46 years ago I was moved to look at the Bible for myself too, the Book of Isaiah. In chapter 5, I learned that the Bible showed that land has a carrying capacity. As a science student, I learned this and I remembered about the Dust Bowl in the 1920s and how America learned that the land has to be cared for and given rest. Then in chapter 7 verse 14, I ran into a verse that a virgin would give birth to a son. I knew that at Christmas we learn that Jesus was born of a virgin and that was interesting. Then in Isaiah 11:11-12, I read that the Jews would be dispersed throughout the "four corners of the earth" and then return to their homeland. I knew that Israel became a nation again shortly after WW II. Also I recognize that there was wisdom as well as holiness as I read these pages. At this point I believed. That was almost 46 years ago. The night before I prayed. I said "Dear God I don't know if You exist, but if You do and Jesus is the way to You, I will follow Him and worship Him for the rest of my life. I am now closer to my 66th birthday than my 65th birthday, and I am still following and worshiping Jesus. That is one prayer than I have kept my promise to God as He has kept His promises to me.

@joshm5237

3 жыл бұрын

Beautiful. Amen!

@gavinhurlimann2910

2 жыл бұрын

Well said.

@youdecide6997

2 жыл бұрын

Wow I didn’t know about the land. Thanks

@bigfrogfella

2 жыл бұрын

wow

@stevenrobinson8263

Жыл бұрын

May the LORD continue to bless you richly, Ted!!

God bless you hugh ross

Live long and prosper, Dr. Ross; I know a few people who would not listen to a preacher, but they will listen to you because of your science credentials and very rational and informed arguments for a Creator. Your work is changing the lives of many.

The reasons to believe ministry has strengthened my faith greatly, and it has helped me to confidently share the gospel. Thank you! May God continue to bless this ministry!

Psalm 90 and forward aligns perfectly with the Genesis days account. It was great that Hugh pointed this out.

God bless Mr.Hugh Ross.

Excellent point: most of the critics did not read the Bible, or take pieces out of context, and go out saying everything is wrong, fake, whatever. But it is important to be clear that the Holly Scriptures are neither history, nor astronomy and biology texts! They are the story of the people of God and their relation with Him.

Such a great answer! That a book was written so long ago, that outlined what science would eventually discover.

To humble oneself under the Lord Jesus and his holy spirit is the key to an understanding of the Bible.

Thanks Hugh

I like Hugh Ross, he is a very eye opening person. I would like to read some of his books.

Great work, keep it up. We need more like you.

Jesus Christ is the light of the world, outside of him there are no answers.

@qaz-fi1id

2 жыл бұрын

Untrue

I am so glad that Hugh's videos showed up in my recommendations. I watched Hugh years ago and was for no reason other than the genealogies of Genesis, a young earth creationist. Today many years later I somehow have changed my rigid interpretation to a more reasonable scientific view of creation over a long, long period. Limestone is one thing that cements it for me today. Pun intended.

Thank you!

@TheJimtanker

3 жыл бұрын

For what? Mashing up science until it fits into a bible sized hole? Nothing but garbage.

@eswn1816

3 жыл бұрын

@@TheJimtanker Your emotional response contains no thoughtful critique. Hugh Ross is a Cal-Tech scientist of the highest order. The Bible is not garbage... but your irreverent comment... hmmm.... 🤭

Let’s not forget that Jesus made Aged wine from water. What this implies is that we are subject to the “laws of the universe” but God isn’t. He could have birthed the earth yesterday. And made it to show age given us memories and so forth. Oh and he also made Adam a grown man “aged. So he was man “not child” yet 1 day old.

God exist wether you like it or not

@1reptile121

5 жыл бұрын

The Phenomenal One that’s probably the worst argument I’ve ever heard

@vashnanerada8757

5 жыл бұрын

If true then prove it because if a god exists an there was evidence so increadible. Every one would belive.

@TyrellWellickEcorp

5 жыл бұрын

VASHTA NAVADA you cannot use natural means to explain or prove anything of the supernatural such as god. We objectively know that god exists.

@TyrellWellickEcorp

5 жыл бұрын

VASHTA NAVADA I think fine tuning evidence is clear that god exists

@vashnanerada8757

5 жыл бұрын

@@TyrellWellickEcorp I don't know a god exists along with billions of other people. That's why I'm still looking for evidence

I would love for Matt Dillahunty to be interviewed.

I hope God brings forth more and more people with great mind to prove that the God of Israel is real.

Awesome stuff rtb!! Just wondering what does the 28:19 refer to? Thx

@johnjkirkwood

6 жыл бұрын

I'm guessing the Great Commission. From Matthew.

@davidjanbaz7728

4 жыл бұрын

Yes!

You take it on faith.

I was blown away by the book of Genesis. The account of creation written by Moses thousands of years ago must be the work of the creator. I don't need further evidence.

The ANE cosmology described in Genesis (waters above the firmament, etc.) How does Hugh process this?

If you like this video then read Hugh Ross's "A Matter of Days." I have read a lot of apologetics but this is my favorite one (along with C. S. Lewis' "Mere Christianity).

@qaz-fi1id

2 жыл бұрын

Ya ok guy, comparing that book to Mere Christianity is ridiculous

Where do people claim Genesis teaches the earth is flat? What's been truly surprising (and embarrassing) is hearing self professing Christians say that the Bible teaches the earth is flat! I hope this is just an internet thing. I've never heard it in real life, so I have no idea how common this belief is.

@noahinson

6 жыл бұрын

Yesica1993 In fact, the bible says that the earth is round. It's in Isaiah.

@fudgedogbannana

4 жыл бұрын

It doesnt, but flat earthers say that it does.

@christianmotley262

3 жыл бұрын

He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth... The book of Isaiah, Seventh century BCE.

@sherrisentieri3123

3 жыл бұрын

I agree

@WaterspoutsOfTheDeep

2 жыл бұрын

@@christianmotley262 It's absurd because that has nothing to do with assuming the earth is flat. That is giving the perspective of God above the earth. A sphere looking down on it or any angle looks like a circle. Also a note Hebrew scholars have said is the writers of the text had the vocabulary of words to say the earth was flat, they never.

Isn't the Interviewer the same guy that was on another KZread video debating with one of the leaders the "Flat Earth" believers? i think he's a scientist too.

@afamilylifeoutdoorsteamshi5726

2 жыл бұрын

Jeff is also an astrophysicist

thank you Hugh! Is the Earth a sphere or flat?

@RTB_official

3 жыл бұрын

Hello Amy, here is an article that I think will help address your question - Daniel. reasons.org/explore/publications/questions-from-social-media/is-the-bible-a-flat-earth-book

If God is, then science must be. If science is, then God must be.

@scottgodlewski306

Жыл бұрын

This feels incredibly flawed.

What version of Genesis is the Dr referring to. Genisys says God create all the animals then man and then later God created man first. It says where was water and God create air and land from the water then contradicts it later.

In Job, God confronts Job with the question, "Where were you when I hung the globe of the earth in the heavens?" I've long found that reference to be prescient.

Mr. Hugh says that in the Bible account of creation, "scientific method leapt off the page." Mr. Hugh, despite claiming that he is a scientist, clearly does not understand how scientific method works.

Democritus predicted the existence of atoms, and Aristarchus predicted de heliocentric model of the solar system, were they inspired by god ?

@norbertjendruschj9121

Жыл бұрын

Aristarchus was "inspired" by observation. Democritus seems to have arrived at the idea of atoms by thinking about the problem of movement and the necessity of open space between objects to make movement possible.

I wish God would help me

@cheeseburgerrunner5217

2 жыл бұрын

I feel you bro

Mr Ross states that he found in Gensis a creation account that lined up with what he knows from science. This is fine, I see largely the same parallels. But then he goes on to say that the Bible therefore has "predictive power". This is an unscientific use of the concept of prediction. It is at most explanatory power. Mr. Ross also saw the scientific method in the pages of the Bible. This indicates a shallow understanding of the scientific method. This method is predicated on a chain of hypothesis-experiment-observation-prediction. While the Bible has many corroborated accounts that indicate accuracy as an historical document, there is nothing in the way of experimentation within its pages.

the most persuasive evidence is the talking snake

@norbertjendruschj9121

Жыл бұрын

One thump up for irony. So rare om this kind of sites.

Well, to think Genesis 1 is scientific, affords quite a lot of blind faith.

How is this an argument for Christianity? Judaism yes but Christianity?

There's a couple misrepresentations I see people making with Ross's view. There's also one little caveat with the title of this video that should be addressed as well. 1) "Ross is just assuming the truth of the Bible to prove it is true." Well, if you listen even half-carefully, you'll know that's not what he's asserting - and he did not bend science to fit the bible. He was only a deist before he read any of the holy books - he believed in a creator of some kind but had no idea if any of the major world religions had a creator consistent with science. He found only the Bible had a creation story that matches what modern science has found in the chronology of the progression of the universe. This impressed him which made him do thorough research on contradictions in the creation account with the historical record of science, which there is none. Which leads to the second point... 2) "The Genesis account doesn't get it right chronologically!" Most of this comes down to misinterpretations of the first few verses. When the Hebrews use "heavens and earth," it is a reference to the totality of physical existence, not the sky and the planet Earth. The word "formless and void" comes from the Hebrew "tohu va vohu", which is better translated as "chaos." So God took what He made in the totality of physical existence and brought order to the formlessness. Then, when it says "let there be light" - it simply means that when the earth was created, light was permitted to enter. It's not that light didn't exist before it was on this planet! Also, take into consideration the many other chapter-long creation accounts in the Bible and it paints a more complete picture - Genesis isn't supposed to be an accurate scientific description of earth, it's the beginning of the story of humanity's fall away from the good relationship we were supposed to have with God, each other, and the creatures of the earth, and how all of those were broken because we messed it up. It's far more theological than scientific, which makes the chronological accuracy even more remarkable. And as for the title of this video, it really should be "Dr. Ross's Reason for Coming to Faith" - it's not really the greatest argument or evidence for the existence of God, because one could easily write off the Genesis account as a lucky coincidence. Still respect Dr. Ross, the way his mind works is very intriguing; this just isn't really "The Strongest Scientific Evidence that God Exists". It's a cool reason, but not very compelling.

@WaterspoutsOfTheDeep

2 жыл бұрын

Also might I add Gen 1:2 has one of the few common translation errors in the text. Which doesn't change the picture but gives more insight. The correct translation is the earth "became" formless and void. Not "was." The text states everything God creates is good/perfect and that he created the earth to be inhabited. This tells us something happened between Gen 1:1 and Gen 1:2... and the rabbit hole starts there.

@afamilylifeoutdoorsteamshi5726

2 жыл бұрын

Hilarious! You just missed represented everything

@thetruthfornow6045

2 жыл бұрын

@@WaterspoutsOfTheDeep well said.

If a 4 year old wrote a book about his view of the Universe and an adult person who has a degree in studies of the Universe spoke about it, who are you inclined to believe is most accurate in what they are trying to convey?..Even though they both are saying the same thing? If you take away the things that might seem to appear as "Fantasy" and look at the focal point, which is an intelligent entity, then it begins to make sense. The progression of technology as has happened over time is currently making it possible to build computers that are nearly at the same level of the capacity of the human brain...In the very near future they will surpass that level of thought. Put that same technology into AI, Self-Aware robots, and what you will end up with are independently thinking machines that you won't be able to distinguish from real humans...Until they speak. Now, to go further, put the same technology into nano-bots, put it in the medical field, Agriculture, Space Exploration, etc., etc., etc. At some point in the distant future, maybe a thousand years from now, you'll see things being created as if out of nowhere...But how? Because there was intelligence behind it all. And if you took someone from 300 years ago and put them in that future where planets are being Terra-formed, worm-holes can be traveled through, physical objects can be teleported from here to anywhere in the Universe, cars have no steering wheels and can drive you anywhere just by speaking to them, and lastly, a whole Universes can be created as Michio Kaku illustrated by his mathematic formulas...This person from hundreds of years in the past may either believe it was all done by random chance...Or...He may conclude that some higher entity had done it all. 🤷‍♂️ So, the way I see technology progressing ahead, it looks to me like it's going to make things look like something that "appears" to have occurred by natural processes...because these advances are going to make it so. 😉

@christianmotley262

3 жыл бұрын

Ok your illustration is possible but why compare it to our reality in this dimension?

@eswn1816

3 жыл бұрын

@@christianmotley262 Edwin is impressed with material technology as would be child with glittering toys who do not understand the Eternal Spirit or our spirit...

God has absolutely used Hugh to make a powerful impact for faith in Christ,for people around the world. My only caution would be that he may be reading scientific understandings into certain passages where that was not what was meant. Of course, Moses and others didn't fully understand what they had been inspired to write - so, there are unquestionably understandings that a far-future audience in the scientific age would more fully understand certain things. But the Bible was not written as a science textbook - it was also written so that the ancient audience would glean key understandings from it. So, while there surely is some scientific understandings to be had, we need to be careful how we try to fit some passages so as to see them in agreement with scientific things.

The bible does not prove the bible. So Ross has no scientific or any other kind of evidence. Just personal opinion.

Cronlogically there cant be vegetation and seeds and fruits,before the sun was created,but that is what Genesis tells us,oops

@staal2691

2 ай бұрын

It can be if creation was 6 24 hour days. sun moon and stars appeared on day 4. vegetation day 3. vegetation can easily survive 24 hours in the dark.

There is no scientific evidence of any God.

So right off the bat he says the main reason for him was seeing the account of creation in the bible was all in correct chronological order. HMMMMMMMM. 1In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. 3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. Ok, now lets look at the order in cosmology. From 370,000 years until about 1 billion years. After recombination and decoupling, the universe was transparent but the clouds of hydrogen only collapsed very slowly to form stars and galaxies, so there were no new sources of light. The only photons (electromagnetic radiation, or "light") in the universe were those released during decoupling (visible today as the cosmic microwave background) and 21 cm radio emissions occasionally emitted by hydrogen atoms. The decoupled photons would have filled the universe with a brilliant pale orange glow at first, gradually redshifting to non-visible wavelengths after about 3 million years, leaving it without visible light. This period is known as the cosmic Dark Ages. Between about 10 and 17 million years the universe's average temperature was suitable for liquid water 273-373 K (0-100 °C) and there has been speculation whether rocky planets or indeed life could have arisen briefly, since statistically a tiny part of the universe could have had different conditions from the rest as a result of a very unlikely statistical fluctuation, and gained warmth from the universe as a whole.[4] But wait, cosmology says light came before planets. So either A) he does not know or agree with other cosmologists OR B) he ignores this OR C) he defines earth in this context as any matter and not the planet we live on. Just think about it, do you really think earth was made, THEN the sun, or do you think the sun was here before the earth formed? If the sun came first then his "evidence/argument is refuted.

@emmanueloluga9770

4 жыл бұрын

WRONG. Watch another video of his, and he literally states and reaches the same conclusion you arrive at. Job 38:9 is your friend

@christianmotley262

3 жыл бұрын

Sentence 1, the Creation has happened... sentence 2, the scene is referenced from an observer on the earth, light is not created, it is allowed to be observed, look at the original Hebrew, it is translated "Let there be" or "Let there be seen".

@WaterspoutsOfTheDeep

2 жыл бұрын

@@christianmotley262 Correct, let is not a word of creation but permission. God is literally unsealing the sky. We know this because it says God judged and destroyed the earth during Lucifers fall(earths inhabitants(demons) corrupted by Lucifer like the angels under him). God destroyed and flooded the earth and sealed the sky it says. That is why we see the change from Gen 1:1 to Gen 1:2 a destroyed flooded frozen earth(no light). The bible even talks about the earth covered in frost shockingly basically we see this flooded ice age in the bible talked about. Light was indeed already created. The seven days is basically creation 2.0 for life on earth, God is restoring the planet. Lucifer was previous "king and priest" over the earth the bible says and God gave the position over to man to have dominion over the earth which is part of the big motivation for Satan to temp Adam and Eve in the garden. To which Jesus had to come and defeat Satan as the second Adam. It's all connected. Basically the story spanning the bible is integrated into the creation account. Such an interesting topic yet no one ever really bothers talking about it because it doesn't have much to do with a Christians walk.

@WaterspoutsOfTheDeep

2 жыл бұрын

Like the other person said. You are misinterpreting language. Let is not a word of creation. Gen 1:1 we have the full creation of the universe. Full stop. This period of time can be almost whatever you want. Gen 1:2 and Gen 1:3 literally have nothing to do with what you are talking about. Gen 1:2 we see a destroyed flooded frozen earth. God never created it like this, it begs the question what happened. Events must have taken place. That right there should already alert you to there being a big gap in time period.

@macmac1022

2 жыл бұрын

@@WaterspoutsOfTheDeep So what was made first the sun or the earth?

Basically start with a presupposition that the Bible is true and then fit all info into that narrow view, got it. Do what you want but don't pretend it's scientific.

@davidjanbaz7728

4 жыл бұрын

Then why does so much scientific evidence support the Bible?

@davidjanbaz7728

4 жыл бұрын

ACTUALLY he started with the presupposition that the Bible was fake like all the rest of religious writings. You didn't listen very well!

@VaeVictis6478

4 жыл бұрын

@@davidjanbaz7728 like what? Give me one example and make it your best one please.

@davidjanbaz7728

4 жыл бұрын

@@VaeVictis6478 Watch their videos!

@VaeVictis6478

4 жыл бұрын

@@davidjanbaz7728 you actually believe that a man who grew up in Canada never met a Christian before he was 27? I've watched the videos and heard a lot of assertions but I've literally seen no evidence let alone scientific testing that verifies Christianity. Not being able to explain something does not give someone the scientific right to fill that gap with god. That's literally no different than an ancient Greek saying zues was throwing lightning because they cannot explain it any other way. Also if this god is real why did it make rules for how to beat your slaves and sell your daughter into sexual slavery (Exodus 21) rather than just saying don't do those things? I hope for the sake of all things good this god is not real.

What's the strongest evidence for god? Hugh Ross: "Opening the bible and seeing there was an account of creation, and it was all in the correct chronological order, everything was correctly described, and that proved to me that the bible had predictive power." How can he keep a straight face and say something so ridiculous? This guy is an astronomer and he thinks the biblical creation story is accurate? The earth appeared before the sun? "So God made the two larger lights, the sun to rule over the day and the moon to rule over the night; he also made the stars. 17 He placed the lights in the sky to shine on the earth, 18 to rule over the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness." The moon is not a light. The sun exists in space regardless if it's night or day where you are. Making a man out of dust and a woman out of a rib? The mental gymnastics it takes to make this all fit together in your head is astounding.

@trirunner2520

3 жыл бұрын

You still have to keep in mind while this was inspired by God it was still written down by a man. Hugh Ross is an old earth believer, and light was mentioned much earlier in the creation story. It wasn't noted as the sun until day 4, but at the end of each day it does say "And there was evening, and there was morning". I believe in an old earth. Nothing in science points to a literal 6 day creation. Everything from the fact that we can see objects millions of light years away to the layers in the polar ice caps point to an old earth. I do believe in God though. The point of the Bible is about God's relationship with his people and not a science book that was written to detail how the universe and Earth came about. So the fact that it is only 1 chapter from the entire book should be a clue that it isn't the focal point.

@BARKERPRODUCTION

3 жыл бұрын

@@trirunner2520 how do you determine which parts of the Bible are flawed due to human interpretation?

@trirunner2520

3 жыл бұрын

@@BARKERPRODUCTION That is the struggle I guess. I do not prescribe to any set denomination. I study science, read the Bible, and draw my own conclusions. I do believe in Jesus because there is way too much written for him to not exist. Of course the fact that he existed doesn't make him the son of God. I choose to believe he is because why would the disciples have died the way they did if they had not seen Jesus post burial? After the death of Jesus most of his followers where in hiding. What gave them a new sense of purpose? I know a lot of that takes some faith, but I don't see what I have to lose. The overall teaching of the new covenant (new testament, which is what would govern us today) is just about loving each other, doing the right thing, and believing in Jesus. The first two of those is how we should act by any standard.

@Ooochild

3 жыл бұрын

@@BARKERPRODUCTION For me it’s 2 Timothy 3:16. “All Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for teaching, for rebuking, for correcting, for training in righteousness, ‬so that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.”

@BARKERPRODUCTION

3 жыл бұрын

@@Ooochild The scripture telling you that the scripture is inspired.... This doesn't really seem to be a reliable way of knowing what's true.

There's not one iota of proof that ANY supreme being ever existed, anywhere.

@trirunner2520

3 жыл бұрын

There also isn't one iota of proof that one doesn't exist. I am a science guy. I am working on my PhD in Eng and I really am a straight up science nerd. While you are absolutely correct that no one can prove a supreme being did or does exist there are still so many questions we can't answer. The perfect situation that even allows our existence is amazing. From the distance to the Sun, and the position of Jupiter, to the creation of life is all incredible. The more you dig into it the more questions you find that may not prove God, but definitely look like something planned our set up. It may not be the evidence you need to convince yourself, but it is enough for me to believe in God because what do I have to lose?

@WaterspoutsOfTheDeep

2 жыл бұрын

What in the world? The fact the universe is coherent is literally a massive proof of God. The discovery of DNA. The person of Jesus. The bible. The big bang theory. The sum of scientific knowledge pointing towards a fine tuned universe. The survival of the Jew. The existence of humans. And so on and so on.

@dumpsterjedi6148

2 жыл бұрын

@@trirunner2520 yawn, god of the gaps argument, appeal to authority, the logical inaccuracies about with your argument Mr, science guys 😬🙄

Hugh Ross is very fond of using obvious fallacy to pretend he has some kind of rationale in what he wants to beLIEve. Ask yourself where any of his published works (in accredited scientific journals) mention his deity. Then ask why a respected peer reviewed scientific journal would reject the fallacious reasoning he uses. The bottom line is that fallacies are not permitted in science, argument is not scientific evidence, and he came into this empty handed.

@jr.8948

6 жыл бұрын

No

@frosted1030

6 жыл бұрын

Can you elaborate and cite where Ross has been published on this specific topic?

@frosted1030

6 жыл бұрын

"From what I've seen so far, he uses scientific evidence and studies to provide reasons to believe in the bring that is God and then specifically YAHWEH." But no predictive models.. so.. it's not science. Just justification for beLIEf (something not done in science).

@yunusahmed2940

6 жыл бұрын

frosted1030 Explain the origin of the Universe.

@samthegreekboy6812

5 жыл бұрын

He lists all his sources, makes great arguments, wins all his debates, his genius is obvious.