You should reupload this. I don't know if it's your audio, or you tubes lowering the volume. This seems the case on many Christian themed programs. It's very nearly inaudible.
It's all about our presuppositions and worldview. Amen. As christians our worldview is polar opposite from a secularist who believes evolution. Ultimately, it comes down to whether or not a person accepts or rejects the gospel. They either want salvation or they want to continue living in sin. That's really the bottom line and hopefully seeing the flaws in their worldview helps them make a good decision. God bless and thank you for posting this 🙂✝️🙏
@@walkergarya Interesting that you ask for proof. What specific proof are you looking for? What proof has evolution provided that you think is so airtight that it cannot be questioned? You claim to live a moral life, but what standard are you using to declare yourself moral? Is it your own subjective reasoning that allows you to rationalize whatever you want at the moment, or is it a higher authority, and if so, where did that authority come from, and what makes it worth obeying?
How about a third alternative: I reject the gospel and have no need for "salvation," but I choose to live in accordance with the sensible moral code agreed upon by millions of us, which excludes the same bad behaviors prohibited in the bible as well as some condoned by the bible, such as slavery, killing disobedient children etc.. "Sin" is merely transgressing against religious rules, and as a non-adherent to any religion, I find that sin is a meaningless concept. It is like telling a carpenter that welding is prohibited.
God reveals Himself to whomever He chooses. The Spirit gives life to whomever He chooses. Salvation is of the Lord. If you humble yourself, read the New Testament, and ask Him for forgiveness of your transgressions, He will show you the Truth.
@@ianmonk6211 Amen. However, if you read the New Testament and God gives you Life, you will naturally read the Old Testament after you complete the new.
@@nickjones5435 we all have those don't we? We all wear worldview glasses. I am arguing that if God is a Living Being, He has the power and Authority to reveal Himself to whomever He will. It's not so much a matter of evidence, it's the fact that you Hate Him.
Perhaps it will excite you to hear that once the Lord starts to renew your mind and give you a new heart, you’ll naturally become more humble and less of a smart ass.
@@freegracerevival seeing that the person I was responding to deleted his comments, you are only seeing one side of the conversation. Just your average atheistic "you are a moron and there is no God" attack. So I presented him with his own worldview. Merry Christmas.
Hi - Please I watch these channels hoping to see a comprehensive timeline for YEC, however, all we get is Flood, Flood, Flood. You really need to show ALL the things God has flung at this planet - Please include and explain the asteroid impacts, such as Theia, Vredefort and Chicxulub. Also, we need to look at possibly the largest impact crater (just discovered), the Deniliquin crater. The asteroid impacts look to dwarf the Flood and we really need the experts to explain when these events, along with decades long impact winters fit into the timeline. I'm also curious as to why no ancient cultures mention these asteroid impacts in their writings - Any ideas welcomed.
@@philipbuckley759 Deniliguin impact crater is one of the largest impact craters on Earth at 520 km in diameter and is about 30 km deep. It has been revealed by magnetic and seismic readings - It is believed this impact sent the Earth into an ice age and wiped out 85% of the life on Earth. Back then, the asteroid hit the Gondwana continent. The Vredefort impact crater is less massive at 300 km diameter. Chicxulub is "only' 150 km. diameter, but it was sufficient to wipe out the dinosaurs. This is what the majority of geologists and paleontologists believe. As a creationist, I have to believe that God's timeline includes asteroid impacts. The surface of the Moon has many visible impact craters, and it makes sense that Earth would not have escaped similar asteroid impacts. The Theia impact is the biggest and created the Moon. God's timeline on Earth is absolutely amazing and worth researching.
There you go again trying to place what man has said happened with what the Word of God says. They say that dinosaurs lived 65+ million years ago but dinosaur soft tissue including blood vessels, blood cells, collagen, erythrocytes and even partial DNA have now been found on five continents with over 140 peer reviewed articles on the subject. Deep time is a myth.
God is a physical being according to Scripture. Daniel 7:9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. Revelation 5:1 And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals. Revelation 19:4 And the four and twenty elders and the four beasts fell down and worshipped God that sat on the throne, saying, Amen; Alleluia. The angels are also spirits, yet have bodies. Hebrews 1:7 And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire. Genesis 19: 1 And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground; Numbers 22:31 Then the LORD opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of the LORD standing in the way, and his sword drawn in his hand: and he bowed down his head, and fell flat on his face. Angels, which are spirits, can be invisible to mortal sight. However God can open our eyes to see these spirits. There is a huge difference between being immaterial and being hidden from mortal sight. Job 19:26 And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God: 27 Whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; though my reins be consumed within me. I look forward to seeing the face of God. John 5:37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape. Here Jesus makes it clear that his Father has a shape. Thus God is a physical being. Psalm 139: 1 «To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.» O LORD, thou hast searched me, and known me. 2 Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off. 3 Thou compassest my path and my lying down, and art acquainted with all my ways. 4 For there is not a word in my tongue, but, lo, O LORD, thou knowest it altogether. 5 Thou hast beset me behind and before, and laid thine hand upon me. 6 Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain unto it. We see here in Psalm 38 that God is everywhere by virtue of his omniscience. Notice that God was afar off from David as he knew his thoughts. "God is in heaven. This we are taught in the Lord’s prayer. “Our Father which art in heaven.” Matthew 6:9; Luke 11:2. But if God is as much in every place as he is in any one place, then heaven is also as much in every place as it is in any one place, and the idea of going to heaven is all a mistake. We are all in heaven; and the Lord’s prayer, according to this foggy theology simply means, Our Father which art everywhere, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth, as it is everywhere." James White, The Personality of God, pg. 4 I pray this study is a blessing and stirs one to deeper thought on the subject. I think one will find that the error comes from a faulty presupposition that can't be supported by Scripture. I'm sure we have all experienced preconceived notions leading us to false beliefs. I know I have.
Greetings, @andrewwhite1318; while this content has nothing to do with the posted video, and to be plain, I do not think this is the appropriate platform to try and push 7th-day / Davidian theology, I will take a few moments to answer some of the issues in your view. There are several inaccurate assumptions you are making that are leading you to bad conclusions that require attention. In order to be precise, I will work through your comment section by section. Your original comment will be in quotations, and I will follow in bullet points. I will leave this up for about a week so you have time to respond if you choose, then I will take it down as this is not what this platform is for. “God is a physical being according to Scripture.” The first problem here is that your use of “physical” is vague. This is to be expected, considering that this was written in the early 1800’s. Are you saying physical as we are physical, meaning a part of this material universe or physical in another sense? When a person is viewing theology from a flawed foundation, it inevitably ripples through the rest of their thinking. James Whites's concept of the physical God is one such severely flawed view, that caused him to misinterpret much of scripture. God is the creator of the universe we live in, Genesis 1:1. This is a universe of space, time, matter, and energy. These are what comprise our physical temporal existence. In order to have created this universe, God would have to be outside of space and time, immaterial as we understand material, and unbound to what we know as energy. So, to say God is “physical” is an inaccurate foundation on which to build an argument. If God has a form, it would be in relation to His existence beyond our material world. Trying to define that existence is speculation at best. “Daniel 7:9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. Revelation 5:1 And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals. Revelation 19:4 And the four and twenty elders and the four beasts fell down and worshipped God that sat on the throne, saying, Amen; Alleluia.” Here, you are referring to visions. Visions are not, by any means, physical realities. Visions are given by God to the one He chooses to receive them in a manner that they will be able to understand and comprehend. We know this to be true because there are several visions of the throne room of God throughout scripture, and they all describe it differently. Daniel 7:9 was part of a dream given to Daniel, not a physical representation of heaven. It was a prophecy of what was to come, not a glimpse of Gods physical nature. The revelation of John was given to “show what must soon happen,” so the visions were not of heaven, but they were prophetic in nature to help us recognize the workings of God when they occur. To turn these passages into proof of a physical God is to ignore their intended purpose and bend them into an interpretation they were never intended to give. “The angels are also spirits, yet have bodies. Hebrews 1:7 And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire. Genesis 19: 1 And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground; Numbers 22:31 Then the LORD opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of the LORD standing in the way, and his sword drawn in his hand: and he bowed down his head, and fell flat on his face. Angels, which are spirits, can be invisible to mortal sight. However God can open our eyes to see these spirits. There is a huge difference between being immaterial and being hidden from mortal sight. Job 19:26 And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God: 27 Whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; though my reins be consumed within me.” - The idea of angels being physical as we are physical is by no means a correct way to see these passages. For instance, in order to interact with a physical world, it makes sense that the angels would take on the physical form required for that task. This is clearly seen throughout the scriptures. But then they return to their spiritual existence. Spiritual beings moving in and out of our physical world is not a new thing. This by no means makes them physical; it makes them beyond the physical, more commonly known as supernatural. “I look forward to seeing the face of God. John 5:37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.” Here Jesus makes it clear that his Father has a shape. Thus God is a physical being.” - Again you are incorrectly assuming a great deal. Having a shape does not mean having a physical form as we have physical form. It simply applies to having “A”form. What form does a spiritual being take? We do not know; we do not exist where He exists. So, this does not show God as a physical being; it just shows how much we do not know about existence beyond this life. Jesus is saying that the Father has borne witness to who Christ is, but no one there knows the Father as He truly is. “Psalm 139: 1 «To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.» O LORD, thou hast searched me, and known me. 2 Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off. 3 Thou compassest my path and my lying down, and art acquainted with all my ways. 4 For there is not a word in my tongue, but, lo, O LORD, thou knowest it altogether. 5 Thou hast beset me behind and before, and laid thine hand upon me. 6 Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain unto it. We see here in Psalm 38 that God is everywhere by virtue of his omniscience. Notice that God was afar off from David as he knew his thoughts.” - This only makes sense if God is immaterial and exists outside of our space/time. A being not bound by our limited material existence, literally outside of the physical universe, can see all of physical existence at the same time, even move back and forth through it. He would know all, see all, and be able to interact with everything and anything at any point in history. This is not a physical being, it is an immaterial being. "God is in heaven. This we are taught in the Lord’s prayer. “Our Father which art in heaven.” Matthew 6:9; Luke 11:2. But if God is as much in every place as he is in any one place, then heaven is also as much in every place as it is in any one place, and the idea of going to heaven is all a mistake. We are all in heaven; and the Lord’s prayer, according to this foggy theology simply means, Our Father which art everywhere, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth, as it is everywhere." James White, The Personality of God, pg. 4 This is an incredibly flawed view. Even if heaven were just a “realm outside of our vision” which it is not, it would still be “a different place”. You are forgetting that in the Lords prayer we also ask “thy will be done on earth… as it is in heaven” these are two different places. One place where Gods will is carried out without question, and the other is this physical world where the rebellious heart of man resides. These views are not only wrong from the very start; they are bad theology built on a bad foundation. I hope you can see that. I would welcome any continued conversation if you are willing.
Greetings, I am sorry if you feel that way. Is there a specific scientific or logical objection you have that we could discuss? While you are considering that, I do have a question about your claim of mythology and magic, which, outside of its obvious literary errors, is a gross oversimplification. Biblical creation research uses and validates all of the observational sciences. The difference is not in the science but in the interpretation. To say it simply, if you are looking for Darwin, that's what you will see, and the same is true for the biblical views. all scientists with a creation worldview freely admit this. Many PhD-level scientists have published peer-reviewed articles, research projects, and best-selling books such as "Traced," a study of genetic links between people groups throughout history, written by Nathaniel Jeanson, a Harvard Ph.D. in cell development and bioinformatics. These are highly respected researchers in their fields with a number of significant discoveries to their credit using the Biblical model with great success. No mythology or magic is involved. At the same time, on the Darwinian side of the argument, claims such as the quantum vacuum, the Oort Cloud, dark matter and dark energy, the multiverse theory, the formation of stars, random unguided accumulation of genetic information, mutation as the engine of evolutionary gains, and a host of other unproven claims with little more than wishful thinking as their support continue to be used as though they are well established, but knowing full well that they are not. This has been true for many decades. For example, Dr. Wolfgang Smith, physicist, mathematician, and an evolutionist, said, "A growing number of respectable scientists are defecting from the evolutionist camp... moreover, for the most part, these experts have abandoned Darwinism, not on the basis of religious faith or biblical persuasions, but on strictly scientific grounds, and in some instances, regretfully." Dr. Edwin Conklin, a prominent evolutionist and former professor of biology at Princeton, said this almost 70 years ago, "The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a print shop." Lastly Dr. David Burlinski, an agnostic referred to the modern theory of evolution as "just a mess." It is pretty clear that even among the leaders in the field, there has been, and continues to be, a serious and growing doubt in foundational assumptions holding up the theory. One by one, as scientific understanding of the natural world grows, the old Darwinian paradigms are being tossed out, and the secular models of origins are beginning to look more and more biblical. This clearly being the case, I would have to agree with Dr. Duane Gish: "Evolution is a fairytale for adults". I would also put forward the idea that hanging onto a theory being decimated by its one research is not a scientific pursuit, it is a religion doomed to destroy itself. If you are interested in a civil conversation, let me know.
Just one thing. It's time to stop saying that comets are made of ice, since we have landed probes on them and found out that they are not made of ice. Also, the tails always point away from the sun, regardless of the direction the comet travels, so they cannot be material being trailed along behind a comet. Comets sometimes flare up when they are way out beyond Jupiter, which means the tails are NOT melting ice from the heat of the sun. So, what force might interact with comets that are close, all the time, so that comets near the sun always have tails, but may also react occasionally at long distance as well? Probably not anything kinetic. I think there are a LOT of secular assumptions that even creation scientists accept without examination. Ice-ball comets are one. Red shift is another. Black holes, dark matter, dark energy, the list goes on. Never accept that which is not observably confirmed over and over by experimentation. We literally landed on comets. The jig is up on ice-ball comets.
Hi there. While I understand the premise and appreciate your comment, we do need to keep one thing in mind. We have only landed on one comet. Multiple flyby missions throughout the years, but only one landing. While the data recovered was useful and showed that the material comets are comprised of includes more than just ice, which was always understood to be true, it also showed it contains large amounts of ice in various forms. The mission increased the understanding of the composition of some comets, but it did not change the general understanding of Comets in general. NASA, the ESA, and other agencies still refer to them as "Dirty Ice Ball" in publications as recent as July of 2023. So, agreeing with that long-held understanding is not a compromised position for creationists to hold to, especially given the very limited amount of contrary data.
@@inthebeginning...4061 NASA and the ESA are not my authorities. I don't care what these agencies refer to anything as. And yes, agreeing with a long-held WRONG understanding is a compromised position for creationists to hold. We have landed on zero comets where we have determined that they are dirty ice balls. In fact, the only evidence that they were made of ice is that they have a tail that is perpendicular to the sun and it was assumed the tail was caused by heat from the sun, so that tail must be water. But, like I said, the tails flare up in the outer reaches of the solar system too, so they aren't kinetic. I feel that any agreement with ANY understanding, long-held or not, is a compromise if that understanding is based on any number of assumptions. Period. Look how much secular science has wrong in Geology. Practically every single thing that comes out of the mouth of a secular geologist is flat out false. Provably so. But hey, the Smithsonian says, so if we just believe in all of it, we aren't compromising.
I have no doubt that the Holy Bible is in fact the word of GOD You either believe beyond a shadow of doubt in the word of GOD or you don't. It is like doubting Thomas who believed in the truth, only after seeing the resurrected Jesus standing in front of him, and Jesus said unto him :-Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: (blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.) John 20:29 you can not say you believe in Jesus and His words, yet you don't believe the words of the Holy Bible as being fact, after all Jesus is the word of GOD and the word is GOD.
![[UNCUT] The Loyal Pin ปิ่นภักดิ์ EP.6 (1/4)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/m05kZ2GDKXg/mqdefault.jpg)
The Turth (The Word) is like a roaring Lion (of the tribe of Judah) set it free and it (truth) will defend itself.
💖🙏💖🙏💖
Praise God, thank you Jesus for opening my eyes!! I thought i had it all figured out until you showed me the truth.
You should reupload this. I don't know if it's your audio, or you tubes lowering the volume. This seems the case on many Christian themed programs. It's very nearly inaudible.
It's all about our presuppositions and worldview. Amen. As christians our worldview is polar opposite from a secularist who believes evolution.
Ultimately, it comes down to whether or not a person accepts or rejects the gospel. They either want salvation or they want to continue living in sin. That's really the bottom line and hopefully seeing the flaws in their worldview helps them make a good decision. God bless and thank you for posting this 🙂✝️🙏
@MrWeezer55 you're a Born Sinner nobody ever had to teach you or any other child how to lie, cheat, or steal and yet we all did it. Guilty!.
@MrWeezer55 you're a Born Sinner nobody ever had to teach you or any other child how to lie, cheat, or steal and yet we all did it. Guilty!.
And in reality the vast majority of Christians accept that Evolution is a proven scientific fact.
@@walkergarya Interesting that you ask for proof. What specific proof are you looking for? What proof has evolution provided that you think is so airtight that it cannot be questioned? You claim to live a moral life, but what standard are you using to declare yourself moral? Is it your own subjective reasoning that allows you to rationalize whatever you want at the moment, or is it a higher authority, and if so, where did that authority come from, and what makes it worth obeying?
How about a third alternative: I reject the gospel and have no need for "salvation," but I choose to live in accordance with the sensible moral code agreed upon by millions of us, which excludes the same bad behaviors prohibited in the bible as well as some condoned by the bible, such as slavery, killing disobedient children etc.. "Sin" is merely transgressing against religious rules, and as a non-adherent to any religion, I find that sin is a meaningless concept. It is like telling a carpenter that welding is prohibited.
God reveals Himself to whomever He chooses. The Spirit gives life to whomever He chooses. Salvation is of the Lord. If you humble yourself, read the New Testament, and ask Him for forgiveness of your transgressions, He will show you the Truth.
why just the NT? Paul tells us all scripture is good for us. 2nd Tim. 3:16-17
@@ianmonk6211 Amen. However, if you read the New Testament and God gives you Life, you will naturally read the Old Testament after you complete the new.
@@nickjones5435 we all have those don't we? We all wear worldview glasses. I am arguing that if God is a Living Being, He has the power and Authority to reveal Himself to whomever He will. It's not so much a matter of evidence, it's the fact that you Hate Him.
Perhaps it will excite you to hear that once the Lord starts to renew your mind and give you a new heart, you’ll naturally become more humble and less of a smart ass.
@@freegracerevival seeing that the person I was responding to deleted his comments, you are only seeing one side of the conversation. Just your average atheistic "you are a moron and there is no God" attack. So I presented him with his own worldview. Merry Christmas.
Alléluia 🔥💗🔥
Hi - Please I watch these channels hoping to see a comprehensive timeline for YEC, however, all we get is Flood, Flood, Flood. You really need to show ALL the things God has flung at this planet - Please include and explain the asteroid impacts, such as Theia, Vredefort and Chicxulub. Also, we need to look at possibly the largest impact crater (just discovered), the Deniliquin crater. The asteroid impacts look to dwarf the Flood and we really need the experts to explain when these events, along with decades long impact winters fit into the timeline. I'm also curious as to why no ancient cultures mention these asteroid impacts in their writings - Any ideas welcomed.
would an absent, of writings, universally, suggest that the said event, did not happen...
@@philipbuckley759 Deniliguin impact crater is one of the largest impact craters on Earth at 520 km in diameter and is about 30 km deep. It has been revealed by magnetic and seismic readings - It is believed this impact sent the Earth into an ice age and wiped out 85% of the life on Earth. Back then, the asteroid hit the Gondwana continent. The Vredefort impact crater is less massive at 300 km diameter. Chicxulub is "only' 150 km. diameter, but it was sufficient to wipe out the dinosaurs. This is what the majority of geologists and paleontologists believe. As a creationist, I have to believe that God's timeline includes asteroid impacts. The surface of the Moon has many visible impact craters, and it makes sense that Earth would not have escaped similar asteroid impacts. The Theia impact is the biggest and created the Moon. God's timeline on Earth is absolutely amazing and worth researching.
There you go again trying to place what man has said happened with what the Word of God says. They say that dinosaurs lived 65+ million years ago but dinosaur soft tissue including blood vessels, blood cells, collagen, erythrocytes and even partial DNA have now been found on five continents with over 140 peer reviewed articles on the subject. Deep time is a myth.
God is a physical being according to Scripture.
Daniel 7:9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.
Revelation 5:1 And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals.
Revelation 19:4 And the four and twenty elders and the four beasts fell down and worshipped God that sat on the throne, saying, Amen; Alleluia.
The angels are also spirits, yet have bodies.
Hebrews 1:7 And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.
Genesis 19: 1 And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;
Numbers 22:31 Then the LORD opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of the LORD standing in the way, and his sword drawn in his hand: and he bowed down his head, and fell flat on his face.
Angels, which are spirits, can be invisible to mortal sight. However God can open our eyes to see these spirits. There is a huge difference between being immaterial and being hidden from mortal sight.
Job 19:26 And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God:
27 Whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; though my reins be consumed within me.
I look forward to seeing the face of God.
John 5:37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.
Here Jesus makes it clear that his Father has a shape. Thus God is a physical being.
Psalm 139: 1 «To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.» O LORD, thou hast searched me, and known me.
2 Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off.
3 Thou compassest my path and my lying down, and art acquainted with all my ways.
4 For there is not a word in my tongue, but, lo, O LORD, thou knowest it altogether.
5 Thou hast beset me behind and before, and laid thine hand upon me.
6 Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain unto it.
We see here in Psalm 38 that God is everywhere by virtue of his omniscience. Notice that God was afar off from David as he knew his thoughts.
"God is in heaven. This we are taught in the Lord’s prayer. “Our Father which art in heaven.” Matthew 6:9; Luke 11:2. But if God is as much in every place as he is in any one place, then heaven is also as much in every place as it is in any one place, and the idea of going to heaven is all a mistake. We are all in heaven; and the Lord’s prayer, according to this foggy theology simply means, Our Father which art everywhere, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth, as it is everywhere." James White, The Personality of God, pg. 4
I pray this study is a blessing and stirs one to deeper thought on the subject. I think one will find that the error comes from a faulty presupposition that can't be supported by Scripture. I'm sure we have all experienced preconceived notions leading us to false beliefs. I know I have.
Greetings, @andrewwhite1318; while this content has nothing to do with the posted video, and to be plain, I do not think this is the appropriate platform to try and push 7th-day / Davidian theology, I will take a few moments to answer some of the issues in your view. There are several inaccurate assumptions you are making that are leading you to bad conclusions that require attention. In order to be precise, I will work through your comment section by section. Your original comment will be in quotations, and I will follow in bullet points.
I will leave this up for about a week so you have time to respond if you choose, then I will take it down as this is not what this platform is for.
“God is a physical being according to Scripture.”
The first problem here is that your use of “physical” is vague. This is to be expected, considering that this was written in the early 1800’s.
Are you saying physical as we are physical, meaning a part of this material universe or physical in another sense?
When a person is viewing theology from a flawed foundation, it inevitably ripples through the rest of their thinking. James Whites's concept of the physical God is one such severely flawed view, that caused him to misinterpret much of scripture.
God is the creator of the universe we live in, Genesis 1:1. This is a universe of space, time, matter, and energy. These are what comprise our physical temporal existence. In order to have created this universe, God would have to be outside of space and time, immaterial as we understand material, and unbound to what we know as energy. So, to say God is “physical” is an inaccurate foundation on which to build an argument.
If God has a form, it would be in relation to His existence beyond our material world. Trying to define that existence is speculation at best.
“Daniel 7:9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.
Revelation 5:1 And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals.
Revelation 19:4 And the four and twenty elders and the four beasts fell down and worshipped God that sat on the throne, saying, Amen; Alleluia.”
Here, you are referring to visions. Visions are not, by any means, physical realities. Visions are given by God to the one He chooses to receive them in a manner that they will be able to understand and comprehend. We know this to be true because there are several visions of the throne room of God throughout scripture, and they all describe it differently.
Daniel 7:9 was part of a dream given to Daniel, not a physical representation of heaven. It was a prophecy of what was to come, not a glimpse of Gods physical nature. The revelation of John was given to “show what must soon happen,” so the visions were not of heaven, but they were prophetic in nature to help us recognize the workings of God when they occur. To turn these passages into proof of a physical God is to ignore their intended purpose and bend them into an interpretation they were never intended to give.
“The angels are also spirits, yet have bodies.
Hebrews 1:7 And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.
Genesis 19: 1 And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;
Numbers 22:31 Then the LORD opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of the LORD standing in the way, and his sword drawn in his hand: and he bowed down his head, and fell flat on his face.
Angels, which are spirits, can be invisible to mortal sight. However God can open our eyes to see these spirits. There is a huge difference between being immaterial and being hidden from mortal sight.
Job 19:26 And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God:
27 Whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; though my reins be consumed within me.”
- The idea of angels being physical as we are physical is by no means a correct way to see these passages. For instance, in order to interact with a physical world, it makes sense that the angels would take on the physical form required for that task. This is clearly seen throughout the scriptures. But then they return to their spiritual existence. Spiritual beings moving in and out of our physical world is not a new thing. This by no means makes them physical; it makes them beyond the physical, more commonly known as supernatural.
“I look forward to seeing the face of God.
John 5:37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.”
Here Jesus makes it clear that his Father has a shape. Thus God is a physical being.”
- Again you are incorrectly assuming a great deal. Having a shape does not mean having a physical form as we have physical form. It simply applies to having “A”form. What form does a spiritual being take? We do not know; we do not exist where He exists. So, this does not show God as a physical being; it just shows how much we do not know about existence beyond this life. Jesus is saying that the Father has borne witness to who Christ is, but no one there knows the Father as He truly is.
“Psalm 139: 1 «To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.» O LORD, thou hast searched me, and known me.
2 Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off.
3 Thou compassest my path and my lying down, and art acquainted with all my ways.
4 For there is not a word in my tongue, but, lo, O LORD, thou knowest it altogether.
5 Thou hast beset me behind and before, and laid thine hand upon me.
6 Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain unto it.
We see here in Psalm 38 that God is everywhere by virtue of his omniscience. Notice that God was afar off from David as he knew his thoughts.”
- This only makes sense if God is immaterial and exists outside of our space/time. A being not bound by our limited material existence, literally outside of the physical universe, can see all of physical existence at the same time, even move back and forth through it. He would know all, see all, and be able to interact with everything and anything at any point in history. This is not a physical being, it is an immaterial being.
"God is in heaven. This we are taught in the Lord’s prayer. “Our Father which art in heaven.” Matthew 6:9; Luke 11:2. But if God is as much in every place as he is in any one place, then heaven is also as much in every place as it is in any one place, and the idea of going to heaven is all a mistake. We are all in heaven; and the Lord’s prayer, according to this foggy theology simply means, Our Father which art everywhere, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth, as it is everywhere." James White, The Personality of God, pg. 4
This is an incredibly flawed view. Even if heaven were just a “realm outside of our vision” which it is not, it would still be “a different place”. You are forgetting that in the Lords prayer we also ask “thy will be done on earth… as it is in heaven” these are two different places. One place where Gods will is carried out without question, and the other is this physical world where the rebellious heart of man resides.
These views are not only wrong from the very start; they are bad theology built on a bad foundation. I hope you can see that.
I would welcome any continued conversation if you are willing.
Can't hear it
Biblical and science don't belong in the same sentence.
Science uses facts and proof. Religion uses mythology and magic.
Greetings, I am sorry if you feel that way. Is there a specific scientific or logical objection you have that we could discuss? While you are considering that, I do have a question about your claim of mythology and magic, which, outside of its obvious literary errors, is a gross oversimplification. Biblical creation research uses and validates all of the observational sciences. The difference is not in the science but in the interpretation. To say it simply, if you are looking for Darwin, that's what you will see, and the same is true for the biblical views. all scientists with a creation worldview freely admit this. Many PhD-level scientists have published peer-reviewed articles, research projects, and best-selling books such as "Traced," a study of genetic links between people groups throughout history, written by Nathaniel Jeanson, a Harvard Ph.D. in cell development and bioinformatics. These are highly respected researchers in their fields with a number of significant discoveries to their credit using the Biblical model with great success. No mythology or magic is involved. At the same time, on the Darwinian side of the argument, claims such as the quantum vacuum, the Oort Cloud, dark matter and dark energy, the multiverse theory, the formation of stars, random unguided accumulation of genetic information, mutation as the engine of evolutionary gains, and a host of other unproven claims with little more than wishful thinking as their support continue to be used as though they are well established, but knowing full well that they are not. This has been true for many decades. For example, Dr. Wolfgang Smith, physicist, mathematician, and an evolutionist, said, "A growing number of respectable scientists are defecting from the evolutionist camp... moreover, for the most part, these experts have abandoned Darwinism, not on the basis of religious faith or biblical persuasions, but on strictly scientific grounds, and in some instances, regretfully." Dr. Edwin Conklin, a prominent evolutionist and former professor of biology at Princeton, said this almost 70 years ago, "The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a print shop." Lastly Dr. David Burlinski, an agnostic referred to the modern theory of evolution as "just a mess." It is pretty clear that even among the leaders in the field, there has been, and continues to be, a serious and growing doubt in foundational assumptions holding up the theory. One by one, as scientific understanding of the natural world grows, the old Darwinian paradigms are being tossed out, and the secular models of origins are beginning to look more and more biblical. This clearly being the case, I would have to agree with Dr. Duane Gish: "Evolution is a fairytale for adults". I would also put forward the idea that hanging onto a theory being decimated by its one research is not a scientific pursuit, it is a religion doomed to destroy itself. If you are interested in a civil conversation, let me know.
"Science uses facts and proof"
LOL. Where's the missing links?
Greg Bahnsen
evidently many dont believe, due to their lifestyles....
evolution is not sustainable, even with unlimited time....due to the dynamics of chemistry....
Just one thing. It's time to stop saying that comets are made of ice, since we have landed probes on them and found out that they are not made of ice. Also, the tails always point away from the sun, regardless of the direction the comet travels, so they cannot be material being trailed along behind a comet. Comets sometimes flare up when they are way out beyond Jupiter, which means the tails are NOT melting ice from the heat of the sun. So, what force might interact with comets that are close, all the time, so that comets near the sun always have tails, but may also react occasionally at long distance as well? Probably not anything kinetic. I think there are a LOT of secular assumptions that even creation scientists accept without examination. Ice-ball comets are one. Red shift is another. Black holes, dark matter, dark energy, the list goes on. Never accept that which is not observably confirmed over and over by experimentation. We literally landed on comets. The jig is up on ice-ball comets.
Hi there. While I understand the premise and appreciate your comment, we do need to keep one thing in mind. We have only landed on one comet. Multiple flyby missions throughout the years, but only one landing. While the data recovered was useful and showed that the material comets are comprised of includes more than just ice, which was always understood to be true, it also showed it contains large amounts of ice in various forms. The mission increased the understanding of the composition of some comets, but it did not change the general understanding of Comets in general. NASA, the ESA, and other agencies still refer to them as "Dirty Ice Ball" in publications as recent as July of 2023. So, agreeing with that long-held understanding is not a compromised position for creationists to hold to, especially given the very limited amount of contrary data.
@@inthebeginning...4061 NASA and the ESA are not my authorities. I don't care what these agencies refer to anything as. And yes, agreeing with a long-held WRONG understanding is a compromised position for creationists to hold. We have landed on zero comets where we have determined that they are dirty ice balls. In fact, the only evidence that they were made of ice is that they have a tail that is perpendicular to the sun and it was assumed the tail was caused by heat from the sun, so that tail must be water. But, like I said, the tails flare up in the outer reaches of the solar system too, so they aren't kinetic. I feel that any agreement with ANY understanding, long-held or not, is a compromise if that understanding is based on any number of assumptions. Period. Look how much secular science has wrong in Geology. Practically every single thing that comes out of the mouth of a secular geologist is flat out false. Provably so. But hey, the Smithsonian says, so if we just believe in all of it, we aren't compromising.
the presence, of carbon, alone, suggests a young universe, due to its short half life, eh...
I have no doubt that the Holy Bible is in fact the word of GOD
You either believe beyond a shadow of doubt in the word of
GOD or you don't. It is like doubting Thomas who believed in
the truth, only after seeing the resurrected Jesus standing in
front of him, and Jesus said unto him :-Thomas, because thou
hast seen me, thou hast believed: (blessed are they that have
not seen, and yet have believed.) John 20:29 you can not say
you believe in Jesus and His words, yet you don't believe the
words of the Holy Bible as being fact, after all Jesus is the
word of GOD and the word is GOD.