adam lived for 930 years. And Seth lived for 912 years and so on. Do we now not take those numbers literally?
If we take the age of Adam, Seth, Enosh as literal (930, 912 and 905), then Adam should've lived through the God's rest day on the 7th day as 1 day or at most as 100 years. Even 1 day as 100 years isn't a plausible argument, it's because Adam had Seth when he was 130 and Adam and Eve had Cain and Abel before Seth. So Adam and Eve would've been younger than 130 years old. The Bible also says Adam and Eve sinned before they had any children, So Adam and Eve would've been even younger than 100 years old or something. Adam couldn't have roamed around the earth or Eden on the 7th day as 1000 years or 1 million or 1 billion years before the fall. The key here is that God rested on the 7th day. God doesn't need resting, does he? That day is there to give us a real timeline that there was only 1 day gap after God created Adam and Eve and as a pattern for the rhythm of life with 7 days a week. So the only plausible explanation of the creation account is literally one day at a time. Otherwise, the later account in Genesis wouldn't make any sense or be nullified.
Small brain: It can't be six days because scientists say millions of years.
Tall brain: It can't be millions of years because Scripture says six days.
Real working brain: it can't be six days because scientists say BILLIONS of years 🙄.
@@christopheespic god cant be wrong, confusing, or a liar, all of which man can be and often are, so id rather trust god ❤
@@swamprat22 I'm not telling you that God is wrong, just that you don't NEED to stick to a litteral interpretation of Genesis! God didn't say in Genesis "take this description as litteral".
@@christopheespic
Scientists also said the sun circles the earth.
@@jacob.tudragens.... And learned from their mistakes. Everyone can and should.
Why do we impose upon God the limitation of mankind. He is God and is not limited. He could have done it all in an instance if he wanted..He is God
'' In the beginning when G-d was creating...''
So... how long was the day before the Sun was created? That's right, you don't know. And why would you.
Before the beginning, there was God
@@WakeUp_333 Turn off the snooze and you will connect two days.
Honest question here...if God made Adam as an adult (he obviously wasn't a child who can't take care of himself) is there a possibility that God created the universe as a 2 million year old universe?
Sure, but to be correct, you'd say "a 13.8B year old looking universe" since that's what we observe. Or you could also say "god created everything 5 seconds ago: humans of every age with fake memories, fake fossils, etc". See where that gets you? Nowhere...
The James Webb telescope by the same logic of observation now suggests the universe being four times that old. Similar to how DNA sequencing of humans and their supposed closest ancestor now shows only about 85% similarity, not 98%. And by current evolutionary models the assumed time required to make that random leap would be about 69 billion years. Gotta keep up with the science as it develops, not stick with dogmatic numbers!
@@Feraeond And? That's just science at work. We change/correct things as we get new data/evidence. Although I don't know what you're referring to when you say "that random leap".
Man it is so nice and enjoyable to find someone who actually preaches-teaches the Word of God based on the actual Word! What a great, creative idea 🙄😂. And I love all the videos I have watched of yours and am subscribed to the youtube channel. But I do have a question. And Im being 100% honest, sincere and humble by asking it. I fully agree that so much brainwashing secular ideology, that is totally not scriptural, has been allowed into the church teachings and philosophy that have greatly damaged the church and its following. Wouldn't it be fair to add to this list an Earth along with 8 other planets circling the sun, a neverending, expanding universe full of infinite planets, galaxies...etc.? I understand that the Bible doesn't list every single detail of creation but I would think that God would have mentioned something relating to it? Like how God clearly states that He made TWO greater lights which He placed in the firmament, one to rule the day and one to rule the night. He did NOT say He created 1 great light to rule the day and that also bounces its light off another object to rule the night. Again, I am not asking this to be controversial. I just really believe in truly following the Bible and not adding to or take away from its Word. And I firmly believe, based on scripture, logic and common sense, that the lies and brainwashing go much further and deeper than most want to accept or believe. Anyways, thank you for ALL you do sir in spreading the Truth of the Word and our Lord. God bless you.
As long as there are young Earth creationists, there can be no Jesus
Can anyone tell me how long the spirit of God was hovering over the face of the Waters in Genesis 1:2? Hovering implies that there’s a wave length. A wave length requires amplitude and hertz frequency. Who can say whether the spirit of God was hovering for half of a second or 6 trillion years?
Couldn’t have hovered long enough for the star’s light to reach the Earth? Are the stars parts of the heavens? Seems like stars could mean heavens. People don’t go to this heaven, or that heaven, or that heaven. That particular heaven, with God, the father seems like it would be singular.
@@PLSpinalthe text clearly specifies where the darkness is. It is on the face of the waters,not the entire universe. The atmosphere was too thick for light to penetrate to the surface. Job 38:4-11 tells us when God laid the foundations of the earth it was wrapped in thick clouds.
One topic I can’t get over are dinosaurs. On day 6 God created man and land animals (dinosaurs). But it’s not possible that dinosaurs lived with modern human beings. They faced extinction millions of years ago. From what I’ve heard, the Bible also claims that the earth is 6000 years old but that has been disproven greatly by radiometric dating. I just don’t understand how this is all true. Someone please enlighten me
In six days God renewed the Earth after Lucifer rebelled with his fallen angels and hurled asteroids throughout all the universe including a massive asteroid towards Earth that caused the extinction of the dinosaurs. “And darkest was on the face of the deep.”
The same hermeneutic disallows Jesus being resurrected as the Bible depicts. All three issues necessary to make resurrection after 3 days require 'day' to be understood in the 3 ways it is used in the first versus of the Bible. (the period not darkness, and 1 rotation, and light). This solves the issue of Jesus being in the tomb for a little over 24 hours and it being called 3 days. Then there are the issues with Paleo Hebrew and the semantic range... making it more like a pre-incarnate gospel rhema.
How many millions of years equals to one of the seven days?
Ok now what about fossils? We’ve found other things besides fossils that have been dated millions of years old. And I think the reason they don’t press on this is because age of the universe or the world has nothing to do with your salvation and following Christ. If it does someone please correct me.
This is not a hill (of doctrine) to fight and die on. Your salvation depends on Jesus, not Moses' metaphors used to tell pre-scientific people the story of creation.
Fossils and other real things are about reality. Genesis was written by some primitive people, who swore with their hand on the phallus and it reflects their level of understanding. At that time people had no idea about the fact that the Sun gives us light, they didn't know what the stars were, they didn't know what the Sun and the Moon were... Let's stop pretending that we are idiots....
There are no fossils that can date older than a theoretical 100k years due to the half-life cycle of carbon dating reaching an undetectable depletion level.
@@Feraeond the oldest fossils dates to 3.5 billion years, Cyanobacteria.
@ancataut7891 They didn't know the sun gives light? That's awfully presumptuous to denigrate the intellectual potential of humans possessing far fresher genes than the mutated and depleted pool of the current time. The only advantage we have over them is the technological and psychological advancements made thanks to a progression of record-keeping and passed on knowledge from what was discovered prior. A simple glance at the effects of inbreeding on mental deficiency and disease prevalence indicates a far more capable time of faculties for the human species prior to gene pool depletion.
I say that the argument is a distraction. Wasting your time.
Juneau’s tells us what our job is and it is not trying to argue on a moot point.
Young earth creationism is the foundation of truth, reality, and the Gospel.
The most amazing thing is the pyramids. They say there stone moved there by something. The Bible teaches the Egyptians had the Hebrew slaves make bricks. Don't say how big them bricks were. That's how they made them .
In the beginning, man created God.
Yes. Not millions of years long. Billions years.
I just left a church where the pastors would not say that the world was created in 6 days. I had been going there for years I was just convicted that they claim the Bible is the word of God but disregard it when they don’t like what it says.
How can they teach this is beyond me. How can you claim to be Christian but not believe the word of God.
It's just about interpretation. Hermeneutics is a complex topic, especially for books written 2k years ago. Not to mention the fact that it's not the word of god, it's the word of man, many men in fact; mostly anonymous. And by no means should one use the bible as a science textbook...it isn't.
@@hongotedesco8931 where the Bible is not clear interpretation is a fair discussion. Where the Bible is very clear it is not a question of interpretation.
The Bible is very clear that God created in 6 days. This is obviously true. No one would ever question this if they didn’t think that science says something else.
The fact that you should believe God above what men say is absolute. The further fact that science has no way of measuring age and radiometric dates are based on pure assumption make questioning Gods word even more foolish.
@@hongotedesco8931 the Bible is 66 books written by 40 men over thousands of years with a message that comes from beyond time. It is the word of God, and denying this is to choose to spend eternity in punishment.
@@beefsupreme4671 Sorry, but no. I understand the bible is very clear "that God created in 6 days", and it's wrong. It's obviously false. And it's obviously false if you have any common sense at all; it's just a story that ancient people made up. Sheesh.
@@hongotedesco8931 what is the obvious story is millions and billions of years. The only evidence for vast ages is the belief of people that were not there.
Hi, hope you don’t mind me asking, but what do you think regarding Einstein’s Relativity? - A proven theory,.. ( atomic clocks, GPS, moon times zones, gravity etc).
It’s generally true, yet people talk as if your going against God’s word for mentioning it. I don’t know why this is, because one could almost believe relativity without evolution, (at a pinch, or maybe just some evolution of the planets, ( Rolling Spheres). 3:48
Then why didn’t Adam die the day he ate the fruit? , on that day you will die, not begin to die and linger for 900 years
The Hebrew word for "die" there more literally translates as "dying die" in English. Just as Adam died spiritually as soon as he had disobeyed, yet the physical death was delayed, so anyone accepting Christ's redemption from that curse is made alive immediately in their spirit but with delay in the redemption of the body.
John 5:24
[24] Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.
Romans 8:23
[23] And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies.
1 Corinthians 15:22
[22] For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.
1 Corinthians 15:53-55
[53] For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality. [54] When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written:
“Death is swallowed up in victory.”
[55] “O death, where is your victory?
O death, where is your sting?”
And " day" also doesn't always mean day. I can't understand how you justify reinterpreting die but not day. Seems arbitrary.
There are two Hebrew words for death used in a row for the occasion of Genesis 2:17. "Mowd tamut" more literally translates to "dying die" or "assuredly die" depending on different translation takes. So that is where the notion of an immediate spiritual death and gradual physical death is sourced.
I'm sorry, I can't read Hebrew. Is that usage consistent throughout the old testament?
Whoever eats from the forbidden tree will surely die on that day. Adam indeed did at 930 proving that the days were indeed a thousand years. It days in the first book.
The six days of creation are a story. A story that's not consistent with logic, never mind observational reality.
Why isn't it consistent with logic or observation, sir?
I’m Christian & believe all modern science ( as fundamentalists would say ‘ secular’ theories.
Then why does Gen. 2 vs 4 call 7 days, 1 day?
The usage of day in Genesis 2, "...in the day that..." is actually confirming contrast to its different usage in chapter one. Chapter 2's usage is an indeterminate amount of time like "in my grandmother's day" and chapter one's usage is a literal day just like wherever used similarly in the rest of the Bible. Moses knew how to specify a literal day as well as a nonliteral day.
Ken Ham gets everything correct except he doesn’t believe in the Biblical flat stationary Earth with an overhead firmament truth as expounded in Genesis Chapter 1.
So… dinosaurs?
Dinosaurs created on day 6
Ken! A deep study of the Holy Scriptures reveal clearly that Gen CHP 1 does not talk about 24 hour days. Also, Gen 1:1 tells us that the earth is not 6000 years old. The minimum time per day is provided, but there is room for longer periods. This in no way means that the atheistic viewpoints need to be accepted. However, we should strictly go by the Bible.
Correct . How long are the days in Genesis is an interpretation debate. In Hebrew the definition for day has 4 different time lengths. I hold to an old earth view and in no way embrace any evolution. It’s always the YEC who drag in evolution. How old the earth is , is a science debate because the Bible simply does not say how old the earth is.
Ken’s entire ministry is riding on his interpretation of 24 hour days and a global flood ,
@@Terrylb285 I believe in a global flood, but I'm an extreme fundamentalist and find all churches in error.
The Earth's age is undefined in scripture, not this 6000 year claim of some. We are even told that this is kind of an eternity in human terms.
The 6 terra-forming days have a minimum per day of 7000 years (6000+ alpha)while their max also remains somewhat unknown(n/able)😏
@@Terrylb285 terra-forming six days. Paul tells that the 7th day hasn't finished yet. Since we should include Christ's thousand year reign in that cacl, the minimum given per Tday is 7000 years. There is nothing in Scripture indicating whether this is true or if each day is much longer. My own preferred length is 42,000 years per day. This is not supported by Scripture, but is my preference. My choice has to do with the Earth's axis rotation relative the galaxy.
@@Grandliseur
Wouldn't it make sense for the creative week to total 49000 years? 1k years is a day to him so his week would be one "creative day". 7 of those equals 49k years.
I'm curious how you arrived at the 42k years per day.
I dont even accept there was 6 days of creation so the whole debate of was 6 days or 6 millions years is irrelevant. There were no eyewitnesses to creation so i dont know how this would be known. We don't even know for sure who wrote Genesis but has been attributed to Moses.
I feel like Ken Ham is just about the only voice out there who continues to stand on God’s Word, to keep pointing us back to the accuracy and inerrancy of Scripture when it comes to the book of Genesis and Creation. What’s wrong with so many Christians today who aren’t getting it???
How about William Lane Craig, Sean Mcdowell, James White, Michael Brown, Ray Comfort, Mike Winger, John Macarthur, and Frank Turek just name a few. (Romans 12:6-8) "We have different gifts, according to the grace given to each of us ect...teaching, serving, prophesying, encouraging, leading." The purpose of Genesis answers the existential questions of life. Is there a God? Who created the universe? Who created mankind? What is sin? Doctrines of justification, atonement, depravity, wrath, grace and sovereignty are also addressed. The Israelites coming out of Egypt to whom Genesis was written to were not trying to figure out the age of the earth. They wanted to know is Yahweh true the God. No offense to Ken Ham. The Gospel saves. It is the foundation of Christianity. (1 Corinthians 15:17)
@Disciple793 sure, but if you can say that one part of the scripture is wrong, why should we trust any of it? If God indeed lied about how he created the earth in the very beginning, then why are we to believe Him when He says this is how you approach me, through my Son? It is paramount that we trust the Bible fully. But this shouldn't just be a blind faith either. Ken is equipping us to defend the faith against those who would subtly chip away at it.
@Disciple793 Aside from the observable sciences pointing to millions of years being the least likely of all historical posits, as of that alone is not enough reason to dismiss such unbiblical claims, the fundamentals of theology must also be reinterpreted regarding death and suffering.
Romans 5:12-14
Death in Adam, Life in Christ
[12] Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned-[13] for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. [14] Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.
If there were millions of years of death and suffering before Adam brought sin into the world and death through sin, then Jesus no longer deals with physical death as a negative consequence, only spiritual death. Ok then. Try telling anyone who lost a son or daughter to cancer that it is a natural aspect of what God called good in creating everything. And if the chaotic, tortured nature of evolutionary processes are all so good, why should we look forward to an afterlife which will not have any more physical death and suffering? Everyone knows in their soul that physical death and suffering are part of the curse, not part of what God called good from the start. So is it any wonder that atheists who start from an evolutionary position of origin scoff at the idea of a good God?
I don't disagree that people who ignore or even accept evolutionary precepts can still believe and espouse the work of Jesus Christ. They just miss a significant aspect of what it is for and adulterate their faith just as Israel often did with Baal.
A bonus consideration to challenge you with. Would Jesus have said God made Adam and Eve in the beginning if it is true that all of human history has been a sliver of time compared to all else that transpired since the actual beginning?
Matthew 19:4-5
[4] He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, [5] and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?
Clearly the dating methods are flawed.
- the word(s) in as too meaning in both the world(s) and that as one day :the description as in and of both -as has been written so in and of Genesis chapter 2 :and the worl d s as to u nderstanding the ages of the ear t (h)
Why would any religious person try to obtain confirmation and endorsement from science? How insecure are they? You can believe that god made the world in 6 days, or that there are unicorns, or that Harry Potter is quiddiching on a broom, I don't care. But don't imply that you are right, and that science is wrong.
According to Genesis 1, the plants on earth were created one day before the sun was created. However, the plant need the sun. They could live one day on their reserves before taking in the first sunlight, but they could not have lived millions of years waiting for that first ray of sun.
It's as easy as that
👍
When did God say: “Let there be light?”
@@Robert-vh2cl You mean at first the plants could live in starlight? Actually, even the stars were created after the plants together with the sun.
Not sure where that "light" came from while Earth was speeding through space without the sun to force it into orbit. Notably, on the first Sunday there was also a "night".
The answer may be that the authors of this story did not know the first thing about anything
If no sun until day 4 the plants wouldn’t have lasted 3 seconds without heat.
@@Terrylb285 That's a good point. However, the "light" that was created right away on Sunday may also have provided heat. More likely, it's just a nonsense story about Elohim doing things in the wrong order. Would he really have created bats on Thursday but mice and squirrels on Friday? He does not need evolution but would he not need practice before trying a bat?
@@erikt1713 I believe the sun was there on day 1 but light couldn’t penetrate to the surface of the deep. That’s where the text says the darkness was ,not the entire universe. Job 38:4-8 tell us when God laid the foundations of the earth it was wrapped in thick clouds.
Amen 🙏
Think about it...if "Day" means not 24 hrs. How we be able to take our medication if the Doctor say..take it 3x a day.😅
God invented the term "a day". But God invented that word before mankind existed. Much, much later mankind invented the term " a day" as meaning 24 hours, or 1 revolution of the earth. So God's idea of a day is different to our idea of a day.