Hugh… I’ve been following you for so many years. I’m a lover of science. My nephew died in 07 in Iraq. Your program got me through 6 months of intense sorrow. Thank you for all you do.

I really thank Reasons To Believe and Dr Ross for such informed discussions on a fascinating topic

@rubiks6

3 жыл бұрын

I've read most of Ayn Rand's books. She darned near ruined my thinking. Thank goodness I've recovered a bit. The God of the Bible has been a great help. Dr. Ross is as good at twisting reality as Ayn Rand. The Bible speaks *_plain_* truth. Believe God, not Dr. Ross.

@jannakruger7800

2 жыл бұрын

@@rubiks6 I was also impressed by the character you refer to in her book The Fountainhead..... until I met with Jesus. He IS the TRUTH and HR pales in comparison :)

@rubiks6

2 жыл бұрын

@@jannakruger7800 - Ayn Rand had a rough childhood and for that, she blamed God became angry at Him. Recognizing that the human experience did not work well without God, she invented a godless philosophy with Man as god and since her ideas could not exist in reality, she fictionized them. Howard Roark is that fictionalized man/god character. Yes. The real Man/God is Jesus Christ. Unlike Howard Roark, Jesus Christ is quite unselfish and quite self-sacrificial. Jesus Christ is the exact antithesis of Howard Roark. Jesus Christ demonstrated that you gain the most by giving the most away. God's ideas are usually quite opposite of man's ideas. God's ideas are usually counterintuitive. "There is a way that seems right to a man, But its end is the way of death." - Proverbs 14.12 (NKJV) "Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men." - 1 Corinthians 1.25 (NKJV) "For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, “He catches the wise in their own craftiness”; and again, “The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are futile.” Therefore let no one boast in men." - 1 Corinthians 3.19 - 21a (NKJV)

@ManlyServant

Жыл бұрын

its not informed,the bible is clear,there IS evening and morning,the first day,day 1-6 is undisputedly 24 hour day because it says there was evening and morning,God already created NIGHT and daylight in the first day,he already create light in the first day

Once again, brilliantly answered Dr Ross.... I never stop learning from you.... A clear, concise response so logically explained, even a lay person can understand.... May God continue to use and bless your unique ministry, and endue you with wisdom and knowledge.

@-kepha8828

4 жыл бұрын

So when Jesus told his deciples in the renewed covenant, that Adam was created in the beginning, you believe Jesus was lieing, because you claim each day was thousands of years? If each day was as long as you claim, was Adam created in the beginning? Nope!

@ojara

4 жыл бұрын

@@-kepha8828 kzread.info/dash/bejne/f22V3NaDnsi2Zqw.html

@-kepha8828

4 жыл бұрын

@@ojara wrong. Genesis chapter 1 tells us how long a day is. It says when the sun goes up, morning, it is light, and when the sun goes down, it is darkness. He says THIS constitutes the time period of 1 day. That means no matter how much you want to justify a long creation, you CANNOT leave those parameters. Sorry. You tried to be fancy with words, but failed. You see, the hebrew language is far more detailed than the english language you go by. The Hebrew says day 1 was YOM ECHAD. This means that only 1 day can preceed it. And the bible already defines a day as the sun coming up, then the sun going down, millions of years in timespan cannot fit that definition no matter how deceiving you are. You are wanting so bad for the earth to be extremely old, because that's all your manmade dating systems tell you to believe. The problem? The dating systems have already been proven to be wrong because they assumed the wrong half life.

@ojara

4 жыл бұрын

@@-kepha8828 ok, then please tell me, how you calculate how old the earth is?

@-kepha8828

4 жыл бұрын

@@ojara I dont. I let Genesis stand on its word. God gave an exact genealogy of Adam to Yahushua. That genealogy is by far less than 6000 years. Now it's up to you to have faith in Gods word, or deny it and side with science. His son Yahushua said Adam and Eve were from the beginning. Which means the first week of creation. God defined a week as 7 DAYS. God defined a day as the period of LIGHT. God defined the night as the period of darkness that was seperated from the light. This is exactly what Dr Ross rejects. He wants to deny the parameters of what constitutes a "day" and a "night" so that he can expand their lengths to fit his scientific beliefs, his scientific faith. He put more faith into mans understanding than Gods. If you cannot accept the very first chapter of scripture, that a day is 12 hours, that a night is 12 hours, but called "watches" in the Hebrew, and that consecutively these 2 phases of time equal 24 hours, not thousands of years, therefore establishing that there was 7 24 hour periods that constituted the beginning of creation, then my friend you have some pretty big issues with having faith in what God said. And if you lack faith in Gods word over mans, I promise you then you shouldn't be concerned with how old the earth is, you should be concerned about your faith.

Well said Dr Hugh Ross

Besides the many explanations on (very) complicated matters dr Hugh Ross provides, I feel compelled to comment on his humbleness of character and the love he portrays through his tone of voice (from his presentations). If I may, I'd like to encourage all knowledgable Christian speakers to achieve a fine balance such as this. (Personally I find it tough to listen to an overconfident speaker). Thank you Doctor for the fine work you do in The Lord.

@youngurbangod1156

5 жыл бұрын

(ahem) Kent Hovind (ahem)

@adamsanchez9288

5 жыл бұрын

You're right. Sometimes its what you say *and* how you say it that achieves greatest reception.

@rubiks6

3 жыл бұрын

"And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light." - 2 Corinthians 11.14 (ESV) I would stick with the unambiguous Word of God, if I were you.

@worldgonemad5866

3 жыл бұрын

, yep, he's quite a salesman.

@e.a.p3174

2 жыл бұрын

@@rubiks6 I'm not sure what your comment is supposed to mean. The word of God was written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, and not In 17th century English.

The last line was perfectly crafted and expertly delivered. 👍🏻👍🏻

God has gifted Dr. Ross with an incredible intellect. He puts to use that gift, not only in the investigation of science but in challenging the entire scientific community by showing that science and God's word are completely compatible. If God is, then science must be. If science is, then God must be.

@5tonyvvvv i do hunt and fish and am always amazed at the wonderful nature that God gave to us for food but also for our pure enjoyment and amazement of his glory.

@worldgonemad5866

3 жыл бұрын

, how humble of you.

In the beginning God created the heavens and the, 6 day as we know them, don’t ad to the word of GOD and don’t subtract, God bless you

@MichaelSeven7777

2 жыл бұрын

Philo, a Jewish scholar of the first century assumed that the days of Genesis 1 were symbolic of periods of time over which God worked. Origen and Augustine, arguably the most influential theologians in the early Christian church agreed that the “days” were not literal 24-hour periods. By the way, others did interpret the days literally, so I do not want to create the false impression that this was the only view. Nobody is adding or subtracting here. This is a complex issue that people can respectfully disagree on.

@jamesdean7650

2 жыл бұрын

Yes he said six days was creation, but even God says in priphetic terms, one day with the lord is as a thousand years...adam alone in the garden with God was more than aday...as hugh ross suggested... the bible is up for interpretaion, but by the spirt we no the truth.as the spirit is truth...

@thetruthfornow6045

2 жыл бұрын

Nobody is adding or subtracting words. We are just trying to get to the correct meaning of the word. The catholic bible did not consider the original hebrew text.

@jamesdean7650

2 жыл бұрын

@@thetruthfornow6045 amen brother...

@mikezbeatz7122

2 ай бұрын

@@MichaelSeven7777that’s interesting. Both were first century or close to, so I wonder if that’s just when they came up earth the idea?

Amazing answer, thanks alot Dr.Ross, you are a blessing to the Church, God bless you.

The evening and the morning are the first day. His said this to end this silliness

Everytime I listen to Dr Ross, I am always getting the answers that Is very interesting. He is able to correlate Bible and Science ❤- which I knew from the past is parallel. May the good Lord continue to bless you with more wisdom and knowledge so we will understand God’s creation and WORDS thru you.

Very humble Godly man

This guy makes some interesting arguments.

@rubiks6

2 жыл бұрын

This guy rejects the Word of God.

@ethan532

2 жыл бұрын

@@rubiks6 wrong

@rubiks6

2 жыл бұрын

@@ethan532 - Whhhatever.

@ShITYouWannaKNO The Son of God is fully God(Hebrews 1:8, Titus 2:13, Colossians 2:9). When the Bible talks about Jesus as being "the firstborn" it is talking about His pre-eminence. In Jewish culture, the firstborn was the heir of all things, so to say that Jesus is the "firstborn" of all creation is talking about His pre-eminence over all things, and the fact that He is the heir of all things. If you read Hebrews 1, you will see that it teaches that Jesus is not angel, but God Himself.

@staeyou1806

Жыл бұрын

Jesus is not god and the so called Jesus was called yahshua

@jeezed2950

Жыл бұрын

I don't understand how being the firstborn of all creation doesn't mean that he was the first thing to be created. If Jesus is the word/wisdom of God in primordial past, then when God spoke, that means that he just created him. How can you misconstrue this? He's definitely connected to God and in a round about way is God/has been given His authority, he is at the end of the day subject to his Father. Because, Yeshua Jesus is basically a physical copy of God's software.

@ShITYouWannaKNO Jesus is fully God(Hebrews 1:8, Titus 2:13, Colossian 2:9). God loves us so much that He took on flesh as Jesus Christ and became the sacrifice for our sins, the innocent in place of the guilty, so that we can be reconciled to God through faith in Jesus. The Bible and the Christian church have always taught that Jesus is fully God.

I love this explanation and I see if very compatible with young earth science. Long period of time does not necessarily denote a 'millions of years' time frame. Having said that, I've never fully understood the whole concept of "day and night" in Genesis 1 but I'm learning. God bless and thanks for posting this.

@MutsPub

Жыл бұрын

Where did you get "young earth" from anything Dr. Ross stated?! The Earth is 4.5662 +/- 0.0001 BILLION years old. Young earth pseudo-science is nonsense! They are deceiving you for MONEY. There were NO dinosaurs on the Ark! Dino's died off some 66 MILLION years ago! The age of the Earth is NOT a salvation issue! YEC zealots make it an issue!

@brunodelconte

4 ай бұрын

There was evening and morning a first day, second day etc. Very few had any problems understanding what that meant until some atheists told us to believe otherwise, and not based on evidence but an a priori commitment to atheism, which still doesn't work because there isn't enough time for evolution to happen anyway, abiogenisis, the Goldilocks zone etc.

@johnpinckney7269

3 ай бұрын

If you listen to him you misunderstand the day of genesis.

God bless this brilliant man 🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼

"and the morning and the evening were the first day (yom)." Morning and evening are the context for YOM.

@-kepha8828

4 жыл бұрын

Let me slightly correct you. The original hebrew said "there WERE evening, and there WERE morning the first day". In the original hebrew, there are actually two "weres" not one like the english translation says. The 2nd "were" is actually a divider in the hebrew. Therefore, when God said "and there WERE morning the first day" is a statement that attaches the phrase "day" to the morning only, and not the evening. What this is telling is is that there is first darkness, then there is morning which is the first day. This separates the possibility that the darkness can be apart of the timeframe of a "day". And God tells us that much himself when he says the day and the night are to be SEPERATE. 1. There was evening. 2. There was morning which is the start of the 1st day

@aznation4592

2 жыл бұрын

@@-kepha8828 it wasn’t long periods of time that’s the issue

@jannakruger7800

2 жыл бұрын

@@-kepha8828 Then why does the Jewish day start at sunset. I lived in Israel for 6 months. The Sabbath started on Friday evening.

@-kepha8828

2 жыл бұрын

@@jannakruger7800 you are correct that todays jews start their day at sunset and their sabbath at friday night. But if you think the bible taught them to do this, you would be wrong. Even the jewish encyclopedia states that the modern day jews adopted this MANMADE TRADITION from babylon and didnt start observing these traditions until the 3rd and 4th century AD. The bible, in Genesis 1:5, defines "day" as the period of the suns light. It then defined night as the period of darkness ruled by the moon. God then commanded that these two periods, day and night FOREVER REMAIN SEPERATE.

@brunodelconte

4 ай бұрын

Which only shows that you have to really try hard to avoid the plain meaning of this text as understood by Christians for thousands of years. And you are still stuck with the 4th commandment, modelling our 6 days of work and one day of rest on the 6 days of creation. @@-kepha8828

you are so much appreciated and loved.....השם יברך

“But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” ‭‭2 Peter‬ ‭3:8‬ ‭(KJV‬‬)

@hopefulheathen1079

3 жыл бұрын

context who needs it

@Smasher77th

2 жыл бұрын

@@hopefulheathen1079 Amazing how everyone is quick to chant "A day is like a thousand years with the Lord" but quickly forget the vice versa "A thousand years is like a day with the Lord". If we apply that, then The millennial rule of Christ will last only one day. After all, a thousand years is like a day in the eyes of the Lord.

Gen 2 does not say that Adam worked the Garden of Eden, it just says that was God's purpose for Adam, we don't know if Adam spent any time doing that yet; we also see that immediately after GOD gave Adam HIS instructions, GOD recognized that it was not good for Adam to be alone. Gen 2 also does not say that Adam named all the birds and animals in one day, it just says that Adam did that and it could have been over many days with Eve's help. I looked at Gen 2:23 and the word "pah'-am" does not necessarily mean a long period of time, it could mean "now". As for the seventh day, GOD could have rested JUST on that day, HE didn't tell us what he did on the 8th. Maybe starting with the 8th day he began HIS work of salvation. Also, we know that a Gen 1 day consists of evening and then morning, and the beginning of the 7th day would be evening, if GOD meant that the 7th day is a continuous period then you could only have one evening and one morning, so we should have seen a night lasting thousands of years and a morning lasting thousands of years. we also have to look at the context, if the first 5 periods could possibly be actual days, then it makes more sense that the 6th and 7th are also actual days. the purpose of scripture is to give us clear knowledge not confusion; why would GOD suddenly change the meaning of day when it's clear HE is using it as a standard unit of measurement? and then of course in Gen 5 we have the genealogy which gives us the elapsed time since Adam, and Exodus 20:11 again clarifies that creation was in six days and the 7th day HE called Sabbath Day, which we know is an actual day of every week.

Exodus 20:11 Believe the bible for what it says, don't let science sway you from the Text! Remember the creation was created mature, just as Adam and Eve were.

@notFakali

3 жыл бұрын

Science is what made it possible for you to write a comment for everyone in the earth to see. Science has actually debunked some of the claims of bible. I still respect religious people, but i just dont want science to look like a bad thing.

@chungusultimate

3 жыл бұрын

@@notFakali Science doesn't contradict the Bible

@worldgonemad5866

3 жыл бұрын

@@chungusultimate , you have either not read the Bible or not read criticisms of claims made in the Bible, because the Bible is absolutely in contradiction with what we have discovered using the scientific method.

@chungusultimate

3 жыл бұрын

@@worldgonemad5866 the bible is not in contradiction in science- show me one unscientific thing in the bible

@worldgonemad5866

3 жыл бұрын

@@chungusultimate , let's start at the beginning. Your God supposedly speaks existence into being. What is scientifically accurate about that claim?

2 Peter 3:8 A day is like a thousand years and a thousand years is like a day to God. This could calculate a thousand year day within a day of a thousand years as a 1000 year squared day and thus as 1 million years in a day and so on. God can stretch and shrink time simultaneously as he likes. He can make all of time as one instant and one instant as all of time at the same time. He has done it, he is doing it, and he will do it.

And the evening and the morning were day 1. Can’t be more clear than that.

I believe the reference to the scripture speaking of a day being like a thousand is a reference to His eternal existence. He has no beginning or end and He created time for us. We were created in a finite world and time was a dimension for our benefit and a limitation for us. The creation of a 24 hour day is a literal interpretation of the creation account. If there is any parallel comparison of the creation account to a Big Bang theory than it is not in balance with that theory. Sun, moon, and stars came after the creation of the earth does not hold with evolution theory or Big Bang theory. I cannot follow any other option than a literal 24 hour day creation. I do think we try to hold God to our understanding, in its limited and finite wisdom. I think this is a faith issue. We just have to trust what is in the Word and quit adapting our logic and limitations to it.

@infoaddict2738

4 жыл бұрын

I agree

@jondouble1645

4 жыл бұрын

I agree. Check out this little theory. God does not live within the constraints of OUR time and space he created for us. He created the heavens (universe) and earth moments before he said let there be LIGHT. This was the light of our Sun and the stars. The actual measurement for our (time) 24 hour days and the rate and distance at which it travels, the speed of light. So cool how God gave us the science to see his Supernatural power. The vast expanse of the universe is his signature. This was for us to realise his power and glory. Both that are NOT of our understanding and yet the science he created is a tool for us. Not only use for every day life but to find him and realise his existence. Unfortunately, people want quantify Light years and Creation to something within their understanding.

@anthonydefreitas5734

3 жыл бұрын

Concerning the 6 days I discern a failure, on the part of advocates for a very young universe, to distinguish between God's original creating of the "heavens and earth" Gen.1:¹ (the material universe) and his later preparing of a more local "heavens" (sky) "earth" (terra firma) and "Sea" (ocean) for earth's inhabitants on Days 2 and 3. (Gen. 1:⁸-¹⁰.) These latter, local "heavens, earth and sea" (which contain birds, animals and fish) are what Jhvh created within the 6 Days as He describes in the 4th Commandment (Exodus 20:¹¹)..... and hence the prohibition on carved images of birds, animals and fish (in the 2nd Commandment. Exod.20:⁴) ....which inhabit these local "heavens, earth and seas". The original creation of the material Universe "heavens and earth" (Gen.1:¹) preceded, and is presented as outside of, the special 6 days starting in vs.3.

@rubiks6

3 жыл бұрын

@e rawan - There was light on day three. It was brought into existence on day one. (Remember when God said, "Let there be light"?) It is similar to the light in Revelation 21; 23.

@rubiks6

3 жыл бұрын

@@anthonydefreitas5734 - You can place the creation of the heavens and the Earth in Genesis 1; 1 in the indefinite past if you'd like but in between that event and the moment God said, "Let there be light," nothing happened. Nothing. Certainly, no evolution of life or the cosmos occurred during that period. That being said, your interpretation of Gen 1; 1 becomes moot. It accomplishes nothing. Your interpretation neither adds anything to nor takes away anything from the narrative. What's your point?

Excellent...!

“Then we can move on to the next Church splitting controversy that has no bearing on salvation doctrine.” 😂 Keep this in mind before you start slashing your brother in the comment section.

@hozn

Жыл бұрын

Death before sin means Christ’s work was not significant. And that God would have called death “very good” Trust the Bible and read what is meant to be literal as literal and parable as parables.

@MutsPub

Жыл бұрын

@@hozn Stop with the misguided nonsense of YEC zealots! Go read Romans 5:12!! NOWHERE does it say death was brought to animals! Your dog CANNOT sin! Only people can sin! - fool!

Genesis 1:1 is an opening summary statement. The days of creation are defined in the following descriptions. Genesis 2:4 is the closing statement.

So perfect, so clear, concise. Great light-hearted ending too! :D

If the 7th day of creation is an undisclosed amount of time, then we have a huge problem with the genealogy of Jesus Christ in Luke 3, as we have an unbroken lineage (inclusive of a parallel account in Genesis which gives the ages of the earthly ancestors of Jesus found as far back in the book of Genesis of when they 'begat' and also their ages when they died) from 'Adam the son of God' 3:38, and Jesus The Son of God 3:23. Adam was created on the 6th day, therefore the 7th day being anything other than a normal 24 hour period throws the whole genealogy in Luke 3 asunder and makes the account of it, pointless.

@zvonimirtosic6171

6 жыл бұрын

Let's not be wholly certain about that. I can challenge Dr Ross that he cannot fortify his opinion with proofs that we live in the 7th day (period) of creation. For if that were true, why would Son of God work for our salvation during that day? Dr Ross is swooned with the science of Genesis, but forgets some theological points that are hidden inside that same text.

@Idle_Koala

5 жыл бұрын

adysaxman77 Well we don’t really know how long Adam was in the garden before he was given eve and before they fell. Also, in the scriptures, “son of” does not always means the physical son, but can mean descendant , like a grandson or great grand son.

@ronpatton5721

5 жыл бұрын

adysaxman77 amen

@jamesdean7650

2 жыл бұрын

After a long day we rest, same as God on the sabboth...

@jamesdean7650

2 жыл бұрын

Not really, genesis is cteation which is of God... and after creation was man , on adifferent timeline after sin ...a thousand years as one day with the lord, before sin , and one day as a thousand years as God said...through sin the life time was shortened...

yep 24 hours. When the word 'day' is used with a number it is ALWAYS!!! a 24 hour period.:) thanks for your question :)

@caeoranger

3 жыл бұрын

This has always been true otherwise "24-hour day" will not even be known by anyone because you've already incorrectly interpreted the word day.

@thepossessor

3 жыл бұрын

I see your point, however how do you explain God not closing off the seventh day with evening and morning like he did with the rest?

@parrot340

3 жыл бұрын

@@thepossessor coss then there would be an 8th day. The bible also says creation shows the glory of God. when I watch the Nature programs I cant belive anyone would belive that all happend with evalution.

@caeoranger

3 жыл бұрын

@@thepossessor God repeated the phrase "and there was evening and there was morning" for the first 6 days. That's how God defined a day so that means the following days will obviously have morning and evening or day and night everyday until the earth dies

@PreachingJesus

3 жыл бұрын

@@caeoranger how can there be a 24 hr evening and morning on the first day with no sun and moon?

what is the procedure of looking "at the context"? And what were the original Hebrew commentaries on interpreting Gen 1? Surely those would tell us the correct way to interpret?

How many hours, or days can a plant survive in the darkness?

@nolanmckain2061

2 жыл бұрын

How many animals can 2 lions eat in 40 days in Noah’s Arc?

@kevin8360

2 жыл бұрын

I’m a year late for this reply, but… there are plants and animals that live in complete darkness now. Even if there wasn’t, you can’t assume that the first plants used photosynthesis like modern plants. Just go to your local garden center and you’ll see that different plants live in different light levels.

@aaronowen4425

6 ай бұрын

a few weeks def. would have no trouble living a few days without light.

Adam had no sin or decay in his body at the time he was put to sleep, so why did he have to "recover"?

@epik9778

4 жыл бұрын

Also, God can create evereything but has to perform a humanistic "biopsy" from which Adam needs to recover? Way to put limitations on God.

@rubiks6

3 жыл бұрын

Where is "recovery" mentioned in the narrative?

@rubiks6

3 жыл бұрын

@@epik9778 - Did you not read Adam's response? Perhaps it was exactly for this response that God chose His method of creating the woman. Also, remember - God is the best dramatist in the universe and it should be obvious to you that He is putting on a great drama for the benefit of men. This way of creating the woman is rather dramatic, wouldn't you say?

@epik9778

3 жыл бұрын

@@rubiks6 I was further emphasizing Jacob's response, put it in context. The Bible says nothing of Adam needing to recover, nor did Adam respond with anything in kind.

@rubiks6

3 жыл бұрын

@@epik9778 - Adam's response to God's act was, "This is now bone of my bones ...[ect.]" - Genesis 2.23

The word says a thousand years is as one day to the Lord, to us its a thousand years to God it is only one day.

@brunodelconte

4 ай бұрын

But when it uses numbers to describe the days, the first, the second etc. It means a 24 hour day does it not?

I really admire the humility of Hugh Ross, I wish I had that kind of temperament...

@stephenmarley2124

Жыл бұрын

Canadian with universal health care.

I will even toss out the hardest one in the bible, for all you to figure out. Tell me how God made the sun and moon, stay in one location for joshua, and yes it can be proven, given we know the location they were at. It was even reported by the american indians, aztec and chinese historical witnesses, 1000's of miles apart.

How long does it take heaven to rotate 360°?

I will look at it, but it depends on your definition of evolution. Are you talking about natural selection though out the universe and random mutation in a species or cause for the species?

@paulmillbank3617

5 жыл бұрын

Randy Foster Here is the facts that I'm referring to: 1) life has been on this planet for at least 3 Billion years and science has broken up and labeled these years into four distinct eras and twelve periods-verifiable and demonstrable FACT 2) Precambrian: single-celled microbes lacking a cell nucleus or cell membrane known as prokaryotes existed and nothing else for billions of years. We have never found a bear, bunny rabbit, kangaroo, human or any above multicultural life in the Precambrian- verifiable and demonstrable FACT 3) Mesozoic: All life during this time which includes, fish, amphibians, dinosaurs, reptile-like birds and a smattering of mammals (all of which do not exist in modern times) existed. We still have never found a bear, bunny rabbit, kangaroo, human or any other modern-day species.- Verifiable and demonstrable 4) Cenozoic is broken up into three periods and in each period you have specific life that gradually over time changes and there's still no crossover. The only life that exists at the beginning of each period exists until we gradually get closer to the next period and that still doesn't have any bear, bunny rabbit, kangaroo, human or any other modern life until we get to the modern period and only towards the end of that which is the last 150,000 years. Verifiable and demonstrable FACT There are plenty of other types of evidence such as chromosomal merges that exist in other primates in two chromosomes but merged in humans where we have both of them in one chromosome. Google Human chromosome #2 evidence for evolution. But much more evidence supports evolution that isn't listed here.

@randyfoster3397

5 жыл бұрын

Then it shouldn't be a problem for you to explain the wide gap of the fossil record in the Cambrian explosion. And what was so important about Dr. Chen's presentation of the fossils found in China. And while you're at it explain to me how you could get anybody to believe DNA coding was the result of natural selection, and then send it to MIT, their mathematics department isn't convinced

@paulmillbank3617

5 жыл бұрын

@Randy Foster I apologize for the length of this reply, but these questions don't allow for a quick reply. Before I get started I have a question for you. With all the evidence of fossils you must recognize that life isn't stagnant. Without implying evolution, modern life hasn't always existed, species lived and went extinct, new life appears goes extinct, new life appears goes extinct....on and on. Is it your opinion that a God is snapping his fingers (figuratively) killing off one species and snapping his fingers again to create something new with almost the same body plan and doing this over and over until he creates humans and modern animals? Is that what you think is occurring, and if not how do you explain the specific life fossilizing in specific sedimentary layers? This is in no way an argument for evolution, I just want to understand your position on this one piece of evidence. I suspect that the wide gap you're referring to is the Precambrian / Cambrian gap. Two poorly explained components lead people to be confused. The first is people who improperly assume that the ”explosion" was instantaneous, and the reality is entirely different. The Cambrian era was 55 million years in the making. To give you some perspective, according to evolution, humans shared a common ancestor with Chimps and Bonobos just 6-8 million years ago, and there has been just as much evolutionary change happening in the past 55 million years as you get in the 55 million years of the Cambrian. The difference is that the Cambrian era is the first time we see, animal life. The second issue is at the core of the majority of the confusion people have with the ”Cambrian Explosion.” Why do we have only a handful of Precambrian fossils (an era lasting billions of years) and loads of Cambrian fossils (an era only lasting 55 million years?) This answer requires me to ask a rhetorical question. What types of lifeforms have the greatest chance to leave a fossil in the fossil record? The answer is an appearance of an explosion and not an actual explosion. It is less likely that soft-bodied structures will fossilize, and that is what we had at the end of the Precambrian and the beginning of the Cambrian. The lack of easily fossilizable life give the appearance of an explosion as they transition from soft-bodied to hard-bodied. In recent years a more complete record of soft-bodied Precambrian and early Cambrian fossils are being discovered, but they are probably never going to approach the diversity we see in the ”Cambrian Explosion” not because they didn't exist, but that soft bodies don't fossilize as often as hard bodies. "explain to me how you could get anybody to believe DNA coding was the result of natural selection.” Changes in DNA do occur but they are not the "result of" natural selection, and the Theory of Evolution doesn't say it is. If Natural Selection were a result of DNA coding occurring, I would be forced to admit that a God-like thing is a convincing answer and driving force behind it. The proper answer is that "random" mutations happen which can add, hinders or be indifferent to survivability. Natural selection can be a result of (environmental factor, but not limited them). Using an example might clear this up. A coding error occurs which leads to an individual rabbit that grows longer fur during a period where the average yearly temperature is 32 degrees Celsius or 90 degrees Fahrenheit, causing the rabbits to overheat and die before it can bread. The individual rabbit dies, but that species will survive. If it were 20 degrees Celsius, then that rabbit lives to bread, introducing the long fur characteristic into the population and now some of the rabbits in that population will have long fur. If the weather were to change to 10 degrees Celcius, the short fur rabbits freeze and die, and the long fur rabbits survive, which introduce a new micro-evolutionary change. This is a simple example of natural selection. (Evolution is a fact, the process of natural selection as a driving force is an educated and well-supported hypothesis.) I rarely get any resistance from creationists on microevolution. However, the problem comes from an issue with scripture when I introduce the theist to the obvious next step of macroevolution. Micro-evolution is one small change of millions and millions of changes to come. Those individual changes are micro-evolutionary changes which accumulate to become macro-evolutionary changes which take 1000s of generations. This is where the theist pounds his/her first and without evidence says ”No it ain't so! NO NO NO my God is perfect and my book is unerring and that's not what it says. I believe God created man in his present form. I believe it because my book says so.” Then I get accused of being an idiot for not ignoring the evidence. When I ask them how they know this when the evidence says otherwise, they claim, ”I know God because I have faith (trust) in God.” When I point out through demonstration that faith is a lousy way to understand anything they always resort to, ”it's only bad in every other case except for God, my God.” If you can't justify your beliefs with non-personal testimony evidence, you shouldn't accept it. Personal experience is evidence, but it's the worst evidence and scientifically unusable. People are easily fooled and impressionable. Once you have someone believing something, they're far more likely to associate positive outcomes as proof of God and forget the negative outcomes or associate it with Gods will. This gives people a false connection and leads them to accept anything positive as evidence for their beliefs and if that's not working, the threat of Hell keeps them in line. Is God possible? Maybe. Should we accept the claim a God is real as a fact? Of course not. Is God likely true? I'm still waiting to hear an argument that is valid that would support that assertion and if a miracle happened we still have a long way to go to get to the God you or anyone else believes. So until a miracle happens and someone offers me a valid argument for God I'll be withholding my belief.

@randyfoster3397

5 жыл бұрын

Granted, slight changes can be attributed to natural selection for survivability but it doesn't explain the origin of the species. The gap you have to fill in if you planning on sticking with Neo-Darwinism and the gap only got wider when Dr. Chen offered his fossil finds. other wise you have all this new life and nothing to link it to old. And I didn't see your response to Dr. Murry Eden and company at MIT concerning genetic coding?

im not sure about your first part, but the part about yom being used to describe the entire 7 days is correct and a good example, right alongside the scriptures we are interpreting, that yom is used to describe "a period of time" as well as a "24 period"

@maync1

Жыл бұрын

So the 7th day allows us to rest for a million years?

@TheSpacePlaceYT

6 ай бұрын

@@maync1 "And God rested" on the seventh [period of time] And he made the seventh [twenty-four hour period in the course of a week] holy. If they're the same Hebrew word then of course there will appear to be a discrepancy where there is none.

I think he is making more out of it than it really is, the scripture clearly states after every creation day, " so the evening and the morning were the first day" and so on throughout the creation narrative. The writer Moses, was explaining that it was a 24 hour period as we know a day to be..it wasn't some secret amount of time, just as Jesus healed people instantly, the blind man didn't have to wait for something special to happen, scripture also says that "a day is as a 1000 years" 2nd Peter 3:8 ...so a day is "as" a thousand years.. not that a day"is" actually a thousand years. Time is irrelevant to God, he made time and is not constrained to human boundaries. Our God is an awesome God. This professor/ author will find that out when he meet Him face to face.

6 days only because on the 7th day God rested.

Science has strongly disproved the long creation days.

@worldgonemad5866

2 жыл бұрын

Science has disproven the genesis creation myth.

@ajmittendorf

2 жыл бұрын

@@worldgonemad5866 Not even close. In fact, science continues to confirm the Genesis account while simultaneously disproving evolution, the Big Bang and the millions-of-years myth. Secular scientists will only "discover" what pays the most, and evolution pays better than the facts do.

Some versions of the BB theory require an equal production of matter and antimatter. However, only small traces of antimatter (positrons, antiprotons) are found in space.

Dr. Ross has written two excellent books on this topic that I would highly recommend for further study: A Matter of Days: lukenixblog.blogspot.com/2015/07/book-review-matter-of-days-resolving.html Navigating Genesis: lukenixblog.blogspot.com/2014/07/book-review-navigating-genesis.html

@SpimmerWill

6 жыл бұрын

Luke Nix I

Well said.

@kmiroshkhin Do you mind if I pm you? My response will take longer the 487 characters youtube allows.

@R5d4d2 "Jesus said to him, 'I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me." - John 14:6

@worldgonemad5866

3 жыл бұрын

, he also said "slaves obey your masters".

@bucketsman9634

3 жыл бұрын

@@worldgonemad5866 Jesus never said that

@worldgonemad5866

3 жыл бұрын

@@bucketsman9634 , you're right, that was Paul. Jesus praised the centurion for the obedience of his slave.

@kemalcs How could it not happen? Cultures and religions all over the world openly state that there was a global flood that destroyed nearly all of life.

@worldgonemad5866

3 жыл бұрын

There are many flood myths. Most of which contradict each other. How could all of these myths be evidence for the same event if they contradict each other?

What an excellent answer. I have never held to the 24 hour period. It just doesn’t make sense in the plane reading of the text

He's wrong. The word yom depends upon context. "the evening and the morening" are the cotext. It means a 24 hr day.

@MrHobiecat said: "you have not been able to refute anything I posted" Maybe you just don't like my answers. And, I still await answers to my questions.

Wrong. How could the 24-hour day even be considered a specific period of time before the Earth was created, when it is the Earth's rotation speed which established the 24-hour day? It couldn't. The 24-hour day did not exist until the Earth did for the aforementioned reason. And each planet, depending upon it's rotation speed, establishes its own length of day.

@BlackRaptor31 - there is an excellent article that answers your questions directly here on their website. In summary - Based on the Hebrew word meanings, the following picture emerges. "In the beginning" God created the universe -- the Sun, Moon, stars, Earth and planets (1:1). In verse 2, the viewpoint changes to the surface of the Earth (the Spirit of God was hovering "over the waters").

@jamesdean7650

2 жыл бұрын

Shalom sister...

I love him but I think it’s so funny that no matter what he says he always points back to a book he’s written. It makes me laugh every time

How is this not common knowledge by now...? I can't believe this video is over 15 years old.....

@MrHobiecat Genesis gives an account of creation that provides precious few details.It can be interpreted like those you refer to (Rabbis), but others like Dr Ross, have a different view. He, taking into consideration some of the modern scientific observations/theories, is making valid points and it's driving you insane. Whether his position is the truth or not remains to be seen. The bottom line is, the Bible gives very little info about it. Nobody can explain creation with complete confidence.

@jamesdean7650

2 жыл бұрын

Yes, but he is correct about the timeline of adam being formed and God sending the animals to adam to name(noah ref)...and then putting him in the garden and then creating eve, it was in fact more than one day, truly opening my eyes, thanks , God bless...

Nectar production began on Day 3, nectar consumption occurred on Day 5.The simplest explanation is nectar production started 48 hours before nectar consumption.

@maync1

Жыл бұрын

Are these facts in the narration. Seems logical. I amnot sure I can agree with this stretchy version of days, esp the consequences of Day 7 for us??

@Mdebacle

Жыл бұрын

@@maync1 Another problem with Ross, did the layers of sediment ascend over millions of years, or did the ocean recede over about 1 year ? Ross seems to avoid offending the Scholar's Union.

Just a note to say thank you. I am embarrassed as a Christian when creation arguments are put forward and fact that fly in the face of facts (or at least such overwhelming science that they have no credence). So thank you for your work and your ability to put forth explanations that we can hold to and still think real thoughts. Gene

I can't correct all his mistakes but I'll try to answer some of his questions, first question was on ' yom' which means day I'll skip that for now, second he says it says g-d created Adam and Eve together later it says he created Adam then made eve. Most commentaries explain that Genesis 1 is a general story and genesis 2 goes into detail, he's question was on the word hapaam he comes to the conclusion that the Hebrew word הפעם means a long period of time. When Adam says "zos hapaam" he is talking about Eve nothing to do with the time. זאת הפעם. מְלַמֵּד שֶׁבָּא אָדָם עַל כָּל בְּהֵמָה וְחַיָּה, וְלֹא נִתְקָרְרָה דַעְתּוֹ בָּהֶם (יבמות ס"ג): זאת הפעם THIS NOW - This teaches that Adam endeavoured to find a companion among all cattle and beasts, but found no satisfaction except in Eve (Yevamot 63a).

@Smasher77th

2 жыл бұрын

Yes the pa'am there is just like me seeing something beautiful and exclaiming "Now, that's awesome!" The "now" there has absolutely no relationship with time.

SO, that answers to the question of why the Egyptians farming in 6000 has no relevance to Noah's flood. Regarding the animals, every "species" didn't need to be saved, only every "kind", and then only the kinds that were essential to humanity (wild animals, livestock, birds, etc). Obviously, Noah didn't take whales or other sea creatures on board the Ark because those animals wouldn't need saving! Again, critical thinking must be applied when interpreting scripture (not "6 year old" logic).

@theuniversewithin74

5 жыл бұрын

You're still clinging to your belief that Noah's Ark is a true story?

@captainbryce1

4 жыл бұрын

@@theuniversewithin74 No. I'm an atheist now. But back when I wrote this, I was interpreting the bible from the standpoint of science, and not from the standpoint of contradicting it.

@theuniversewithin74

4 жыл бұрын

@@captainbryce1 good you evolved. The Bible shouldn't be regarded as a science source either way. Anyone who uses it to prove a point have automatically lost.

Just like our sleeping dreams same going on in our waking hours.been talked about for about 5,000 years

God can only reveal himself to us through the reality he created for us, in other words he created the physic of this world so he, through it, could be known by us. All the relationships understood by mankind are used by God to reveal his charter. For this reason a man shall leave his mother and father and cleave unto his wife,and the two shall become one flesh. In this relationship we see the picture of Gods divine revelation to mankind.

@kathimjones

9 жыл бұрын

Well said!

@maync1

Жыл бұрын

Frightening.

It says the, "Evening and the Morning" were the 1st day"

The LORD said, He thought before He created anything. The question is how long did He think before He spoke anything into existence . If He said let there be light, that would be 3 secs not counting time He was thinking. How long will you be simple, according to proverbs 1-8., really it is not complicated. Say away from all unclean things, dead things, study the Word, and keep your mind clean, He might reveal himself to you. Seek the LORD with all your heart(mind), soul, and spirit, He love you to praise, sing and dance and tell of His works, and if He reveals himself to you don't be surprise, just listen.

@THIS7IS7I7SRP

7 жыл бұрын

Why can't I correct my words I misspelled? Say is meant for stay.

Perhaps the hebrew word for morning could be translated better as dawning or beginning, and thus not actually be a literal 24 hour day?

But God made the plants on the 3rd day so how could they live all that time before he made the sun ?

@danielright2044

4 жыл бұрын

The sun was already there, this is a clearing of the sky

@BlackRaptor31 - Initially, the Earth was dark (1:2). On the first "day," God caused sunlight to penetrate the darkness (1:3-5). On the fourth "day," God caused the Sun, Moon and stars to become visible from the surface of the Earth (1:19-20), having made them earlier (1:16) as part of His creative activity prior to the six creation "days."

@maync1

Жыл бұрын

Did they actually have 7 days in the days of this having been recorded? On the Dead Sea scroll? If not, how can we make sense of the scripture if we had lived then?

From my understanding, the word "rest", could be equated to "the job is complete" or in a Creators case..."the creation process is complete", because (biblically) after the supposed "day of rest", the creator didn't go back to doing more creating. And there ya have it.

I really appreciate your desire to be faithful to all of Scripture. Some of your statements, however, are found wanting when checked. Around 4:18-4:25 you state that the Hebrew word 'hapam' means a long period of time and that "everywhere else it's used in the Old Testament it's translated 'at long last.'" The definition given in Brown Driver and Briggs (quote from the BibleWorks version) is "beat, foot, anvil, occurrence." It is used in Genesis 18:32 where it is typically translated "just this once" or similar. In Genesis 29:34&35, Exodus 9:27, and Exodus 15:3 it is translated "this time" by the ASV, ESV, NAS, and NKJ. In Genesis 30:20 and 46:30 it is translated "now" by those same versions. In Exodus 10:17 and Judges 6:39 it is translated "this once" by those same versions. In Judges 16:18 and 16:28 it is translated as "this once" or "again" or "once more." Now I will grant you that I have only searched the forms of 'hapam' that are identical to the form found in Genesis 2:23, but doing so is sufficiently establishes that your statement "everywhere else it's used in the Old Testament it's translated 'at long last'" is not accurate. Thank you for your effort to base your arguments in the authority of Scripture, for that I am grateful even though I differ with much of what you say.

@maync1

Жыл бұрын

Well, that's why the 7 day definition given by Dr. Ross makes me a little skeptical.

So we should examine all uses of "day" in the Bible to determine in which meaning the word might have been used to refer to the 7 "days" in Hebrew. I add: Is there a pattern? And can the Bible be regarded as a single piece of narration by one author? Surely not. So variations on the theme should be expected. Someone kindly enlighten me, please. If days were a rather long period of time, then the 7th day might mean an extended holiday for all of us? I am totally confused and stuck here. Also, perhaps inconsistency across biblical narration (due to different authors, copy errors, lots of translations, etc, etc.) is preferable to a "forced" consistency imposed with a stretchable term. Is "day" used throughout with the meaning of "long period of time"? And how long might that have been? Isn't that pure conjecture? Research on the authenticity of different parts of the Bible might be in order. I should consult a Bible historians next.

It seems to me the fossil records point to an old view creation. So does astronomy, so does archeology.

@rubiks6

2 жыл бұрын

The fossil record points to the global flood - billions of creatures buried suddenly, so as to fossilized. Astronomy points to nothing because we know not how (in what state) God created the populated heavens. The scripture tells us in many places "God stretched out the heavens." The astronomical universe is not there to teach us how it evolved from nothing. It is there for the benefit of Mankind, to show us the grandure and power of our Creator. The universe was filled by the spoken Word of God in the form we see it today. An enormous amount of archeology points to civilizations starting about 4500 years ago - shortly after Noah's flood. Think of the Tower of Babel and research the oldest languages. Radiometric dating methods are fraught with ways for errors to be introduced. Also, consider that men who reject God need another explanation for so many things and long durations of time seem handy. Confirmational bias leads these researchers to abuse the time measurements of evidence and especially their non-evidentially based narratives.

@jamesdean7650

2 жыл бұрын

Thats you believing in science and not God the creator...

@MutsPub

Жыл бұрын

@@jamesdean7650 Ill-educated and ignorant YEC folklore theology response! Does the Sun revolve around the Earth as the folklore theology of the Church taught for some 1800 years?! No fool! Did the Bible change?! - NO! Science did! God Created Science! - fool! Go Read the Belgic Confession Article 2! 2 Books are stated! 1) Book of Nature 2) Book of Scripture The Earth is 4.5662 =/- 0.0001 billion years old! You think that a 13.79 billion year old Universe is somehow less of a miracle? You have NOT read Isaiah 55! 14 billion years is LESS than a blink of an eye for God!

But it did have a creator. It had to be built didn't it?

Now I have found a very smart man who as I agree on the 7 days is right up into today. I came to this understanding reading the 4th earth day period of Noah. I believe the first page of the bible is also really the first day after the rain stopped. God spirit abode above the water. Abode is like a bird caring watching laying on her eggs. You can see this connection with the dove Noah sent to find dry land. God said let there be light. The clouds part and the new light appears or the sun is revealed in a different way. Noah walked off the ark into a different changed earth then what it was when he entered. The same with Adam Eve. They entered walked out into dust dry land from perfection. Where people get caught up is in the creation story only being that creation. But it is way more than that. Its about a place of once perfection turned into a wasteland. God put the man into the garden God put Noah on the ark. Why? To protect them from what was going to happen. Before Noah it never rained on earth so we know this is the 4th earth day period along with a 365 day year period starts. Looking at the periods of God is with man then he rejects them walks out. Now we can see a pattern up the bible of times this has happened. Adam Eve are the third earth day period. Noah is the 4th day earth period. 1st temple is the 5th earth day period. The temple is built God enters. The King gets God angry his people are sent into exile. The 4th earth day period is 2nd temple birth of Jesus. On the 7th day God rested. Jesus death entering into Gods rest. I go prepare a place for you. I am not saying creation didn't start as it is described on the first page. But it has a parallel story that unlocks the days of creation. If Noah is the 4th day.. Adam is the third day on up. We can now see we have 2 earth period days before Adam Eve not accounted for. Thank you Hugh Ross

The argumentation ( and the original question) is fundamentally wrong. The description of the creation is not actual history. Genesis 1 contradicts Genesis 2, what anyone - whose mind is not made incapable of thinking by religious fundamentalism - can see. In Genesis 1 man is created at the end, and man and woman are created simultaneously. In Genesis 2 man is created before the animals and plants and woman is created after man. So the Bible manages to contradict itself in its second chapter (!!) therefore we shouldn't take neither Genesis 1 nor Genesis 2 for real history.

@daman7129

5 жыл бұрын

pannonia77 just thought I'd add to the supposed 6000 years of time since creation, its a documented fact the last ice age ended 12000 years ago and there is history in Australia that aborigines were around during that ice age, 40000 years ago. If you study ice age history it reveals something very wrong with the christian interpretation of genesis. And yes, I'm a christian, but one who has taken the time to examine the facts. You are correct with what you say about the contradiction.

@belenzamorano4834

5 жыл бұрын

Please watch this in refutation of your comment. kzread.info/dash/bejne/mZt3ls6GmLi7ZdI.html

@pannonia77

4 жыл бұрын

@e rawan This article is complete bogus. So someone said he discovered the Ark of Covenant, but no-one else has seen it. Are you so credulous that you believe this?

@maync1

Жыл бұрын

Apparently that happens a lot in the Bible due to who wrote the parts, the copying, personal preferences of the scribe, the errors, etc. Maybe best to go for the essence of creation and its great wonder and leave it at that.

Each “Creation” day was hundreds of millions of years long.

We weren't there during creation. God says 1 day is as 1,000 years and 1,000 years as a day. In Heaven, the time we understand doesn't exist. It is an eternal "now" that contains all things. We won't know until we leave this place for good.

According to the Book of Genesis, God created vegetation on the third day and the Sun on the fourth day. If one day refers to a long period of time, how would vegetation survive for a long period of time without the Sun?

@jamesdean7650

2 жыл бұрын

The day and the night were the first day, so the sun and moon and stars already exist...first you need land and water, then comes vegetation. Like putting a rock in a fish tank, and then starts to turn green...from light darkness and oxygen...

The Gospel of Nicodemus: was it caiafa that said to pilatos that the Maccabees were gentiles that converted ?

@Paraglidecrete

6 жыл бұрын

the names of the Maccabees mentioned in the gospel of nicodemus are gentile

@colinjones4022

6 жыл бұрын

😂 What even? This sounds like a Catholic Apocryphal Scholar having a seizure.

Until you realize that Genesis 2 is more of a synopsis, and much less chronological than Genesis 1. Otherwise, they contradict each other, something that I'm sure Dr. Ross is keen to avoid.

@MutsPub

Жыл бұрын

Correct! Dr. Ross has written some 23 books. Read answers in Genesis.

For those who say it was six twenty four hours I would like to say, how do you know? What's your evidence? Were you there? “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell me, if you know so much. Who determined its dimensions and stretched out the surveying line? What supports its foundations, and who laid its cornerstone as the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?" Job 38:4-11.

@michaelmiller3996

4 ай бұрын

Exodus 20:9-11 is a major reason why I believe in the 6 24 hour days. Also, if the order of creation in Genesis is not a lie, then how did plants reproduce without insects?

Merry xmas

"Every instance of it in the Bible which refers to a day is in reference to a 24 hr literal day" I can't give you the scriptures, but i know for a fact that is wrong! I heard it in a lecture where he quoted various scriptures through the Bible where the word "yom" was NOT used to describe a 24 hour period. Not to mention I think that is irrelevent anyway. It doesn't matter how they use it in other places, the only question is 1) can you use it in different ways 2) how was it used in Genesis

1:40 the word YOM has 4 literal definitions: 1. a portion of daylight hours 2. all of daylight hours 3. the 24 hour period 4. a long but finite period of time. EARTH has five literal definitions, HEAVEN has three because biblical Hebrew were very few nouns, so if moses wanted to describe a long period of time he only had the word YOM available to him.

Great Video

Love you

@alph0214 oh for not one millisecond would he take his heart off of us. we are constently blessed by his mercy and forgiveness and he will never leave us. and i cant wait to go to our home which he shall provide for us.

Does it mean God needed a long long long time...to create ...

@j.t.dennis4900

3 жыл бұрын

"The Lord is not slow to fulfill His promise as some count slowness..."

@jamesdean7650

2 жыл бұрын

Even god says things take time...

@kingofthemultiverse4148

Жыл бұрын

By that Logic why would God even need a 6 24 hour days to create? an all powerful being could have done it instantly 🙄

Also GENESIS 5: it says God creating Adam Male and Female...and called (Their) name Man But now Only SETH is named

@MrHobiecat Are you trying to convince yourself? =P

I cannot believe some of the comments. Genesis 1 is the condensed version of Gen 2. There is no contradiction. The Lord created everything in six literal days. Why ?. 1- Gen 21Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. 2And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. 3And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made. The Lord had finished His work. The sabbath was made for man. God neither sleeps nor slumbers. You will find this in your bible if you read it and it is not a corrupted version. Six literal days ?- 2... Read Gen 1:11-19... on the third day God bought forth the herbs, trees etc On the fourth day God made lights..the greater to rule the day (sun) and the lesser to rule the night (moon) Plants, trees, herbs will not last 1000 years without sunlight so it has to be a literal 6 days of creation. One of the problems is that people are influenced by what they learn in school or the carnal mind. Science will tell you that the age of the earth and universe is determined by the fact that a star is so many millions of light years away and so therefore the universe has to be billions of years old. God is a big God. He exists outside time because he is eternal. He spoke the universe into being and it was formed within an instant. The stars were put in their place within an instant. It did not take billions of years and there was no big bang. You cannot make something from nothing.

@charlesbarkley8198

5 жыл бұрын

If God neither sleeps or slumber why did he rest on the 7th day or like Dr Ross said he did not create anything on or after the 7th day

@MrHobiecat Please explain the following: 1. What is the universe? 2. Did it have a beginning? 3. How did it begin? Three simple questions for your scientific mind to clarify. I await your answer. Peace.

@worldgonemad5866

2 жыл бұрын

The universe is all space matter and energy. It appears, from observation, that the universe had a beginning. We don't know that caused the expansion of our universe. Were those supposed to be hard questions?

@RPM11111

2 жыл бұрын

@@worldgonemad5866 - Not by any means were they meant to be difficult. But the answers do lead to a logical and probable conclusion.

@worldgonemad5866

2 жыл бұрын

@@RPM11111, what conclusion do you think they lead to? Is it Jesus? Because that doesn't follow.

@RPM11111

2 жыл бұрын

@@worldgonemad5866 Anything that begins has a cause. The universe had a beginning, therefore it had a cause. Time, space and matter came into being when the universe began. Therefore, whatever cause the universe cannot consist of time, space or matter...something timeless (eternal), something non-physical that doesn't require three-dimensional space to exist (spiritual). Sounds like a very good description of God to an honest man.

@worldgonemad5866

2 жыл бұрын

@@RPM11111 , I heard frank claim thst shtick many times and it still fails. Those are simply a set of assertions without any evidence to support them.

Professor Nathan Aviezer (physicist, Bar Ilan University) wrote a book several decades ago called "In the Beginning", where the biblical account of creation is compared to what is know in science (including the Big Bang, Plate tectonics, etc.). When correctly read, there is no contradiction. Note, also, that the coming year (5784 since the Creation) measures the time from the END of creation, not the beginning..

If there was anymore time added to the Bible, then the thousand years equalling one day would no longer apply or make sense because we would then be here longer than a week.

@PreachingJesus

3 жыл бұрын

Who said we would only be here a week?

@auh2o148

3 жыл бұрын

@@PreachingJesus good question. YHWH established the 7 day week, and 1000 years is as a day to Him - all for the reason of laying down the pattern of us working for 6 six days and "resting" on the 7th. Part of the reason why violating the sabbath was punishable by death is because it would tell people there is evangelizing in the next millenium - thereby stating that Messiah physically ruling down here (with a rod of iron) isn't good enough. Also, the Word says that we have to 'over-work' on the 6th day (and year) to cover for not only the 6th & 7th, but the 8th as well. 8 ofcourse means "new beginnings & eternity" and applies to Firstfruits. Passover/Unleavened Bread & Firstfruits, along with Tabernacles all refer to the 7 days plus 1. Then there's the year of Jubilee, which is 7 cycles of 7 years, plus 1. The 120 years in the Bible is not talking about man's lifespan - it means 120 Jubilees which is 6000 years. This 6th millenium we're coming to the end of is the most intense time - coming to a head with the False Prophet & Antichrist, peaking with the return of Messiah. I was trying to keep this somewhat short while still being descriptive...hope I answered your question.

@PreachingJesus

3 жыл бұрын

@@auh2o148 the Bible also says that a thousand years is like a watch in the night to the Lord. A watch in the night is 3 hours. Psalm 90:4

@auh2o148

3 жыл бұрын

@@PreachingJesus and how many watches in the night are there? 4, signifying the 4 days (thousand years) of darkness before Messiah was born. Besides, you have to keep context in mind.

Woot,i like this intellectual gymnastic.

Was there water on Earth before the flood? or did mankind have no need for water before the flood?

@bobwhatshisname2161

5 жыл бұрын

It does not say that there was no water but it says that there was no rain. Gen 2: 5And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. 6But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

paam does not mean at long last. It means now in Gen 2. Before God made Adam from the dust, now he made from bones and flesh. Where does Hugh Ross get this idea? I did not find "at long last" in any concordance.

2 Peter 3:8 "But do not forget one thing dear friends, with the Lord one day is like a thousand years and a thousand years are like a day."

@jho186

7 жыл бұрын

Tom Fuller a day mentioned in bible is not actual one solar day. how can we confirm? the answer is in bible itself. after 6 days of creation God rested on 7 th day... So what does it mean, if I work for company for 6 days and taking rest on 7th day then I would continue same job from 8th day that's what rest is. so god rested on 7th day and he took rest from creation so he is still on his 7th day, so when will he start creation again? answer is in revelation. after 1000 years of God's ministry there will be new earth and sky so god going to start creation again... So days from Genesis to revelation including nowadays are one day to god and it's still 7 th day for God

@bluesky6985

6 жыл бұрын

Tom Fuller Exactly.

@plainjane9502

6 жыл бұрын

That entire passage was speaking of end times, not creation, and was metaphor to boot.

@mustang8206

6 жыл бұрын

He was not talking about creation

@jessejive117

6 жыл бұрын

That is not what that versus referring to. Lol Read around that verse there’s more context. I’m not disagreeing that the earth is billions of years old that’s just not a defense of that. I think that versus referring to God’s timing being perfect and having patience

what if God is still resting? he is watching us, our time is his 7th day, he is resting, he is not yet finish in creating our life. he is resting because he is watching us?? just curious

@MrPastaTube1

6 жыл бұрын

This gives me chills. Maybe because it is true?