Atheists Will HATE This Video (Ken Ham)
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 05. 2024
- Answers in Genesis: Today, Ken Ham lectures about all of the ways Science proves the Bible. You’ll hear about how DNA is evidence of an infinite God, the origins of difference races of people, the proof of a worldwide flood, and much more!
GET MORE ANSWERS: www.AnswersInGenesis.org
RESOURCES:
Science Confirms The Bible (Ken Ham Speaks to Teens) featuring Ken Ham: bit.ly/2MOwZ7c
The Great Debate on Science and the Bible - Young Earth vs. Old Earth featuring Ken Ham, Dr. Walt Kaiser, Dr. Jason Lisle, and Dr. Hugh Ross: bit.ly/2IXsZ1M
The Evolution of Darwin: His Science featuring Dr. David Menton: bit.ly/2u8grQ2
Science 101 pack featuring Wes Olson: bit.ly/2tWwEZc
0:00 Introduction
5:30 - Is there any evidence for an infinite God?
17:48 - How could Noah fit all the species of animals on the Ark?
25:49 - Where did Cain find his wife?
28:33 - How did the different “races” of people come about?
32:55 - Is there any evidence for a global flood?
44:36 - Did God create in 6 literal days or long periods of time?
48:18 - Can Christians believe in millions of years?
50:04 - How old is the earth?
55:50 - Why does it matter what Christians believe about Genesis?
#kenham #answersingenesis #scienceandthebible
As a former nihilist who neglected existence and disobey all morals, I am truly grateful for this inevitable information, this video humbled my heart and changed my stubborn soul. Most of the people who reject the existence of God is through pride, we really cannot offer our lives to Jesus if we boast about our knowledge and ego, even Lucifer was cast out and banished because of his pride, honestly (Proverbs 16:18) is one of the reason I stopped doubting God, because no matter how many evidence the bible gives some people are just too prideful to care, we will really never know and understand God no matter what unless the Holy Spirit shows us, faith takes a lifetime experience. I just wanna say to those who lost all their hope, life will get better even if you don't see it so don't end it, even if you suffer remember that our Almighty God will reward you in heaven, God bless everyone and Merry Christmas:).
_no matter how many evidence the bible gives_
Except it doesn;t give any. At all. The bible is just a collection of fairy tales. Many of which can be proven beyond reasonable doubt to be false. Genesis and Exodus, for example, they can both be thrown out as nonsense.
@@richardgregory3684 That's because you believe in the modern mythology that fish evolve into philosophers, puddles of chemicals can fizz into people if you just add *Time,* and you are literally related to that banana you're eating. You have your own fairy tales my friend.
*"Time is in fact the hero of the plot. . . . What we regard as impossible on the basis of human experience is meaningless here. Given so much time, the “impossible” becomes possible, the possible probable, and the probable virtually certain. One has only to wait: time itself performs the miracles"* (George Wald).
Charles Darwin gave a testable hypothesis for the validity of his theory, saying "if an organ were discovered which could not possibly be explained by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down..." and he didn't have access to the fields of genetics or microbiology when he made up his theory. *If evolution is true, then how did male and female evolve?*
*"All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God"* (Romans 3:23)
*"But God is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish, but for all to reach repentance"* (2 Peter 3:9)
@@michaelg377 Hilarious! The Bible is attacked. You 'defend' it by trotting out your 'gotchas' attacking evolution. But I agree - the Bible is indefensible!
@@Oldtinear "the first life-forms which developed this feature *left no trace of themselves* 2 billion years ago." (Oldtinear, 30 September 2023)
""We can speculate [regarding early evolution], but *any speculations could not be tested, so we will never know"* (Oldtinear, 30 September 2023)
*"If you cannot test it, it ain't science."* (Oldtinear, 20 December 2023). Thank you for those powerful arguments against Evolution - now you can know, *from your own words,* that your own belief system *"...is not testable - it is nothing to do with science. It is a fundamentalist religious belief."* (Oldtinear, 20 December 2023)
Charles Darwin gave a testable hypothesis for the validity of his theory, saying *"if an organ were discovered which could not possibly be explained by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down..."* and he didn't have access to the fields of genetics or microbiology when he made up his theory. *If evolution is true, then how did male and female evolve?*
*"Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap."* (Galatians 6:7)
*"It is appointed for a man to die once, then comes Judgment"* (Hebrews 9:27)
@@michaelg377 Desperate stuff, Micky! Quote mining bits of what I said but leaving out the context and accompanying explanations is a kind of lying. But then, you are good at that!
Live by Faith and not by sight for Faith is evidence of things that are unseen, things that are hoped for!!! Blessed are those who believe without doubt or seeing HALLELUJAH!!!
Faith is a voluntary exclusion of reasonable thinking!
@@HarryShagnasty-sc9zdit is evidence that leads to faith
Faith is the reason you give for believing something when you don't have a good reason.
😂😂😂😂😂😂
In older times, farmers used to bury Maple block in blue clay. After 4 months, the wood became petrified and was used as a hone stone.
That's super cool.. how did u come by this info?
enoch news or the Dailywire lol@@joanneg7646
No they didn't, and the wood cannot be petrified because it takes millions of years to actually do that.
@@JB-yb4wn like coal or diamonds that they can now make in months
Right, the massive lie of millions of years to create a fossil is just that. Plus the only way to create a fossil is by rapid burial. What could bury a fish with another fish halfway down its throat. Only a huge wave of sediment from a huge flood.
Thank you so much for this video! I’m almost 11 and science text books have been messing with my head and I’ve been having a hard time with my faith. Thank you so much Ken Ham!
I feel your relief! I'm 65 and learning with you. 😊
For your own sake, watch videos discussing logical fallacies. Most of Ken Ham’s arguments rely on them. If you truly wish to see how creationism holds up under scrutiny, watch Ham debate Bill Nye. Seriously, it’s an enlightening experience to see how dishonest his stance has to be in order to justify his belief.
@@damonirvine8910 Do you say that because you believe in the modern mythology that fish evolve into philosophers, and if you just wait a long enough *time* puddles of chemicals can fizz into people? I do agree with one of your points - do watch that debate between Ken Ham and Bill Nye - it's Bill's false assumptions that caused him to do as poorly as he did. Ironically, *Time* is actually working in favor of Creation, and increasingly against Evolution. For example:
*“…It has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwin’s predictions. Nor is the problem a miserably poor record. The fossil record simply shows that this prediction is wrong."*
*“…The observation that species are amazingly conservative and static entities throughout long periods of time has all the qualities of the emperor’s new clothes: everyone knew it but preferred to ignore it. Paleontologists, faced with a recalcitrant record obstinately refusing to yield Darwin’s predicted pattern, simply looked the other way.”* (Niles Eldredge, "The Myths of Human Evolution, 1982)
That last part is important: "Paleontologists... obstinately refusing to yield Darwin’s predicted pattern, simply looked the other way.”
@@damonirvine8910 indeed, and a book I believe it’s called ‘Stealing from God: why atheists need God to make their case’ and some other ones from that author, it’s always around half truths and lies towards Scripture, don’t be afraid child the truth prevails and it’s mostly hypocritical arguments and just goes in circle, by their fruits we know them, it’s all spoken in the Bible that such men had do their works, and we have ours to do too, let us keep walking on that narrow path that God has put us in. He’s risen, He lives and loves, they forgot that it’s not because they reject and turn their faces away from someone that they stopped existing: they only ‘don’t exist to them’, yet we pray for them and ofc for all but the sin that leads to death as it’s stated in the book of John. God bless brothers, I also was one that had doubt and there are different things and problems but God clarifies everything, not everyone wants to serve but some want to be their own lord and gods of their lives, as Jesus said he who has ears let him hear.
Me to. Cause truth of anything seems to be handed down generation to generation. Look at politics. Handed down generation to generation. Oh my grandparents and parents believed in this. So this must be the right!! Wrong
Sorry to comment so late after the post. Always been strong Christian (so I think), recently had a couple questions. You answered them with your words exactly.
God bless you 🎉
What were these questions ?
*_God Bless_*
@Tbone I always find it funny when people who are not religious comment on these videos. You that bored or are you trying to convince yourself of something?
@Tbone You came to this exact video just to comment a nonsense claim. My brotha, there is a God and His name is Lord Jesus!
It goes pretty fast. I'm going to have to watch 2 or 3 times to fully digest all the info. It's one of the the best arguments for God I've ever seen.
We do not affirm His existence because we have doubt, just like you did affirm the existence of your friends because you doubt they exist, but because you are grateful they do. Did you ever tell your friend "I am so glad you are here." So do you have doubt they exist?
Besides what makes you think that if such a creature exist everyone would believe in it? Especially since he gave us free will.
@@adamokornrajh3874 we were given free will but we already know from Christian Doctrine that we will be divided, we will not stand in unity. Which is exactly why our different races were created by us. There is only one race, the Human race. God made us unique because why would we want to look like every other person? That would be pretty bleak. Going back to my original point, different religions, teachings that contradict the Bible are designed to separate and confuse us. As finite beings we can’t comprehend something outside of our own world. We can’t comprehend time nor space which does not exist. Yet we still create our own time…
@@AmbientVibesASMR I agree with you on the fact that other religions were created by satan to confuse and divide us, but I don't understand what you mean by creating our own time?
@@adamokornrajh3874 Time does not exist.
The explanation won’t be short but I hope you understand!
Humans everywhere use spatial metaphors to think about time, but the specifics differ from culture to culture.
Even alone in our thoughts, we think of time as space, leaning on brain areas known to play a role in spatial understanding.
Culture plays a large role in determining which metaphors we use. The direction of the written word has an especially strong influence.
In the 19th century, the physicist Ludwig Boltzmann wrote: “For the universe, the two directions of time are indistinguishable, just as in space there is no up and down.” Boltzmann’s view departed from time as an absolute in itself, a constant of the natural order of the universe.
He implied that there is no objective direction of time, and that we invent it according to our perception, just as we call the direction towards the centre of the earth “down.”
TIME AS AN ILLUSION
The great revolution in our idea of time began with Albert Einstein.( A Religious Non-Believer)
In his general relativity he included time as another dimension in the deformable fabric of the universe that explains gravity, and in special relativity time also became elastic, dependent on the position and velocity of the observer, so that the concept of “now” became meaningless.
Decades later, in a letter of condolence to the family of his friend Michele Besso, who had died shortly before, Einstein wrote that for physicists “the distinction between past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion.”
This is the best video that Ken has ever come up with. I just wish he would slow it down a little bit and not try to cram everything into 1 hour. Love you Ken! ,😊
I remember when Mt. St. Helens erupted. Scientists "carbon dated" trees after the eruption and the reading said they were millions of years older than everyone knew them to be!
You keep ignorant & deluded, your flavour of geographically and culturally ordained god seems to like that! 😂👍
@@pup1008 What are your thoughts on the observed 10-year old samples taken from a lava dome at Mt. St. Helens that were K-Ar dated to be 300,000 years old? In order to accurately "date" something, you need to know the original amount of the parent isotope, the original amount of the daughter isotope, that the rate of decay remained constant, and that the material was in a closed system unaffected by other influences which could throw off the results - *we can't verify any of these Assumptions without a time machine.* Why were the samples from this lava dome so far off? Because the scientists *incorrectly assumed* that all of the Argon was the product of radioactive decay of Potassium, but the material inherited additional Argon as it solidified, so they incorrectly dated a 10-year old object to be 300,000 years old based on their false assumptions.
If objects that we observe can be so incorrectly dated, what does that tell you about dating objects that we cannot observe, from the Unobservable Past?
Other items for consideration include young Carbon-14 found inside of allegedly "billions of years old" diamonds, young soft tissues and intact cells found inside a growing number of allegedly "65 million year old" dinosaur fossils which appear similar to 4000 year old mummies and the Tyrolean Ice Man, snail shells dated to be 26,000 years old in the 1980s, and numerous measurements taken from samples of past historically documented volcanic eruptions (Mt. Etna, etc.) which are WAY off compared to what documented history shows.
...but without this atheistic "flavour of geographically and culturally ordained god" (Naturalism and its underlying assumptions), you don't have "billions of years." Without "billions of years," your already implausible belief that chemicals fizzed into people by chance just by adding *Time* falls apart. You need a Creator.
*"It is appointed for a man to die once, then comes Judgment"* (Hebrews 9:27)
Sorry my husband says he is an atheist but he is going to go to Jerusalem with me. I pray this trip will open his eyes to the faith of Jesus Christ and believe in the history of the Bible through the knowledge of many archaeologists.
Easy. All wanted to keep Jesus's body in the tomb. 2000 lb rock, SWAT team watching all night with promise of death if the Seal was broken.
Jesus was messing up the MONEY of the Jews and Rome feared a rebellion.
Easy.
Where's the body.
🙏
Praying for him too.
Just as the novels of JK Rowling contain many true-to-life things and events, so does the bible. There truly was an historical Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Sea of Galilee, etc. There was a Herod and a Pontius Pilate, and crucifixions used as punishment, and many "holy men" running around leading one and another religious sect or cult. There does not however seem to exist any evidence for the supernatural events attributed to Jesus in the bible. I commend your husband for willingly accompanying you. My wife is a believer, and in 45 years of married life I have always supported her in her beliefs, beliefs which I do not share. I know we would have a parting of ways if she were to become a christian nationalist (remember Nationalisten Sozialisten?).
Amen praise God for this guy talking about the different genes On the animals. I used to be mormon Am I early sixties I accepted Jesus Christ as my personal saver . And Jesus Christ open my eyes.
Faith and Jesus is all we need !!! Everything else will fall in line !! Amen
Genes are amazing. My kids are 4 years apart. My son was born with perfectly olive skin, though he is white And he tans perfectly and never burns, my daughter however, is pale and I have to put sunscreen on her. Their skin is so different!
Might also be good to add that not only could the voulcanos done this but today if you pour hot steel into way it explodes upwards and for that reason the molds at steel factory’s are inspected before use so no one dies
As I watched this 57mins video, I found myself lifting my hand and worshipping the great God of glory! This video is simply declaring His mighty works. I am totally in awe of our Lord God. How could there be no God. It doesn't even make sense to my mind. How great thou art oh Lord
The fool hath said in his heart there is no God - Proverbs
hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
See how delusion makes you happy?
Amen sister
PRAISE BELONG TO JESUS AND JHVH FOREVER AND EVER
AMEN
One of the best clearest message I have seen
Yeah, it's clear alright, in that whenever something cannot be explained, it's explained by being god. Never mind truly looking for the cause of anything, as it's just god. But then which of the thousands of gods that have been brought forth by man should one believe? For some crazy reason it's the one from the bible. As if that fairy tale carries any more weight that any other religion.
So according to The cosmologist the big bang theory is currently the accepted theory of the beginning of the universe up to now .....but apparently there are a few other theories The steady state theory where matter was always.there. mult universe theory..but for now The universe started from a single point in spacoe expansion from a single Atom so where did the atom come from you can't have something out of of nothings
@@soultraveller5027 - Funny how you go from saying "steady state theory where matter was always there" to then saying "so where did the atom come from you can't have something out of of nothings".
Well, if the steady state theory is correct, then that atom was always there!
@@soultraveller5027 The old chestnut, "nothing" as scientist use it is not the same as ordinary people understand. Nothing is a state of energy that equals zero then that fluctuated which then became something hence everything created (in a simplistic sense). I also pose a chestnut question, you can't believe that the universe came from nothing, but you believe god can or that he has always been there?. So why could that not be possible with the universe?. God is unnecessary baggage that need not be added. You are hypocritical of your own reasoning.
@@soultraveller5027what makes God?
Enjoyed this video. I appreciate the discussion on evolution. I've watched several other speakers discuss the complexity of DNA and protein strands. The ecological impact of the eruption of Mt. St. Helen's had some new information for me. Keep up the good work.
Have you actually watched anyone other than the self affirming minions from YEC echo chambers?
@@pup1008 With respect, given your misunderstandings and inability to explain your own worldview beliefs from our prior discussions... have you?
“…It has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwin’s predictions. Nor is the problem a miserably poor record. The fossil record simply shows that this prediction is wrong…The observation that species are amazingly conservative and static entities throughout long periods of time has all the qualities of the emperor’s new clothes: *everyone knew it but preferred to ignore it. Paleontologists, faced with a recalcitrant record obstinately refusing to yield Darwin’s predicted pattern, simply looked the other way.”* (Niles Eldredge, "The Myths of Human Evolution, 1982)
That last part in particular is important: *"...everyone knew it but preferred to ignore it. Paleontologists, faced with a recalcitrant record obstinately refusing to yield Darwin’s predicted pattern, simply looked the other way.”* This is an evolutionist admitting that evolutionary paleontologists are ignoring the evidence. What are your thoughts on that?
All the best evidences for evolution can also be explained by Genesis 1-12.
@pup1008 what's it to you? I enjoyed the video. Spread your hate somewhere else.
@@rosesacks7430
One man's "hate" is another man's reality...
@@michaelg377 Niles Eldredge - a biologist who lived and breathed evolution.
michaelg - a Creationist who lies for God that Eldredge had doubts that evolution had happened.
Thanks for a very informative view, using basic understandable language and logic to describe the comparisons between science and Christianity. which at the end proves the existence of God and the work of His hands and that the evolution and other theories are just theories and nothing else. Thanks for a great video.
do you know what does theory mean?
@@YerdauitYerlanulya theory is an interpretation of facts to form a conclusion. That’s why theories change, and can be wrong. We can interpret the facts incorrectly or we can discover new data that changes the picture.
It’s the same reason we can get wildly different politics when interpreting data incorrectly or not getting the full picture. The addition of data changes theories rapidly. For example, recently the JWT found that galaxies and heavy elements are found fully formed far further than we ever could have predicted they could be according to the conclusions and theories that we currently understood. This wildly changes the possibilities of the Big Bang, the process of the creation of our universe, and the timeline associated with it.
Understandable language and logic are important, but do you knwo what else is important? Sources. He has not proven that God was a witness to anything, he has not proven that God is capable of inspiring anyone and that he did. We know the history of the eiffel tower, because we have primary sources of people who left physical evidence with blueprints, and newspapers.
@@Quartz512_ So, you believe only in that you can see and obtain information from blueprints? Well, I have news for you, there is a blueprint for the existence of God namely the bible. If you take the time to understand the building of the Eifel tower, you might find it more interesting to read the blueprint of God, the bibile KJV. You, are His creation. Look around you at nature, and not man-made structures, and you will realize the power of God. He alone has the power to life and existence, and He created it.There is only one God and His Son, Jesus Christ. Trust and believe in them and you might be with Them when Jesus comes collect the saved. It is not to late for you to confess and repent of your sins and accept Jesus Christ into your life.
@@Quartz512_ Do you say that because you believe in the modern mythology that fish evolve into philosophers? Throughout Scripture we have 66 books written by 40 authors, including 27 books written by 8 of them plus their amanuenses which all corroborate the same claims - that's enough eyewitness/secondary witness evidence to sink a modern court case. We also have demonstrable proof of supernatural phenomena through fulfilled prophecy documented in the Bible, such as the prophecy in Daniel 9 which accurately predicted the rebuilding of Jerusalem, coming of someone meeting all the qualifications of the Jewish Messiah, execution of said Messiah in a specifically curse-worthy manner, and then destruction of the 2nd temple and Jerusalem (AD 70), all in that order and on a specific timeline that just happens to line up with the year that Jesus was crucified.
*Fulfilled Prophecy in the Biblical Texts*
Among other things. *Accurately telling the future with such precise detail is either extremely incredible chance, or it's a supernatural phenomenon. This is evidence of God's divine intervention in mankind through Scripture, and is therefore evidence that supports His inspiration of this text.* These specific prophecies came to be because God is sovereign over all of it, and His prophecies are always accurate. BTW we can prove this prophecy above was made hundreds of years before this specific timeline of events occurred based on tangible manuscript evidence that we have in hand that predates Jesus' time on earth (Dead Sea Scrolls, Septuagint, etc.).
*Science in the Bible*
Also consider the many hints of scientific truths throughout, yet undiscovered by secular man at the time they were written. The human authors wrote that God put the stars in the Heavens, and Scripture goes on to say that they are countless (Jeremiah 33:22, etc.) while Ptolemy only catalogued 1100 observable stars in his time. Likewise, years before Pythagoras is attributed with discovering a round earth, and while the rest of the world believed it was flat and/or on the back of an animal with wind blowing from four corners, Isaiah suspiciously wrote that God "sits above the circle of the earth" (Isaiah 40:22) and Job wrote that God "hangs the earth on nothing" (Job 26:7) both showing signs of countercultural and 3-dimensional thought. *It's almost like these prophets of God suspiciously had glimpses of a scientific truth we didn't figure out for centuries.*
Then of course there's how Matthew Maury discovered ocean currents based on his understanding of Psalm 8:8, the Bible's descriptions matching the hydrologic cycle which we didn't figure out until relatively recently (Amos 9:6, Ecclesiastes 1:7, Psalm 135:7, Ecclesiastes 11:3, etc.), that blood is the source of life (Leviticus 17:11) while other cultures were practicing bloodletting to try to stop disease, hygiene laws requiring running water (Leviticus 15:13) while even up to the 1800s doctors would wash their hands in a still basin of water leaving invisible germs and causing countless infections and deaths as a result...
Among countless other examples. These hints at modern scientific truths throughout Scripture make sense if they were revealed to us from the all-knowing God who created the entire universe including the laws of nature (Jeremiah 33:25) and time, space, and matter themselves (Genesis 1:1). *They make sense if Scripture was inspired by God - literally "God-breathed" (2 Timothy 3:16).* But if the Bible is false, then it's very odd that all these prophets seem to have gotten modern science right on so many points millennia before modern science figured these things out.
*"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness"* (2 Timothy 3:16)
I am blown away with this information which clears up many questions I've had over the years and how naive I have been, giving me a better perspective. Look out, I've finally woken up to a better understanding. Thank-you!
All he needs to do now is study some serious textbooks and will find a mountain of evidence the earth 4.6 billion years old.Deep time is something people of his mind set fail to comprehend or understand but is true regardless of what he thinks.
@@BobSmith-ew5oi Note though that the bible doesn't say the earth isn't 4.6 billion years old nor does it mention another age of our planet.
Also note how Ken doesn't adhere to Thomas Aquinas vieuw on the relation of science and scripture. In my personal opinion, both the science aspect as well as the theological aspect of this video are sub par.
Especially the "it's not x, so it must be y" arguments Ken makes are cringy as he fails to demonstrate that it must be either x or y to begin with, as long as that is not proven that it must be either x or y the conclusion is invalid as it's equally valid to conclude that its not x nor y but instead is a, b, c, .. etc, or it could even be both x and y.
So I'm afraid Ken has a little more to do than you are suggesting.
@@BobSmith-ew5oi You pretend like that affects the validity of Christianity to any degree whatsoever.
@@BobSmith-ew5oi You claim that people like Ken cannot comprehend deep time. No, it is rather you, sir, that cannot comprehend an Infinite God who is outside of time and capable of speaking all things into existence in a mere six days. We understand "deep time" completely. Our understanding transcends it. You are the one who is limited.
@@gooberpeas535 and yet somehow unlike all other human beings on the face of this planet you completely do? I'm sorry... if the main argument is you cannot get information from non-information, that means that all life had to have a creator... however, that also means that someone or something had to create God... so who created God?
This video is so good. I see a lot of mockers and scoffers in the comments, but I haven't seen one comment that can disprove anything Mr. Ham is saying.
The religion of atheism requires plenty of blind faith, much more blind faith than Christianity does. The difference is they are putting their faith into the fallible opinions of men, rather than in the perfect word of God.
atheism is the absent of religion. it doesnt make sense what you´re saying. Atheism do not pray or follow a set of rules in the name of atheism.
Being an atheist is similar to be ab "individual person" why you may ask? two atheist are just doing their own thing. Religious people are forced to follow what i would call a communistic world view "if you dont follow the rules the consequenses can be severe" sounds like a dictator to me. Thats not freedom
You can be an atheist and deny every scientific discoveries there is outthere. You can be an atheist and deny evolution.
Religion can be dangerous because i am 100% sure that you have never have come across a situation where the bible is wrong which makes you and any other religious person closed minded. non believers can also be wrong aswell but we arent closed minded since we follow the evidence.
in a nutshell if god can be proven tommorow i would not be religious because religion is hope and hope isnt facts. religion will cancel itself since it would be facts
I know this was 5 months ago, but I am seriously curious as to what blind faith atheists must have that a theist doesn't.
Atheism is not a religion, they literally dont believe in any god or anything divine, but rather just believe anything they can see is reality.
Buddy, this dude did not bring hardly any valid receipts or sources whatsoever, even his alleged friend that is a scientist and a creationist who apparently has some method of dating that could place the Earth in the young earth creationist territory he still didn't name the person or cited any study they did.
Not only that but if you actually knew the science or anyting remotely connected to the material reality of what this man is talking about, then you would be able to recognize the subtle strawmanning of science as well as the quiet dishonesty that bleeds through their unrecognized bias.
@@justinstuder1649 "Atheism requires faith" is probably the strongest indicator that they have absolutely zero idea what they are talking about. 😂
No need science to verify Bible. Let Bible verify the science.
Bingo!!
This was a fantastic viewpoint and I just ordered the book! Can’t wait to discuss with my husband.
10:50 - "We have never seen matter produce one bit of brand new information that ever previously existed" Truth.
Very true. And this information includes complex instructions for building things like your eyes with its millions of cells and a concave light-refracting lens that bends light just right so that you can see... and they say 'it's just chemicals." It's incredible.
@@ThomasKundera Well, first you need to get information from non-information - out of a chemical puddle. This information needs to then grow into instructions for building things like your concave light refracting lens that bends light just right, 137M light sensitive cells, 40M nerve endings, and precise muscles that auto-focus this complex optical system 100,000 times a day. Then once you've solve that information/instructions problem for building this complex masterpiece of engineering, you can move on to the chemicals and physics involved in this engineering masterpiece - but first you need to account for the instructions for it from non-information in a lifeless information-less chemical universe. How do you do that?
@@ThomasKundera So you admit that your chemical DNA is programmed with information (instructions) to build this complex machine including a concave light-refracting lens that bends light just right so your 137M light sensitive cells can process this input and turn it into a signal so you can "see"? Because the intelligent origin of information was the point of my post.
So far so good my friend - right?
@@ThomasKundera " the intelligent origin of information was the point of my post." And evolution is what put that information there."
Okay, so DNA contains information. We observe that every example of information elsewhere always has an intelligent source - every book has an author, every program a programmer, the words on this screen came from you as the intelligent source. So take an early living cell, and go back in time to the first "creature" or "bacteria" or whatever it was that contained DNA with "information" - How did that "information" in that first DNA/information filled cell get created out of chemicals in a puddle without an intelligent source?
Two worldviews, same evidence, two very different interpretations.
Evidence: DNA contains information.
Evidence: Every *other* example of information in existence always ultimately has an intelligent source.
Biblical Creation Conclusion: Therefore, *consistently interpreted,* the information and instructions in DNA also had an Intelligent Source (God).
Atheistic Naturalist Conclusion: "Evolution [an unintelligent source] is what put that information there."
Can you please explain?
@@ThomasKundera You just made another logical fallacy, *begging the question* of an unintelligent source for early DNA. Read above carefully, I'll repost here for you side by side, maybe it will help: "take an early living cell, and *go back in time to the first "creature" or "bacteria" or whatever it was that contained DNA with "information" - How did that "information" in that first DNA/information filled cell get created out of chemicals in a puddle* without an intelligent source?"
You said "Do you suggest that *a mutation in DNA* is caused by intelligence?" - *That depends on whether that information in DNA originally came from an Intelligent Source or not, right? So back on topic, with the first instance of information in DNA, in the first bacteria, cell, etc. - where did that information come from?*
You can get information from other information ("mutations in DNA," etc.) - but you need to get *information from non-information* without an Intelligent Source.
By way of a rough analogy, if a bunch of pages were ripped out of several books and thrown into the trash, it's possible that those pages could just happen to fall together into a certain order in a "new" book. That "new" book was not formed by an intelligent source - but *all of the information in it still came from an Intelligent Source (the original authors).* You need to account for the "author" that gets you from information-less chemicals to information-full DNA, not from one information-filled cell to another mutated information-filled cell. Does that help?
What a beautiful explanation of skin shade, so color of skin shouldn’t matter at all! What does matter is the quality of the persons standards, the morality of each individual. As believers in Jesus we should be most concerned about those two things, and how we as individuals keep his commandments! Love to all!
You're talking about this like you're mind blown by the idea of not being racist
32:58 the fact that we all technically live on islands is a pretty good indicator that there was a flood.
Science agrees that there has been floods in the past, there's deserts that used to be under water and so on.
But all the continents user to be one super continent at one point. We know this because of archeological findings like fossils of the same species being found on different continents and other geological findings. Not to mention the current movement of the continents.
A few floods in the past does not confirm gods existence. In fact the pole ices are melting right now and will cause landmasses to get under the sea level.
These events happen on a geoactive planet.
But to make a further argument. The epic of Gilgamesh is a text written around 2000 BC, (long before the bible).
And it has a flood myth which is very very similar to the story of Noah.. Including building a ship and taking animals onboard
"The gods sent a flood to destroy the human race, but one god, Ea spoke to a reed fence giving instructions on how to build a suitable boat. Uta-napishti heard the words of Ea, and saved himself, his family and all living things. The flood was upon the earth for six days and seven nights."
Is it coincident? I think not.. Most likely this story was carried on from mouth to ear, gradually changing and eventually tailored to fit into the Old Testament. It makes the most sense.
No it's not. Creationists like ken Ham deny evolution but they rely on the theory of evolution to support the claim of the flood. People who believe there was a flood and an arc need to be institutionalized. It's a belief founded in ignorance and denying science.
@@HaveAHuff That's just not true my friend. For example, *if sediments have been accumulating on the ocean floor for 3+ billion years, then the sediment on the sea floor should be several miles deep* ...but the thickness of these sediments is only about 1300 feet deep.
Approximately 20 billion tons of dirt and rock debris are eroded from the continents and deposited into the sea every year, mostly near the continents. Approximately 1 billion tons of sediment are removed every year through tectonic movement (1-2 inches per year), resulting in a net gain of approximately 19 billion tons of sediment every year. At this rate, it would take about 12 million years (assuming atheistic-Naturalist assumptions) for all of this sediment to accumulate - not 3-4 *Billion* years.
This measurable evidence makes sense from a biblical creation perspective which holds that most of these sediments were rapidly deposited a little over 4000 years ago in the global flood. The evidence just fits.
Atheistic-Naturalists, however, have to invoke one of several rescuing devices to circumvent this problematic evidence, all of which are problematic themselves. Some claim *"it must have accumulated at a slower rate in the past"* - but the sediments on the continental shelves suggest they were deposited much *Faster* than today's rates. For example, the layering and patterns of the grain sizes in these sediments are the same as those produced by undersea landslides, when turbidity currents flow rapidly across continental shelves and the sediments then settle in thick layers over vast areas. *There is also no evidence of a large amount of sediment being subducted under the mantle.*
Two worldviews, same evidence, two very different interpretations. Biblical creation proponents "scientifically" accept this evidence at face value of a recent global flood and a young creation - the evidence simply fits. Atheistic-Naturalists have to invoke a rescuing device to unscientificially *circumvent this problematic evidence in order to preserve their atheistic version of our origins.* Which worldview is really behaving more "scientifically" at this point, the one that accepts the evidence (biblical creation) or the one that has to invoke yet another rescuing device to sustain their belief system (atheistic-Naturalists)? We are all indoctrinated into atheistic-Naturalism (evolution, etc.) today in our public education system.
Atheistic-Naturalists do the same thing with the Faint Young Sun Paradox which suggests earth should have been frozen when life was supposed to create itself 3.5 billion years ago (various unsubstantiated theories), young 100,000 year old maximum comets in our allegedly "14 billion year old" universe (fabricated Oort Clouds), young soft tissues in allegedly "65+ million year old" dinosaur fossils that appear similar to 4000 year old mummies and the Tyrolean ice man (preservative rescuing devices), the fact that the moon would have been touching the earth 1.5 billion years ago based on calculations concerning the effects of tidal recession on the moon (usually miscalculated and/or ignored), etc. Is this really how "Science" is supposed to work?
@@michaelg377 I'm not reading any of that. There are 16000000 species that would have had to be on the arc. Creationists acknowledge there's no way a vessel that size could have been constructed by a man and his family. They assert there were only 1000-4000 species, depending who you ask. Which means everything had to evolve from those species. The entire world view is a contradiction. Even most people who believe in your god don't believe the flood happened. It's simply illogical.
@@michaelg377 You aren't going to be taken seriously when you blatantly deny science.
Great presentation. Thank you!
In my 56 years on this world, this is the best explanation of the Bible. I have been a Christian since childhood but growing up and learning what they taught me in school had me asking all kinds of questions. I've tried talking with different pastors from different Christian denominations (Baptist, Protestant, even Lutheran) and couldn't get satisfactory answers. Faith or science? This video cleared a lot of the misconceptions up for me. I'm going to share this with as many people as I can. Thank you!
Another good source for answers is Apologetics Press.
Seems to me you've gone to all sources but the True One: the Catholic Church. The saints and Church Fathers can answer any, each and all of your questions. And more. And so much more.
@@fernandaabreu5625 With respect, I don't think the Modern Catholic Church is the same as the One True original early church... If that's true, then why did St. Jerome say "“As, then, *the Church reads Judith, Tobit, and the books of Maccabees, but does not admit them among the canonical Scriptures,* so let it read these two volumes for the edification of the people, *not to give authority to doctrines of the Church.”* ...? You have a different Bible from your early church fathers, are you sure that your Modern Catholic Church is really the same as the One True Original Catholic (from the Greek "Katholikos" = "Universal") church of Jesus Christ from 1600+ years ago? *Where do we find in the earliest records of Christians in the TRUE CHURCH promoting things such as bowing before images of things in heaven and earth, rosary beads, scapulars, and holy water?*
Cardinal Cajetan (AD 1534) likewise said: "For the rest (that is, *Judith, Tobit, and the books of Maccabees) are counted by St Jerome out of the canonical books,* and are placed amongst the Apocrypha, along with Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, *as is plain from the Prologus Galeatus.* Nor be thou disturbed, like a raw scholar, if thou shouldest find anywhere, either in the sacred councils or the sacred doctors, these books reckoned as canonical. *For the words as well of councils as of doctors are to be reduced to the correction of Jerome."* ...just 15 years or so later and he would have been declared Anathema by the Modern Catholic Church at the Council of Trent for his agreement with St. Jerome and rejection of the apocryphal books.
What are your thoughts on these things?
The Bible tells us that Man has limited knowledge --only God knows and understands everything.
@@michaelg377 Michael. my thoughts on the Apocrypha, rosary beads and bowing down in front of statues. all such things are traditional. according to the Catholic Church.
also, Paul mentions saints, veneration of, in his letters to churches. this, probly the earliest writings of any Christian? when Paul refers to saints he probly means someone who has died in the faith, achieved sainthood, and that they should be remembered. such as Blessed Virgin Mary. altho Paul does not mention Her, Justyn Martyr did. he likened Jesus to a new Adam, and Mary to a new Eve, in one of his early writings. the veneration of saints and Blessed Virgin Mary probly as old as Christianity itself!
Maccabees, not thought of as 'inspired' by the Holy Spirit, so therefore not included.
Maccabees, more of a history, than anything. a bloody history, of religious fundamentalism. as Paul tells us, Jews were persecutors and contrary to all men..
Wonderfully presented! Watching this in the start of the year is meaningful.
God bless you 🎉
*_God Bless_*
@Tbone
Yes there is
i WILL SHARE THIS WITH AS MANY PEOPLE AS i CAN! THANK YOU FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER! WE NEED TO SHARE THE GOOD NEWS AND THE TRUTH! PEACE BE WITH YOU ALL!
WHY ARE YOU SHOUTING?
The Best concise explanations of aspects of creation I’ve seen thus far. Explanation of the East Asian eye shape was omitted; which most likely originated with Eve. Thank you.
I used to watch Ken Ham many years ago when he debated between evolution and creationism. I over the years have became detached from God and Jesus. And have recently found my love again for God. It took a jarring event though that God used to wake me up again, God does work in mysterious ways. After finding God again I'm starting to feel better and better every single day. Things are brighter and more clear. Ken Ham's message is very powerful.
I wasn't an Atheist per-say, but I was lost. I don't know how Atheists have the strength, it isn't a good existence.
How dare you speak for others.
@@ngc-fo5te "The long and short of it is that I became convinced that atheism implies amorality; and since I am an atheist, I must therefore embrace amorality... The religious fundamentalists are correct: without God, there is no morality. But they are incorrect, I still believe, about there being a God. Hence, I believe, there is no morality." ~ Joel Marks, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at the University of New Haven.
*'They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them"* (Romans 2:15)
It doesn’t mean the word of God is not real if the Earth isn’t older than 6000 years. It means that human beings kept better records and oral traditions than we thought possible before.
The Catholic Church wants you to believe that the world is only 6000 years old for whatever reason. Maybe to ignore the ancient archaeology around the world which is getting increasingly harder to ignore the more intelligent human beings become.
Forget, carbon dating. Do you think you have more than 200 ancestor to Adam and eve? If so, that means the world is order than 6000 years. The institution of marriage itself is absolutely older than 6000 years. 😂
Right beside you man. I'm going through some stuff and God is using that to bring me back. AMEN
@@michaelg377 I don't understand what you mean by, 'without God there is no morality'.
There are billions of people in the world who do not worship the Christian God, are they all running around raping and killing each other? Some of the countries with the lowest crime rates in the world, such as Australia, New Zealand, France, and many more, predominately identify as atheist; all they're all running around raping and killing each other?
Morality is subjective, it does not come from a book or a god.
There is a LOT to unpack here, i will have to watch it multiple times and make notes. God bless this teacher.
yah all fake
@@jmatiasdelgado Evolution is a lie because Charles Lyle and Charles Darwin both lied about it. Charles Lyle wrote in his own journal that he just wanted to make something that refutes the Bible Genesis creation.
@@jmatiasdelgado Just because you're delusional and incapable of comprehending anything does not mean it's a hoax.
How does it make you feel? Knowing that man changed "Gods Word?" The only passages in the bible that talk about slavery are the ones that support it. So when the laws in the United States changed, and slavery became illegal the interpretation of the Bible changed over night. Do you get that? No Messiah was needed. The word of God was just changed, boom, like that, over night. God was overruled. God trumped. How does that make you feel? We're doing bad things with our nipples and making God watch us.
@@royromano9792 I'm in full agreement with you - but " God trumped." was an unfortunate turn of phrase! 😜
Your amazing at this i can really feel his spirit when your talking
It so funny how he first stated that there's no new information being added to DNA because of genes just being handed over from the parents, but then he goes on to explain mutations for the reason why incest is a bad idea.
The thing is: it's all mutations both the good and the bad.
Mutations are the force behind evolution.
That's because you believe in the modern mythology that fish evolve into philosophers, and if you just wait a really long *Time* puddles of chemicals can fizz into people. *All the best evidences for evolution can also be explained by Genesis 1-12,* and if you understand "science" (a methodology) then you understand the implications of a competing explanation. Let me ask you this... DNA contains mass quantities of ordered, sequenced, encoded information - instructions for building complex machines like your eyes. Every other example of information without exception that we observe always has an original intelligent source - every book has an author, every program has a programmer, the words on this screen came from you... therefore, *if consistently interpreted,* the information in DNA likewise came from an original intelligent source: God. *How do you handle this observable evidence?*
Do you interpret it consistently, as Biblical Creation proponents do? Or do you interpret it inconsistently, in contrast to ALL the rest of the observable evidence?
Evolution does not care about your advantages, survival, advancement, and it most certainly does not "select" anything. Meaningless evolved protoplasm in a meaningless chemical universe that literally does not care. Hitler did his deed, had his fun, and - according to your belief system - he got away home free with no punishment...
*"The evidence of God... has been clearly seen since the beginning in all that has been created, so they will have no excuse"* (Romans 1:20)
@@michaelg377 Yawn! 'Gotcha' no 13 trotted out for the 127th time.
@@Oldtinear How do you interpret this evidence? It's a simple, linear, logical, evidence-based argument. The programming language in your computer came from a programmer. Every book has an author. The words on this screen came from countless intelligent human beings around the world. Even a modulated radio wave had an original intelligent source to modulate it. In DNA we see ordered, sequenced, *encoded* instructions that act with *agency* to tell your organs how to grow and operate - including instructions for complex machines like your eyes with their perfectly shaped concave translucent light-refracting lens, 137M light sensing cells, and precise muscles that auto-focus them 100,000 times a day. That's all *programmed* into your DNA.
I look at this linear, logical, evidence-based argument above, and *consistently* interpret it as evidence that DNA came from an intelligent source. That makes sense - chemicals didn't just fizz into people over time by chance; God created us intentionally, with engineering-level precision so complex that we barely understand a lot of it.
Can you name one example of information coming from non-information without an intelligent source (without *begging the question* of atheistic abiogenesis, of course)? Just one, and my entire argument would crumble. Just one.
*"We've not made the RNA in a prebiotically relevant manner. It hydrolyzes too rapidly."* (Professor Saztech, Chicago, 2021)
*"The evidence of God... has been clearly seen since the beginning in all that has been created, so they will have no excuse"* (Romans 1:20)
@@michaelg377 How do you test your idea that an invisible supernatural being created DNA?
@@Oldtinear One step at a time my friend. Are you conceding that the information in DNA reasonably came from an intelligent source? Information we observe in every book, letter, magazine, computer program, modulated radio wave, directly from your mouth, etc. always without exception comes from an original intelligent source. DNA contains mass quantities of ordered, sequenced, *encoded* instructions for building complex machines like your eyes. Therefore, *if consistently interpreted,* the information in DNA likewise came from an original Intelligent Source. That's where this argument stops - so if you reject that God created DNA, are you proposing "Aliens"? Something else?
*"Human DNA is like a computer program but far, far more advanced than any software ever created."* - Bill Gates
Or are you just unscientifically demanding an INCONSISTENT interpretation IN CONTRAST to ALL of the rest of the observable evidence - Information just must have atheistically created itself out of non-information that one time, without explanation, and without evidence?
*"We've not made the RNA in a prebiotically relevant manner. It hydrolyzes too rapidly."* (Professor Saztech, Chicago, 2021)
*"No matter how large the environment one considers, life cannot have had a random beginning . . . there are about two thousand enzymes, and the chance of obtaining them all in a random trial is only one part in (10^20)2000 = 10^40,000, an outrageously small probability that could not be faced even if the whole universe consisted of organic soup"* (Sir Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe, Evolution from Space (London: Dent, 1981), p. 148, 24)
That's why we should teach our children about God and His Word in our homes. Don't leave it to schools.
God bless you with lots of good health and happiness 🎉
*_God Bless_*
@@AlbertPaulMontini-nk6wh thank you, God bless you.
@@canadiankewldude thank you, God bless you.
Amen!
I was shocked to see kids hearing this, I can’t imagine hearing this when I was little, even as an adult this is a lot to take in!
But it is true, called faith.😊
@@TdBone a more accurate statement- you can’t just claim people are your friend by saying it
It's not really
@@pamelaevans3146 faith doesn't mean anything, irs just a word used by people without evidence for their so called invisible celestial dictator
@@frankmurphyburr3598 😂so what are you doing here watching? Have you nothing better to do than hang around to start arguments? Go watch something you enjoy
Thank u God not that we deserve truth but people keep searching like their suppose to and it always begins and no end with u. Thank u again love Terry
Glad I found this video. Answer all my questions
Great lecture. Can't wait until my daughter is old enough to watch it and understand. Not only is it a great Biblical teaching but makes science learning so much easier and accurate.
God bless you with lots of good health and happiness 🎉
How wonderful that you will teach your daughter the truth!
Andy Stanley has thrown out the Old Testament. He has brought himself under God's curse. Revelation 22:18-19.
We are not to change God's eternal word. Yet many honor modern bibles which lie, change who God is, and continually challenge God and His word!!! by asking, Did God say? Come on, really?
God said He preserved His word. Psalm 12:6-7. Most modern bibles do not. In other words they are not admitting that God has a standard, His inspired word. His word is quick (alive) and quickens (gives life). His word is eternal.
Most of the modern bibles have at least one out and out lie. NKJB lies in Exodus 6:3. They began to call on the name of the Lord in Genesis 4:26.
Others quote Jesus telling his brothers, i am not going to the feast. John 7:8. (Is he saying he is going to break the law of Moses?) He waits and then goes. Liar! BLASPHEMY .
Jesus simply said, not going now, not yet. He waits and then goes. No problem, no lie.
And blatantly they mock Jesus and unashamedly, constantly, with each change ask, Did God say? "All things were made by Him and without Him was not anything made that was made. " John 1:3.
Clearly He is the Creator.
Their Jesus was but a vessel. "Made through him."
Did God say Mark 11:26? Absolutely. It is an essential part of our walk with God. A verse that makes us tremble was added?????
Did God say? Acts 15:34? It shows God's divine providence. Silas was there when Paul needed him for a journey. Obviously Silas remained there.
BRAZENLY, they change or remove a word that gives the believers true power! Matthew 12:31 and Mark 9:29! Some spiritual warfare needs prayer and fasting!
Did God say eleven (11) times in the New Testament the word damnation, eternal burning? Yes. But not in theirs! Did God say?
Did God give three witnesses to that truth? Mark 9:44, 46, 48. They however only have v48. The other two they ask, Did God say? This is important because we need to know the truth and those who preach Annialism, we cease to exist, are easily proven wrong with these verses.
Jesus is God and Jesus is Man. Hebrews supports this with four verses, 3:3, 7:24, 8:3 and 10:12: "But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sin for ever, sat down at rhe right hand of God; v10:12. They do not use the clarifying words 'this man' at all. Again, Did God say?
Every change they make is an insult to God and His word.
God said He would curse those who add to or take from His word. Revelation 22:18-19.
In the Old Testament those who honored a false prophet received the reward of that prophet. So the Alexandrian translators, the bible societies the publishers, the promoters, sellers and those who teach from them (showing those ear tickling bibles as God's word) or honor them will be held responsible. If done ignorantly, repent. God will not be mocked.
This happened when the inspired Antioch manuscripts called the Textus Receptus were replaced by the Alexandrian manuscripts called the Codex B or the Vaticanus from the Vatican basement, and the Sianiticus from a monestary. They do not agree with each other and the latter has about 30 changes per page. Obviously inspired by their spiritual father who brings conflict, frustration, despair and DOUBT.
King James Bible online
Helpful tool: Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary online:
This dictionary has civil and spiritual definitions. Look up: Repent, Regeneration, Believe, Faith Redemption, Perfect Conversation, Prevent, Propitiation,
Suppliers: Churchkjb.com
Localchurchbiblepublishers.com
Sources:
Adullum Films
-Tares Among the Wheat Sequel video.
Books: The Revision Revised and The Last Twelve Verses of Mark, both by William Burgon. Dean Burgon lived during the time of Wescott and Hort.
Book: Look What's Missing by David Daniels Chick.com.
If interested an old video called The Forbidden Book video.
It has some American History also.
You have a lot more learning to do if you think they accurately represent science. They use inductive reasoning, which is where you have your answer and you look for evidence to support it and omit the rest. Science doesn't like that because it's not a good way for finding out what is true. You need deductive reasoning. You look at the evidence and see where it leads you, then double check and have others double check for peer review. They got a lot of stuff false just within the first few min and when you start with false information, it will only lead to false information.
@@sadistksuffring1537 instead of criticizing, why don't you point out what is false? Your "science" uses inductive reasoning as well, just take a look at how many assumptions have to be made in order for c-14, dendocronology, archeomagnetic dating and so on.
If we pick up the most famous one, carbon 14 for instance, why can't we date a dinosaur fossil using this technique when there are still carbon in the bones?
There is an overwhelming amount of evidence from multiple fields of science, including genetics, paleontology, embryology, and comparative anatomy. The similarities in DNA sequences and developmental patterns between different species provide strong evidence for common ancestry and the gradual process of evolution over millions of years.
Additionally, the observation of natural selection in action, as well as the numerous documented instances of speciation, provide further evidence for evolution. For example, the evolution of antibiotic resistance in bacteria and development of new species of animals on isolated islands, have been well documented.
But hey, let’s instead believe some illiterate and superstitious goat herders who, over 2000 years ago, had a higher level of understanding of our world and universe than we do today. I don't believe God would want you to be that naive. You have been given free will, please use it to educate yourself.
This video is simply extraordinary. It confirms all my beliefs in a clear and concise manner. I will share with my daughter so that she may have a better understanding of God and life itself. 🙏
when science supports your beliefs you take it as confirmation. When science refutes yoru beliefs you say science is wrong.. Apparently science is only correct when it supports your beliefs. In fact science changes when evidence changes and reuiares changes in scientific theories. Your beliefs don't change no matter what evicence is uncovered.That is dogma.
@@jasonwiley798 Actually, you're wrong. I don't look to science to validate my beliefs. I simply wait for science to catch up to my beliefs. I know science cannot explain everything-eg.."quantum entanglement" or how the "big bang" was created in the first place.
@@tico9866 and your beliefs don't explain them either. But I guess you are not looking for explanations.
@@tico9866 what about when people were saying God was responsible for thunder and lightning and we discovered how it actually happened. Clearly you don't understand that science closes the gaps that God fills and your God is becoming less and less responsible for the universe. Less and less places for him to hide
Throughout history there have been many people who were misguided into thinking there were many gods..Thor, Zeus, Athena, Sun, etc. But there is only one true living God and he created our world and the entire universe. He allowed the moisture from the ocean to cause precipitation in the atmospheric and form rain clouds 🌦 that's brings about thunderstorms and rain that our plants need to grow so we can feed upon them. There's no conflict with Science. It just explains in detail what is physically happening throughout the process.
The Lots-of-Dogs-lecture from 20:00 on is really worthwhile. I cannot but give this video a thumbs up! Lets all redistribute it as many times as possible to anyone, because anyone, not only those remotely in contact with statistics, really any grown up should be able to look right through it and detect the screaming errors. This is a "lecture" that could only be performed in front of a complete helpless audience. It would be interesting to track how many of those children will remember this particular nonsense long enough to hopefully see through it sooner than later. It may even serve as a tipping point to them.
There was nothing wrong with the explanation, it was just simplified for children to understand, this is exactly what we observe in nature, everything is a top-down speciation proccess limited within each family kind, by dogs he meant canines in general, originaly two canines brought all the rest of them, and there has never been a case where a canine can become a non-canine regardless of how much time passes
@@SillyMagoo What? there are at least 13 different definitions of the word "species", the most commonly used one refers to variations within a family/kind, for example the canine family has different species such as wolves, dogs, coyottes etc and those have sub-species too, and can interbreed with each other, but no canine can interbreed or become a non-canine
@@user-rb3tk5th2i "There was nothing wrong with the explanation, it was just simplified for children to understand..."
No and no, there are many errors in his presentation and I wouldnt bet on that he trimmed his presentation down for children - it is probably exactly how he misunderstands things.
"...originaly two canines brought all the rest of them..."
Are you referring to the 2 that are suppopsed to be made by god according to some tales? Its not necessary at all for a new species to spring from exactly 1 pair of parents.
"...and there has never been a case where a canine can become a non-canine regardless of how much time passes"
Evolution has allready outFOXed you.
I just discovered this channel, and the series like this one is powerful truth. I'm going to share them with my gandsons.
Child indoctrination. Shame on you.
@@Oldtinear We are all Uncritically Indoctrinated into the modern mythology that fish evolve into philosophers, and if you just wait a long enough *Time* puddles of chemicals can fizz into people by chance - very few ever get to hear a different perspective. *Scientific theories are supposed to be falsifiable: Given its history of constantly being rewritten as it runs into problematic evidence, what would it take to falsify the theory of evolution today?*
In 1982 a federal court ruled that Creation can't be taught in schools because "it is not falsifiable." Evolution has a long history of radically ad-hoc rewriting itself as it runs into more and more problems - what would it take to "falsify" Naturalistic Evolution? Over 500 Living Fossils? Debunked "Junk" DNA? Finding a 70M year extinct *evolutionary ancestor to tetrapods still alive, unevolved, with no evidence of it ever evolving?* Discovering that many "vestigial" (leftover) organs actually have a normal function, like the appendix? Finding "millions of years" old creatures with no signs of evolution? Fully developed vertebrate creatures in the Cambrian explosion? An Ankylosaurus fossil found where it's not supposed to be buried among sea creatures? Whale fossils deep inland in the United States? Trilobites found appearing suddenly and fully developed with complex eyes in the Cambrian - and in every fossil layer indicating they were buried rapidly? Maybe measurably young tissues in dinosaur fossils that look similar to 4000 year old mummies or the Tyrolean Ice Man? Early jawed placoderm fossils showing fully developed complex jaws - causing evolutionists to claim that they must have evolved, de-evolved, and then re-evolved those jaws to maintain their story of shark evolution? What if scientists admitted that Human-Ape DNA is down from 99% "similar" to only 84% "similar" and admitted their bias in "humanizing" the ape genome?
...or should we just reinterpret all of these problematic evidences to keep the belief in Atheistic/Naturalistic evolution alive, and why? We are all *uncritically indoctrinated* into this Atheistic-Naturalist religion of evolution in our public education system today... Should evolution be held to the same religious standard as Creationism?
All of the best evidences for evolution can also be explained by Genesis 1-12, and if you understand "science" then you understand the implications of a competing explanation.
*"The evidence of God... has been clearly seen since the beginning in all that has been created, so they will have no excuse"* (Romans 1:20)
I'm thankful that I found this Video I always pray to GOD everyday but I'm also a man of science I'm not a scientist or anything I'm just a regular guy that finds science fascinating. That's why I'm also looking for a Logical way to explain the things in the Bible and here we are Thank You So Much Good Sir Godbless you, your family and everyone who's watching this video right now.
Personally I prefer the vieuw concerning the relation of science and scripture as presented by Thomas Aquinas.
Though probably well meaning, Ken makes the mistake of claiming that people who believe evolution to be true don't believe in God. Meaning that either he doesn't know that the Catholic church, still the largest christian denomination of which half of the christians belong to, accepts the evolution theory or even worse, he claims that those belonging to the Catholic denomination don't believe in God and thereby alienating half of christianity.
Seems to me that Ken knows about as much about evolution as Dawkins knows about theology.
“We must love them both, those whose opinions we share and those whose opinions we reject, for both have labored in the search for truth, and both have helped us in finding it.”
― St. Thomas Aquinas
The rational thing to do is to read the bible, see it is nonsense and stop sending your money to priests, frauds and other liars.
You cant marry evolution and criacionism together, if you study them closer you will see that they deny each other . Even though the catholic church is trying to bring everyone into its boat that is goin to suppress the truth bible preaches which is the word of god so when you compromise that it's the one thing the bible warns about ... dont mix light and darkness....
We need to be kind and patient with those that think different but never sugarcoat the truth
Science is a tool not something to be worshipped on it's own .It's the mechanics of how things work . Machines cannot bring themselves into being . It's arrogant and foolish to think otherwise . AMEN and praise our Heavenly Father !
@@BlacksmithTWD evolution assumes the random creation of information, highly technical and accurate, by just chance.....hmm.......
This just in, God proved he was real because he said so.
Love your answer!
And I just proved I'm God because I said so.
Oh yeah and are y’all able to rise after death like Jesus Christ did? That’s how he proved he wasn’t of THIS world. Please read your bibles.❤
@@boldasalion2911 I am just as [in]capable of rising from the dead as your Jesus was.
This is a matter of competing worldviews over the exact same evidence, and you have to evaluate the worldviews. For example, *if sediments have been accumulating on the ocean floor for 3+ billion years, then the sediment on the sea floor should be several miles deep* ...but the thickness of these sediments is only about 1300 feet deep.
Approximately 20 billion tons of dirt and rock debris are eroded from the continents and deposited into the sea every year, mostly near the continents. Approximately 1 billion tons of sediment are removed every year through tectonic movement (1-2 inches per year), resulting in a net gain of approximately 19 billion tons of sediment every year. At this rate, it would take about 12 million years (under *atheistic Uniformitarian Naturalist assumptions)* for all of this sediment to accumulate - not 3-4 *Billion* years.
This measurable evidence makes sense from a biblical creation perspective which holds that most of these sediments were rapidly deposited a little over 4000 years ago in the global flood. The evidence just fits.
Atheistic-Naturalists, however, have to invoke one of several rescuing devices to circumvent this problematic evidence, all of which are problematic themselves. Some claim *"it must have accumulated at a slower rate in the past"* - but the sediments on the continental shelves suggest they were deposited much *Faster* than today's rates. For example, the layering and patterns of the grain sizes in these sediments are the same as those produced by undersea landslides, when turbidity currents flow rapidly across continental shelves and the sediments then settle in thick layers over vast areas. *There is also no evidence of a large amount of sediment being subducted under the mantle.*
Two worldviews, same evidence, two very different interpretations. Biblical creation proponents "scientifically" accept this evidence at face value of a recent global flood and a young creation - the evidence simply fits. Atheistic-Naturalists have to invoke a rescuing device to unscientificially *circumvent this problematic evidence in order to preserve their atheistic version of our origins.* Which worldview is really behaving more "scientifically" at this point, the one that accepts the evidence (biblical creation) or the one that has to invoke yet another rescuing device to sustain their belief system (atheistic-Naturalists)? We are all indoctrinated into atheistic-Naturalism (evolution, etc.) today in our public education system.
Atheistic-Naturalists do the same thing with the Faint Young Sun Paradox which suggests earth would have been frozen when life was supposed to create itself 3.5 billion years ago (various unsubstantiated theories), young 100,000 year old maximum comets in our allegedly "14 billion year old" universe (fabricated Oort Clouds), young soft tissues in allegedly "65+ million year old" dinosaur fossils that appear similar to 4000 year old mummies and the Tyrolean ice man (preservative rescuing devices), the fact that the moon would have been touching the earth 1.5 billion years ago based on calculations concerning the effects of tidal recession on the moon (usually miscalculated and/or ignored), etc. *Is this really how "Science" is supposed to work?*
Two worldviews, same evidence, two very different interpretations.
@@adelinomorte7421 Do you say that because you believe in the modern mythology that fish evolve into philosophers? I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say, God "created" ("Bara", past tense) the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1:1), and then He looked at all He had "made" ("Asah" - past tense) and saw that it was good (Genesis 1:31) - He finished His creation. My point above was very simple, the sediment off the coasts does not fit a "billions of years" worldview, but it makes sense in a young earth worldview with a catastrophic global flood. This is a matter of competing worldviews over the exact same evidence. For example: *What are your thoughts on the Faint Young Sun Paradox?*
Scientists observe that our sun is slowly warming up as hydrogen fuses into helium, and at this observed rate, 3.5B years ago our sun would have been 30% fainter and earth would have been frozen solid as a result (if it was really billions of years old). The problem is that atheistic-evolutionists believe that 3.5B years ago chemicals fizzed by chance in a puddle to form all the necessary proteins required for life - in what would have been a global, dead, frozen environment - hence the "paradox." *How do you handle this observable evidence?*
A) Biblical Creation proponents happily accept this measurable scientific evidence - it's not a "paradox" at all because the earth isn't billions of years old, and life didn't create itself by chance from a puddle of chemicals, we were intentionally created. This makes sense because there is zero evidence that our earth was ever frozen solid as it should have been if it was really billions of years old, and also zero evidence of an early greenhouse gas atmosphere or other atheistic miracle warming effect to help sustain the atheistic belief in abiogenesis.
B) Atheistic-Naturalists (evolutionists, etc.) however have a problem, because you need billions of years of deep time to make it seem less implausible that chemicals can fizz into people, and that life atheistically created itself. So you have to invoke some kind of a miracle warming effect with no evidence like an early alleged greenhouse gas atmosphere, or various implausible celestial phenomena. Not only do these excuses have zero evidence, but they are also incredibly implausible - because if you did have an early greenhouse gas atmosphere 3.5B years ago, you have to believe that it countered the faint young sun's temperature just right (not too hot like Venus, yet not cold like Mars) and it had to dissipate in perfect inverse proportion to the gradual warming of the sun over time - *all just to make atheistic abiogenesis and early evolution seem less scientifically problematic.*
Two worldviews, same evidences, two very different interpretations. Which one is being more "scientific," the one that just accepts the evidence, or the one that has to fabricate implausible and evidence-less excuses to *circumvent this problematic scientific evidence and sustain their already scientifically-problematic belief that puddles can fizz into people?*
Any thoughts? *All the best evidences for evolution can also be explained by Genesis 1-12.*
*"The evidence of God... has been clearly seen since the beginning in all that has been created, so they will have no excuse"* (Romans 1:20)
@@michaelg377 Definition myth: a traditional story, especially one concerning the early history of a people or explaining a natural or social phenomenon, and typically involving supernatural beings or events:
So what is in the Bible fits this definition perfectly. What is in a modern science textbook does not. Your use of 'mythology' to describe the theory of evolution is a Definist fallacy - defining a term used in an argument in a biased manner (e.g., using "loaded terms"). The person making the argument expects that the listener will accept the provided definition, making the argument difficult to refute.
@@Oldtinear That's because you believe in the modern mythology that nothing created everything accidentally with mathematical precision for no reason. I just don't have enough Faith to believe that a puddle of chemicals can fizz into a person, no matter how much *Time* you add to the mix. And I don't use the word "mythology" lightly, I say that because it a constantly rewritten atheistic origins story as it continuously makes evidence-less claims *about the unobservable past* and encounters evidence that contradicts its claims and expectations. That's not how "science" works. *"I mean the stories, the narratives about change over time. How the dinosaurs became extinct, how the mammals evolved, where man came from. These seem to me to be little more than story telling."* (Colin Patterson Sr., Palaeontologist, British Museum of Natural History, London)
*What are your thoughts on the fact that planets and moons in our solar system, including our own Earth, show measurable evidence of being 'young,' not billions of years old?* Magnetic fields on planets in our solar system are measurably young based on data collected through probes we've deployed over the last few decades, and on a billions of years time scale you start to have a lot of problems with them. Creation scientists actually predicted this accurately - the evidence just fits a biblical worldview.
We also observe tiny geologically active celestial objects which shouldn't be if billions of years old - like Pluto, Enceladus, Europa, and even our own Moon. There's no way the icy dwarf planet should still be geologically active with active nitrogen flows after 4.5 Billion years - scientists recognize this. Enceladus is spewing out material via a giant geyser, which is not sustainable on a billions of years time scale - secularists have an excuse for this, but that excuse doesn't apply to these other objects which are likewise geologically active - they are observably young. Even our moon was recently observed to be geologically active, including evidence of recent tectonic activity. Examples abound.
*"Time is in fact the hero of the plot. . . . What we regard as impossible on the basis of human experience is meaningless here. Given so much time, the “impossible” becomes possible, the possible probable, and the probable virtually certain. One has only to wait: time itself performs the miracles"* (George Wald).
These evidences (among many others) make sense in a biblical worldview - they look young because they simply are young. Right alongside measurably young comets in our solar system, measurably young tissues found in dinosaur fossils, the faint young sun paradox which causes a lot of problems for early atheistic abiogenesis and evolution, and the sedimentation off the coasts which would have only taken 12 million years to accumulate (assuming atheistic naturalist standards), among many others. In contrast, Atheistic-Naturalists like yourself have to invoke a number of various excuses to *circumvent these problematic young evidences and sustain your modern mythology that fish evolve into philosophers and puddles can fizz into people if you just add enough Time.*
Meanwhile, *All the best evidences for evolution can also be explained by Genesis 1-12,* and if you understand "science" then you understand the implications of a competing explanation.
*"The evidence of God... has been clearly seen since the beginning in all that has been created, so they will have no excuse"* (Romans 1:20)
@@michaelg377 'the modern mythology that nothing created everything '
This mythology exists only in the minds of Creationists. No scientist proposes it. You are lying. Again.
' I just don't have enough Faith to believe that a puddle of chemicals can fizz into a person,'
Again, no scientist proposes this. You are lying. Again.
@@Oldtinear You just ignored a LOT of scientific evidence above that militates against your mythology my friend. None of those young objects in our solar system should exist if your mythology was true, that's why you have to make *unsubstantiated evidence-less excuses for all of them* to sustain your belief system. *All the best evidences for evolution can also be explained by Genesis 1-12,* and if you understand "science" (a methodology) then you understand the implications of a competing explanation. *"we see nothing of these slow changes in progress, until the hand of time has marked the lapse of the ages"* (Charles Darwin)
*"we are condemned to live only for a few decades, and that's too slow, too small a time scale to see evolution going on"* (Richard Dawkins)
Whatever "evolution" is, at least we know it's not observable as science (a methodology) requires. It's just *constantly changing storytelling about the unobservable past.*
*"Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever. In explaining evolution, we do not have one iota of fact."* (Dr. T. N. Tahmisian, Atomic Energy Commission)
Your words: *"Science is about testing. If you cannot test it, it ain't science.* Biologists could come up with many hypotheses for how sexual reproduction evolved. *But they could not test them."* (Oldtinear, 6 Jan 2024).
*So if you can't test, observe, or produce evidence for alleged Male and Female evolution in the unobservable past, then it's not Science. So what is it? Atheistic Faith?*
It's not that you're lying - at least this time, you've been caught in a lie before - it's more that you are stuck in a "strong delusion" (2 Thessalonians 2:10-12) and are literally incapable of understanding (1 Corinthians 2:14).
*"But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."* (1 Corinthians 2:14)
Very good information for a witness to add to his arsenal or in other words a great stone to sharpen a sword...!
One example of a genetic process that can increase the information in a genome is gene duplication followed by divergence. This process occurs when a section of DNA is duplicated, resulting in multiple copies of a particular gene or set of genes within an organism's genome.
Gene duplication can arise through various mechanisms, such as errors during DNA replication or recombination events. Once a gene is duplicated, one copy remains functional, carrying out its original role in the organism, while the other copy is free to acquire new functions through mutations without disrupting the essential functions of the original gene.
Over time, the duplicated gene can accumulate mutations that alter its sequence and functionality, leading to the formation of a new gene with a distinct function. This process is known as gene divergence or subfunctionalization.
Through gene divergence, the duplicated genes can take on different roles or specialize in performing slightly different functions within the organism. This increases the genetic information by adding a new gene variant with a unique function to the genome.
An example of this process can be observed in the evolution of the globin gene family, which includes genes responsible for producing hemoglobin, the oxygen-carrying protein in vertebrates. Gene duplication events in the ancestral genome resulted in the formation of multiple copies of the globin gene. These duplicated genes then diverged over time, leading to the development of different globin genes with distinct roles.
In humans, for instance, gene duplication events resulted in the formation of several globin genes, including those responsible for the production of different types of hemoglobin: fetal hemoglobin, adult hemoglobin, and myoglobin. Each of these genes has undergone divergence, acquiring specific mutations that allow them to perform their unique functions in different stages of development or in different tissues.
This process of gene duplication and divergence has played a significant role in the evolution of new genes and the expansion of gene families throughout the history of life on Earth. It has allowed organisms to acquire new functions, adapt to different environments, and increase the complexity and diversity of their genomes, ultimately contributing to the richness of life forms we observe today.
Other processes, such as mutation, recombination, horizontal gene transfer, and genomic rearrangements, can also contribute to the generation of new genetic information.
Mutation, for instance, introduces changes in the DNA sequence, which can lead to the formation of new alleles or novel gene variants. Recombination, the exchange of genetic material between chromosomes, can result in new combinations of genetic information. Horizontal gene transfer, the transfer of genetic material between different species, can introduce entirely new genes into a genome.
Furthermore, natural selection acts as the driving force that determines which genetic variations are advantageous and thus more likely to persist in a population. Beneficial mutations that increase an organism's fitness, such as providing a new function or improving an existing one, can be positively selected for, leading to their preservation and spread in a population over time.
Overall, these mechanisms, combined with natural selection, provide a comprehensive understanding of how genetic information can increase in a genome over generations. The claims against evolution that suggest information cannot be increased are based on misunderstandings of the processes involved and ignore the substantial evidence supporting the accumulation of new genetic information through evolutionary mechanisms.
Nicely put. Thank you.
Bubble of fresh air in swamp of ignorance, but anyway they will put god in any gap and crack you have
😂lol gene duplication is not increasing information or generating new information? Apart from A, T, G, C how many new bases could be formed and entirely new generic code could be created? Can you answer that?
Hgt is transfering not creating
Recombination is just rearranging n so is mutation just mutating on the information available? Rewatcv the video
I thank God that Ken Ham and all of the Christians working on this have been able to show the truth. God's light will never be extinguished and will provide guidance to those who ask for it. Praise be to God!
Yeah, but why do they have to lie about science? Is that a requirement of theirs or something?
@@travisbicklepopsicle what lies?
@@ninkstheultimate3376 you aren't aware that AIG has a well documented history of lying about several fields of science? Of misquoting and quote mining scientists?
Sure, when I get some free time I'll compile a brief list. After that, you can find more on your own if you feel like it
@@travisbicklepopsicle that's what i thought
@@ninkstheultimate3376 sure, it can be a joint effort :-) you aren't even curious? Didn't do any searching on your own?
I work for a living, and I'm sure you are busy as well; you'll get your list. May be a day or two, but you'll get it 👍
Thank you for this!
Really impressive and appreciated questions I've heard asked now answered appreciate you Ken Ham !
The Mount St Helen’s geology lesson was particularly interesting.
And breathtakingly wrong.
I think its the best lecture for not only the believers but also for the non-believers. It is needed to make more scientific lecture of the same type. It will be a good answers to those who criticize the Bible's teachings. Thank you so much for uploading this wonderful message.
Professor ... aren't you having to believe the Catholic Church as the "sole" earthly authority needed to write and publish the Bible? Knowing what epistles & gospels belonged and which did not? You, nor any Protestant, Evangelical, Baptist, Lutheran, Calvinist or 7th Day Adventist were in existance. You and they and the other 20,000-40,000 differing Christian denominations were yet to exist, much less play any part at all, having to do with God, His Son, and the complete understanding of the Almighty's plan for our Salvation? The One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church (established by Jesus Christ) needed to be (100%) under the guidance of the Holy Spirit (the Spirit of Truth)! In order for the Bible to be absolutely true, the CC needed to be absolutley "true." Is it possible, otherwise? Could the early church, have misunderstood Jesus, taught heresy, but yet knew enough to formulate & produce the (73 books) fully canonized Bible, that you need for your "sole rule of faith" ... you & every individual Protestant, with the authority to proclaim what it means? Even when all of you disagree? Isn't this the height of hypocrisy?
*How can you make any sense of this way of thinking & believing?*
@@gabepettinicchio7454 My friend, the Modern Catholic Church also was not in existence - you have many practices and even a modern canon that was not the same as the canon of the original early one true church, and even up to AD 1534 (Cardinal Cajetan, etc.) Modern Catholic leaders rejected apocryphal books from the canon. It wasn't always so clear-cut and "traditional" as Catholics insist... Let me ask you this: Scripture says *"One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind."* (Romans 14:5) - As a Catholic, what does *"let every man be fully convinced in his own mind"* mean to you?
What if your church was teaching you something that was false, hypothetically speaking? *How would you know?* How could you know? Is there a way for you to know, as a Catholic?
*"Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true."* (Acts 17:11)
Just as the Bereans questioned Paul's teachings and were considered *"of more noble character"* for doing so, I would "examine the Scriptures every day to see if what [the Catholic Church] said was true." But since you believe the Catholic Church is the "sole earthly authority" to interpret Scripture, how would you know if they were lying...?
And you should know that Protestants are overwhelmingly united on the essential doctrines of Scripture (who is God, who is the Trinity, what is the Gospel, etc.) - it's on mostly minor secondary issues where we have disagreements. Besides, *Catholicism has many denominations:* The Latin Church, Coptic, Ethiopian, Maronite, Syrian, Armenian, Chaldean, Byzantine, Greek, Macedonian, Romanian, Russian, Slavic, etc. *So, if Protestantism is not true because of denominations, then it also means that Catholicism is not true because of its denominations. Do they, like Protestants, share the same core doctrines, and that excuses their differences?* Can we abandon the double standard...?
@@michaelg377
You: "My friend, the Modern Catholic Church also was not in existence - you have many practices and even a modern canon that was not the same as the canon of the original early one true church, and even up to AD 1534 (Cardinal Cajetan, etc.) Modern Catholic leaders rejected apocryphal books from the canon. It wasn't always so clear-cut and "traditional" as Catholics insist... Let me ask you this: Scripture says "One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind." (Romans 14:5) - As a Catholic, what does "let every man be fully convinced in his own mind" mean to you?"
*Me: Then you are calling Jesus Christ a nut-case & deceiving liar, for stating that His church would never fall to the gates of hell. He also said that he would have to leave, but that he would send the "Spirit of Truth" ... and that it would guide the church to all truth, until the end of the world. I remind you that he also said that their was so much more for them to know, and that he hadn't the time. So, did he somehow give them all the rest? If so, how would he do that. Catholics believe that all ceased after the death of the last apostle (John), so in what way could they grow in the knowledge that the lord required of them? Answer: The Spirit of Truth, not by adding on to what Jesus had already taught them, but by furthering their understanding of it. Therefore the "true church" is still with us, if one believes Jesus Christ is a God of his word. Is he? And where is his church that is still with us?*
*You are mistaken, in claiming the so-called Apocryphal books, were not part of the original canon, as stated by the church councils held in the late 4th & early 5th Centuries. Remember, Jerome questioned them. Anyway, please share the "unbias" link that supports your claim.*
*You should be aware that that there were the Hebrew OT & the Greek Septuagint OT. The deuterocanonical books were present in the "Greek" but not the Hebrew. As I mentioned in my last comment, Jesus & his apostles quoted (in the NT) the OT roughly 300 times. Roughly 200 of those quotes were from the Greek Septuagint, including the reference of "the mother & the 7 brothers" found in 2 Maccabees of your "Apocryphal" books.*
*Which "modern" Catholic leader's did not believe in the deuterocanonical books? I'm not saying that there were none, but would like their names and positions they held. If they existed that proves nothing. Many priests leave for Protestantism and many Prot. minister's leave to become Catholic. As a side note, Luther took away these 7+ books and also wanted James, Revelation and a few other books removed from the canon, but his followers would not allow it. He even called James, "the book of straw" and said it should be tossed into the fire.*
*In Romans 14:5 ... you left out the rest of the passage: "He who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. He also who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God; while he who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God.” --- Who was Paul speaking to and about what? --- He was dealing with the infamous “Judaizers,” that are defined in Acts 15:1-2. So, I do not understand your point.*
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You: "What if your church was teaching you something that was false, hypothetically speaking? How would you know? How could you know? Is there a way for you to know, as a Catholic?"
Me: *Yes, I believe I answer this in my comment above.* Of course, this pertains to the truths of "faith & morals." Individual men of Holy Orders, can and do sometimes error. I would also read the "Catachism of the Catholic Church." It's all there, and availabe on-line* www.usccb.org/sites/default/files/flipbooks/catechism/
How would you know if your cgurch is correct? In fact how would you know the Ninle is the true word of God?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
You: "And you should know that Protestants are overwhelmingly united on the essential doctrines of Scripture (who is God, who is the Trinity, what is the Gospel, etc.) - it's on mostly minor secondary issues where we have disagreements. Besides, Catholicism has many denominations: The Latin Church, Coptic, Ethiopian, Maronite, Syrian, Armenian, Chaldean, Byzantine, Greek, Macedonian, Romanian, Russian, Slavic, etc. So, if Protestantism is not true because of denominations, then it also means that Catholicism is not true because of its denominations. Do they, like Protestants, share the same core doctrines, and that excuses their differences? Can we abandon the double standard...?"
Me: *That's nonsense. If they were united enough then they wouldn't be seperated ... would they? Luther believed in the Eucharist, he honored the Blessed Mother, as well as many other Catholic teachings, including the Catholic Doctrine of "The Trinity!" Then other's such as Calvin who left Luther for his own views on, free will vs God's will. Then Zwingli left because he decided to reject the Eucharist ... and so on. We're at 20-40000 different Protestant denoms, and counting. Is that what Jesus wanted? No, he was correct in telling Peter ... "the devil wishes to sift you as wheat ... and he did!" even in spite of the Lord saying that he has prayed for them (apostles) to all remain one*
*If you want any Scriptural truth, just ask and I will gladly add them.*
*You make mention of other Catholic denoms. Also, false. They are rights or sects, all 23 of them, are united with the pope in Rome. All, believing and teaching the exact same things w/the same readings at Mass, every day, as they share the same Liturgical Calender, in every country on Earth! They only differ, because of locality & culture, meaning wearing different colored garments as well as differing styles, again due to localities, and not differing in the teachings of faith & morals from the "Roman Right" ... or the "Western Church." We're all entirely ... One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic as Christ left it and the Spirit continues to lead it!!!*
@@gabepettinicchio7454 the roman catholic cult, so many wrongs, where do you even start to fix the whore of babylon's woes......
The Bible contains ficional stories with ficional events, timelines and characters. Or is there Scientific research done that can prove otherwise🤔?
It’s weird when they try to claim science can’t be trusted then try to use science to prove their claims
Ah! Cherry picked science! 😂
Do you say that because you believe in the modern mythology that fish evolve into philosophers, and if you just wait a really long *time* then puddles of chemicals can fizz into people? They're not saying that "science can't be trusted," they're saying that your interpretations of the evidence are necessarily *Assumption* based and if you have false *Assumptions* then you are going to misinterpret the information.
Let me ask you this... the 1st law of thermodynamics doesn't allow energy to "naturally" come from nothing. The 2nd law of thermodynamics (entropy) is that energy is always being converted into a less usable form, and it doesn't allow energy to remain usable forever, because in the infinite past it would have been infinitely used up by now (Heat Death). *So if our universe can't "naturally" have a beginning from nothing, and it can't have just always been here (otherwise all of our energy would be infinitely used up), how do you naturally explain the beginning of our universe?*
Have you ever wondered why Atheistic-Naturalists have to invoke such wild and sci-fi sounding theories to sustain their "natural" (atheistic) beliefs on our origins? *Infinite* alternate universes, an *eternal self-existent* singularity, alternate unobservable metaphysical laws of nature, *pre-existent* phenomena... they have to attribute supernatural qualities of God to "nature" in order to "naturally" explain our origins. This is the Atheist's Natural-Supernatural (!) worldview. It's an internally inconsistent and self-refuting belief system... the only way for nature to create itself is if nature is *pre-existent - like God.*
*"The evidence of God... has been clearly seen since the beginning in all that has been created, so they will have no excuse"* (Romans 1:20)
@@michaelg377 So you invent a class of beings (supernatural) to whom things such as causality and thermodynamics just do not apply. You gift these beings the attribute of the power to create universes from nothing.
The authors of superhero comics give their superhero creations similar attributes. Have you any more evidence that YOUR superhero exists than the comic book characters do?
@@Oldtinear My friend, you just said it yourself - if the laws of nature break down as demonstrated above, then clearly something Super-Natural (beyond "nature,' beyond those laws) must exist. No "inventing" required - that's why even the Atheist has to make up *Infinite, Eternal, Self-existent/Pre-existent, etc.* phenomena to sustain your "natural" belief system (examples above). *The only way for nature to create itself is if nature is Pre-existent - like God.* This refutes "naturalism" at its foundation - but it makes sense in a biblical worldview.
"Have you any more evidence that YOUR superhero exists than the comic book characters do?" - Yes - for example, even you live in accordance with Him rather than your own worldview that says we are all "just chemicals" or "meaningless evolved protoplasm" in a meaningless amoral chemical universe that doesn't care. It's weird, why do you do that?
That is powerful evidence you can see in yourself that God created you, and that you're not just "meaningless evolved protoplasm" in a meaningless chemical universe that doesn't care about you, and I love that He put that into you so you can see clear evidence in yourself that He exists.
God said you are a meaningful and valuable human being made in His image and likeness (Genesis 1:27), with a purpose and a unique capacity for "dominion" over creation as you sit here typing this (Genesis 1:26), morality and a sense of justice (Genesis 9:6), a sense of respect towards others (James 3:10), and a conscience which reflects the principles of His law (Romans 2:15), among other things. These are observable qualities that we all observe in you, and being made in God's image and likeness makes perfect sense of that.
How do you explain these qualities of the image and likeness of God in you from your own worldview? For example, *is "rape" always wrong in your worldview, or is it sometimes morally permissible - and why?* Where does that come from in your worldview? Animals do it all the time, it's "normal" - it's "natural" - and we're just "evolved animals," right? Chemical reactions destroy each other all the time, it's "normal" - it's "natural" - and who cares - we're "just chemicals," right? What's the difference...?
*"They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them."* (Romans 2:15)
@@michaelg377 Nothing in your unevidenced fantasy merits a response.
The physical is merely a "shadow" of the spiritual, or things to come. Imagine studying spirit bodies, spirit dna, spirit adaptation but in reverse! Those who are in Christ are being transformed from glory to glory, here a little and there a little as we yield to the image of Christ. All understanding of the physical world is filtered through a sin-cursed depraved de-evolving mind that constantly needs renewing by the Word. Imagine when we're in Heaven and perfect!!! Our heavenly minds, bodies, emotions will always be sinless, and have infinite capacity like Jesus to do everything He does, and be where HE is. I'm way more excited about the next life than anything in this life. But it does help to have a foundation from which to grow. Thank you brother Ken and staff for being faithful over the years to spread the Truth. Love you all.
[Citation Needed]
Thank you good sir . I’ve been on the teetering edge of belief in god and science for many years but I must say your video here has opened my eyes. Science exist because of god . So again thank you
I recommend studying the difference between science and scientism. That'll help you a lot.
Just trying typing in "difference between science and scientism"
Hello, I am a career scientist. I can tell you for sure that there is nothing in natural science that verifies or proves the existence of any god or gods yet. The question cannot be answered by our current understanding of the universe. I think your attempt to ask this question honestly is admirable, but I encourage you to be more skeptical of people, like Ken, who claim things like this. Never trust a man who says his word is absolute truth, it's lies and it smells like death.
@@ryansergas2776 My friend, you're making a logical category error if you think a Super-Natural God (by definition, beyond the laws of nature) can be "verified or proven" by "Natural Science." *Science is a methodology, what you're talking about is an Ideology,* and there are many things that Science is simply unable to account for like the immaterial metaphysical laws of logic, immaterial information, or the metaphysical immaterial mathematically precise laws of nature which exist outside of our chemical bodies and which all of nature obeys for some reason. Do you believe that there was a "Big Bang" and all of math and science happened? Or do you believe these mathematically precise realities are *pre-existent, like God?*
Mathematical precision looks like the product of an intelligent engineering mind, not the product of a "Big Bang." Science can't function in the first place without the mathematical precision and order that these laws of nature give to it.
*"This is what the Lord says: ‘If I have not made my covenant with day and night and established the laws of heaven and earth..."* (Jeremiah 33:25)
@@michaelg377 When profound things happen outside of natural laws you have your proof.
If you would just open up your tightly squeezed shut eyes, you could see that all of creation, especially living things, cannot be explained except by outside of natural laws, which govern the creation since its creation. Also, The God that obviously created all things does, at times, for His reasons, intervene and override His laws which He built into His creation and do what is know as miraculous things.
What had you teetering on the edge for so long?
Oh man, I wish I could go 10 years back with studies these kinds to debate my biology teacher, that would be fun
@Just me The problem with that "peer review" argument is that it depends on which "peers" you listen to. Consider this: *How many PhD creationist technical papers do you suppose a PhD evolutionist had to evaluate in their education? But how many PhD evolutionist technical papers do you suppose a PhD creationist had to evaluate in their secular education? One of these sides lives in a bubble, the other has to evaluate both worldviews.* Science is a methodology, but the theory of evolution is an Ideology my friend - and it's actually riddled with scientific problems. For example, Charles Darwin gave a testable hypothesis for the validity of his theory, saying "if an *organ* were discovered which could not possibly be explained by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down..." *If evolution is true, then how did male and female evolve?*
You couldn't answer this question before rationally, would you like to try again? If you can't answer it, then your entire belief system stands potentially refuted according to Darwin... it's "breaking down"...
@Just me How do you know if you've never even read one? And if none of the scientists you choose to listen to ever read one? What you're doing here is a logical fallacy called an *argument from ridicule* - it's not a rational response, you just reject it because it shows just how empty your claim is. Why not just be rational, open minded, and listen to *all* of the evidence and arguments my friend? You're also *begging the question* of atheistic-Naturalism - it's another common logical fallacy.
And you didn't answer my question, again... how did male and female evolve (remember - organs)? You couldn't answer this before rationally - and until you can, per Darwin, your entire belief system stands potentially refuted.... it is "breaking down" my friend.
@Just me Wrong about what?
@Just me Explain.
@@michaelg377 which organ or organs can't be explained by successive modifications? You do realize that scientists have learned much more about evolution and how it works since Darwin's time, right? You could spend a lifetime studying evolutionary theory and never once read any of Darwin's words.
'If evolution is true, then how did male and female evolve?'
If you have internet, which you do, and you are honestly interested in the answer to that question, you could very easily find it, you know?
God bless you for the young Earth truths!❤😂🎉😊
"IT COULD BE".......
THIS IS PUR INTUITION
WITH ALL RESPECT FOR TRUTH AND KNOWLEDGE
This is Nutz, Holy bananas, this is simply Radical...Thank you Jesus for this, this is needed more than ever now. Hello from a 16-yr-old❤
Amen. You are on the right path!! Praise God!!❤🙏
God Bless You Stay with Jesus he is the way the truth and the Life. He is everything.
Read the prophets in old testament...Isaiah. God gives us more proof there when he predicts King Cyrus hundreds of years before he was born...and what he would do. Plus other things. Pastor Jack Hibbs gives weekly sermons on the bible. He has a set of sermons going through isaiah chapter by chapter. Also david sutchet has an audio bible he reads. Very easy to listen to. You are walking on the right path grasshopper dont let go of Yeshuas hand and learn more about He who loves you so much that He died for you. Welcome. God bless you.
Your gullibility will lead you to be "touched" by one of these wolves, pretending to be a shepherd.
Stay in the bible and read it alot it really is awesome. Noone will ever know this unless they actually read it..
I have been really blessed with this teaching. explained all the doubts i had about my own concern regarding the history of mankind and the creation of the world. And most importantly the existence of our living God the Father.
Don't billion doubts. Truth
Then yiu don't doubt much. Gode xplains nothing.
If you were a common person 500yr ago, then you never read a Bible because there were no Bible! Therefore you wasn't going around having these stupid arguments. Good night.
@@jasonwiley798 Well done on winning the spelling bee.
This guy never showed anything about science that proved the bible was right, he just poked a bunch of holes in science which is totally reasonable as science is just theory based upon earlier theories, no scientist knows 100% of anything but the point is to continue to explore and understand.
Thank you again. I approve of your presentation. The Bible and science are there to complement each other
the bible was used to explain things that science couldnt such as why a disease killed people etc. but now we have that science to prove it. people just want to continue to believe in the fictional fairy tale because they cant accept the fact that when u die, your are dead. thats it. and anyone that disagrees with them is just a 'lost soul ' or whatever nonsense, and that they are clearly the more educated one even though they have never studied science or evidence or read a science book in their whole life. They disregard every single scientist and book of evidence except their one book of evidence make thousands of years ago. and then instead of disproving the facts they cherry-pick evidence so they feel like they are in the right, and parade incompetent scientists to pretend like science is on their side.
No they aren't
They actually contradict each other over and over again
6:24❤❤❤ words are keys ❤❤❤
What a presentation. Sitting down with the wife and 4 kids to watch this after dinner tonight!
@@stephenlaing2152 His children will have the opportunity to decide for themselves if they get to be presented with the information, and also, it is not really any of your business, now is it....
@@stephenlaing2152 And I venture that if you give them both sides, more often than not they will become fascinated in the real (scientific) version.
What a wonderful video I am a science enthusiast and this video is made beautifully with correct logical explanation! This video should reach to everyone! God bless!
I'm not sure that you have ever studied logic. God cannot be explained by logic. The Bible itself claims to be illogical, to confound the wise and all that. An elementary rule of logic is if A=B and B=C then A=C. The Bible confounds the wise but Ken Ham is not confounded, therefore Ken is not wise. Believing Ken Ham does not mean you are not a Christian; however, it does mean that you suffer the bondage of falsehoods. The truth shall make you free, my sister..
@@KeithWaggoner-kb6ue we all know the Bible is a historical book that can be backed up by evidence. There have been a ton of scientific discoveries that were actually mentioned in the Bible before they were discovered. Jesus' existence has been proven by the Bible and other reliable sources. Around 500 people saw Jesus alive after his resurrection.
It's definitely true that some things in the Bible can't be explained - the revelation and all - but the Bible is ultimately a historical book. Over the years, it's been portrayed more like a fairytale book, and people have blindly accepted those false claims.
@@chimchimexcuseme A lot of people saw Elvis after he died. Jesus no doubt existed, but what about unicorns, dragons, and talking serpents, not mention Balaam's ass asking a few questions?
@@chimchimexcuseme Scientific evidence of unicorns, dragons, talking snakes, wrestling angels, rivers of blood, flaming chariots in the sky, and talking asses? I haven't seen it and haven't either. Faith by proofs is weak. Jesus refused to prove Who He was during his conversation with Satan. The Bible says that faith without having actually been there s the purest. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have come to believe. 'I sincerely encourage you to read the Christian Bible.
@@chimchimexcuseme I Kings and 2 Chronicles describe the "Brazen sea" or basin in the temple as having a diameter of 10 cubits and a circumference of 30. Science tells us the actual circumference would have been 31.4. I encourage you to read the Bible and quit listening to the false prophets who are among us wolves among sheep. There are many "scientific" falsehoods in the Bible including in Joshua where the sun stood still in the sky. This led to the Christian theory of epicycles to explain retrograde motion of planets. Modern Christian believe that Earth revolves around the sun and "the sun stood still" is a poetic explanation of what happened during the battle.
My favorite part is when the boy asked who made God and he can't answer rambles on and makes fun of the kid for asking he also said there's no instance where life randomly forms but says it does when God is made but no one from the church had a answer from where God comes from they only have a sneaky way to deflect the question
My friend you clearly didn't understand, and you are making the same logical error. *It's the Atheist that has to Infinitely pass the buck backwards to some other cause - which ironically contradicts science (2nd law of thermodynamics, etc.).* In the Christian worldview, God created the laws of nature (Jeremiah 33:25) including time, space, and matter (Genesis 1:1) and thus He exists *beyond* those natural limitations (Super-Natural) - which explains how He can be infinite, eternal, and *Self-Existent.*
What you missed is that Christians have a self-existent cause of the universe - there is no need to commit a "passing the buck" fallacy as Atheists have to do. *The only way for Nature to create itself is if Nature is Pre-Existent - like God.*
Think of it this way... when God revealed Himself to Moses, Moses asked Him "what should I call you?" and God said "tell them "I AM" sent you." That name "I AM" is a statement of God's self-existent nature - He "just is." That is ironically the godly supernatural quality that the Atheist has to attribute to infinite, eternal, pre-existent, etc. "Nature" in order to atheistically attempt to explain our origins. An Atheistic infinite "passing the buck" fallacy.
*"The evidence of God... has been clearly seen since the beginning in all that has been created, so they will have no excuse."* (Romans 1:20)
@michaelg377 also why was there magic then God told mosses to turn his staff into a snake but then the ppl he showed mimicked it also if we find a dead body we are supposed to find the nearest city and break a cows neck in a valley
@@Durrtyboy In your deep study of Deuteronomy 21:4 (?), did you look up an exegetical commentary to better understand the cultural background? With respect, you have some pretty basic misunderstandings of those things. Check out GotQuestions "How were Pharaoh’s magicians able to perform miracles?", "What is the difference between miracles and magic?," etc. That said - why do you have a problem with Supernatural phenomena given that even Atheists unavoidably rely on the Supernatural?
Let me ask you this... the 1st law of thermodynamics doesn't allow energy to "naturally" come from nothing. The 2nd law of thermodynamics (entropy) is that energy is always being converted into a less usable form, and it doesn't allow energy to last forever, because in the infinite past it would have been infinitely used up by now. *So if our universe can't "naturally" have a beginning from nothing, and it can't have just always been here (otherwise all of our energy would be infinitely used up), how do you naturally explain the beginning of our universe?*
Have you ever wondered why Atheistic-Naturalists have to invoke such wild and sci-fi sounding theories to sustain their "natural" (atheistic) beliefs on our origins? *Infinite* alternate universes, an *eternal self-existent* singularity, alternate unobservable metaphysical laws of nature, *pre-existent* phenomena... they have to attribute supernatural qualities of God to "nature" in order to "naturally" explain our origins. This is the Atheist's Natural-Supernatural (!) worldview. It's an internally inconsistent and self-refuting belief system... the only way for nature to create itself is if nature is *pre-existent - like God.*
*"The evidence of God... has been clearly seen since the beginning in all that has been created, so they will have no excuse"* (Romans 1:20)
@michaelg377 but for real where did he come from there must of been some origin before he made everything was he just always there how long did he exist before making everything
@@Durrtyboy With respect, you misunderstand and you're making a few logical errors. When you say *"...before* he made everything was he just always there *how long did he exist before* making everything" ... *There was no "before."* Again, God created the laws of nature (Jeremiah 33:25), including *Time,* space, and matter (Genesis 1:1), and thus He is not bound by those "natural" limitations. He exists beyond Time itself. So when you demand an explanation for something that happened "before" God created time, your question is literally nonsense (no offense), because the concept of "before" didn't even exist.
Second, again, God is self-existent. The Atheist needs to Infinitely pass the buck (a logical fallacy) backwards to another cause, another cause, another cause, another cause... But God is self-existent, and the need for a previous cause applies to our "natural" creation, not necessarily the Super-Natural (ie. beyond the limitations of "nature") - God doesn't need a previous cause because He is self-existent.
Again, the 1st law of thermodynamics doesn't allow our universe to come from nothing. The 2nd law of thermodynamics doesn't allow it to exist forever. So if our universe can't have a beginning, and if it can't have just existed forever, then how can you "naturally" explain the beginning of the universe? You can't - nature (and therefore "science") literally break down at this point. This is a problem that refutes Atheistic-Naturalism (evolution, "Big Bang," etc.), not for the biblical Supernatural God.
*"For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse."* (Romans 1:20)
A very informative, enjoyable, and clear presentation of science, which indeed suuports the Bible! 🙂
***the bible has to be read by people who are ready to understand it, the bible do not need charlatan scientists to support, needs only people who can read it, not those stupid fanatics.***
@@adelinomorte7421 kindly tell us how we can prepare people to understand the Bible and how we can assess if those who've read and have been taught the Bible did understand it. Also how do we identify charlatan scientists and these so-called fanatics? An objective answer to these questions will be helpful. Thank you. 🙂
Nutty "Creationist" Ken makes money with a Noah's Ark tourist attractiin for Christians crppled by USA's local control of public education. Try to 7nderstand the following, in spite of your atrophied thinking skills:
"Chris Mooney, of Slate magazine, believes Ham's advocacy of young Earth creation will "undermine science education and U.S. science literacy".[54] But Andrew O'Hehir of Salon argues that the "liberal intelligentsia" have grossly overstated the influence of Ken Ham and those espousing similar views because, while "religious ecstasy, however nonsensical, is powerful in a way reason and logic are not", advocates like Ham "represent a marginalised constituency with little power".[55]
Ham has been awarded honorary degrees by six Christian colleges: Temple Baptist College (1997),[56] Liberty University (2004),[57] Tennessee Temple University (2010),[58] Mid-Continent University (2012),[59] Bryan College (2017),[60] and Mid-America Baptist Theological Seminary (2018).[61]
On February 17, 2020, PBS aired a documentary about the Ark Encounter entitled We Believe in Dinosaurs. Filmmakers Monica Long Ross and Clayton Brown followed the story line of a "religious organisation creating their own alternative science in a legitimate looking museum."[62]
Don't Believe; maintain the logical skepticism that real science demands.
Read science.
Reading that "good book" is practicing ignorance with 3000 year old oral traditions of fairy tales.
Gilgamesh?
@@markplimsoll "Science" is a methodology. What you're talking about is an Atheistic Ideology, that's not "science" - that's something else. *Do you say that because you believe in the modern mythology that fish evolve into philosophers, and if you just wait a really long *time* then puddles can fizz themselves into people?*
Your "3000 year old..." epithet fallacy is something C.S. Lewis called "chronological snobbery" - we have evidence that many of our ancestors were quite advanced and very intelligent, in contrast to Atheistic-Naturalist caveman stories. For example, we discovered that neanderthal remains had the same size hypoglossal nerve as we do (ie. they didn't just grunt; they could talk!), and we also found neanderthal bone flutes and shell make-up kits, which suggests intelligence and culture. Compare that to the Atheistic mythology that dinosaurs turn into chickens and apes can turn into people if you just add *time.*
Also, did you know there are at least 9 major differences between the Epic of Gilgamesh which is clearly written in a genre of mythology, and the Noahic flood which is written in an ancient Hebrew genre called "historical narrative." Did you know there are thousands of global flood legends all around the world, many of which suspiciously corroborate the Biblical worldview but not the Epic of Gilgamesh? There are 300 Native American global flood legends developed in the absence of Judeo-Christian influences, many of which specifically corroborate the biblical Noahic flood - but not the Epic of Gilgamesh. Also many cultures all around the geographically separated world have their own legends paintings etc. of dinosaur-like creatures, the exact same architectural style (ziggurats), and other odd similarities millennia before intercontinental travel became the norm... these things make sense if the biblical global flood was real. How do you explain these things if it wasn't?
@@michaelg377 You would enjoy the science book "The Singing Neanderthals" and it will help you dispell your disjointed fantasies about how science DOESN'T work, and a clearer picture of homonid lineage.
Look around; everything physical created in the Modern world - food, furniture, architecture, etc. - evolved by collaborated incorporation of "new" contemporaneous scientific discovery or analysis.
Touché.
Thanks for responding.
to be able to see this, know this and learn from this!!! what a time to be alive
@@martinkent333 at this particular time it really doesnt matter, say what you want we all find out in the end
Faith is incredibly inconsistent in proving anything. If I’m at a crossroads with two paths, and flip a coin on which path to take. Then I have faith that my path was correct that would be incredibly arbitrary. Now let’s make a crossroad with one thousand paths. I decided to pick a random path with the faith that the one I chose was correct. Would that make me anything but delusional? So basically yeah it’s blind faith.
@@drewchrisman7516 I don't always make word salads but when I do it's a Saturday morning
@Tbone
Yes there is
Pray for strength, because a bumpy ride is just about upon us ... a great time to be alive.
Hartelijk dank voor deze heldere en duidelijke uiteenzetting
Verfrissend is dit geluid voor mij
Moge het vele broeders en zusters helpen en vrijmoedigheid geven om open hier over te spreken
God zij geprezen door deze video
Thank you this makes a lot of sense to me
Thank you!! This is wonderful!!!!
One thing about the bible is that no stage of the human history was left out, it explains everything.
Great marketing brochure for the religion, ain't it?
They left out cats tho...
And before human history, as the Genesis story starts before humans existed, it can’t be factual.
Ahh ...now I understand scientific explanation of "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God...All things were made by him."
Very scientific! Lmao
An evolutionist believes the theory that a 14 year old boy named Charles Darwin came up with. He thought “the world looks old, therefore it must be old”
And we use a child’s theory as our proof of history, JUST BECAUSE HIS FAMILY WERE CULT ELITISTS, aka Freemasons. His family was neighbors with Thomas Jefferson’s family, and William bartrams family.
You gonna believe a book that is historically accurate and a book that we tell time from (2022 years after Jesus was born)
OVER
a 14 year olds random idea/theory
LOL
I CAN TELL WHO IS AND ISNT WELL READ HERE. WHO IS INDOCTRINATED AND WHO ACTUALLY LOOKS FOR INFORMATION
Amen
Jesus is indeed the Creator God. The Word who was in the beginning and formed all things. Great bible scripture! John 1 is one of my favorites.
@@samuelrodriguez9199
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence. Can you comprehend that?
Amen from Cape Town South Africa SDA ❤
Thank u sir for this video.
God bless you, so nice to see so many young people in the audience.
He is amazing and scientific. God is always right! If you think isn’t you have to study deeper to get the answer.
So sad to see young people being brainwashed.
He is not scientific, but if you want to explore the other side then you can ask me and I’ll be respectful towards you
@@rademilosavljevic5754 he is absolutely un-scientific, he just poked some valid holes in science, but never really proved anything within the bible. He just put forth his theory of how things could have happened like they were described in the bible. There is a difference between proving something actually happened and simply stating a possibility of how things may have happened.
Amen! God bless you and your family 🙏❤
Loved the video!
Makes one second guess a lot of things in life... For myself I am 60 and just learning about spirituality in my life.. This is a lot of food for thought and compelling words to digest... I do believe...
As an atheist this was really eye opening. Still an atheist
Can I ask you a related question about it? DNA contains mass quantities of ordered, sequenced, encoded information, including instructions for building complex machines like your eyes. Every observable example of information in existence always has an original intelligent source: every book has an author, every program has a programmer, the words on this screen came from you... Therefore, *if consistently interpreted,* the information in DNA likewise had an intelligent source (God). *How do you handle this observable evidence?*
@@michaelg377 Quote :"Can I ask you a related question about it? DNA contains mass quantities of ordered, sequenced, encoded information, including instructions for building complex machines like your eyes."
no it does not. It is more like a recipe, less like computer code. The best evidenmce is that we can read dna, know what it does, what the information means, and yet can´t just make an eye. There is a lot more to this.
Quote :"Every observable example of information in existence always has an original intelligent source"
that is a lie, but nice try. WE know for a fact that DNA changes via positive mutations, neuitral mutations and negative mutations, all 3 are clearly infiormation (you just admitted that) and all are clearly the result of random mutations.
Quote :"Therefore, if consistently interpreted, the information in DNA likewise had an intelligent source (God). How do you handle this observable evidence?"
ah you are saying this is proof odin exists , or did you mean zeus ??
@@daftwulli6145 With respect my friend, everything you just said is incorrect on nearly all counts. You say "no it does not. It is more like a recipe, less like computer code." Please consider the following: *"Genes are information. They are coded information. It even looks like computer information. A chromosome is a great long computer tape. It's linear. It runs one dimensional. [It's] digital code. It's not binary, it's quaternary, but apart from that it's just the same as computer tape. It's read in sequence. It's copied and pasted from one part of the organism to another in just the same way as a computer programmer would copy and paste. So biology has turned into computer science..."* - Richard Dawkins, DNA : The Greatest Discovery in Modern Science. *What are your thoughts on this? Do you disagree with Richard Dawkins?*
"Every observable example of information in existence always has an original intelligent source" that is a lie, but nice try. WE know for a fact that DNA changes via positive mutations, neuitral mutations and negative mutations, all 3 are clearly infiormation (you just admitted that) and all are clearly the result of random mutations."
No, "Mutations' doesn't explain how you get *ordered, sequenced, encoded instructions for building complex machines like your eyes* out of meaningless informationless chemicals. We have never once observed information create itself out of non-information without an Intelligent Source - on the contrary, *we ONLY ever observe information coming from an original intelligent source.* Why would you insist on an interpretation IN CONTRAST to ALL the rest of the observable evidence?
My friend, you're *begging the question (a logical fallacy)* of atheistic-naturalism and atheistic-abiogenesis here. Every single observable example of information that we have always has an intelligent source, like those 3 examples I offered above (book authors, computer programmers, the words on this screen from you, etc.). If this is truly a "lie" as you assert, *can you name one example of information in existence that doesn't have an original intelligent source? Just One?*
""Therefore, if consistently interpreted, the information in DNA likewise had an intelligent source (God). How do you handle this observable evidence?" ah you are saying this is proof odin exists , or did you mean zeus ??"
In essence you're not wrong on this, this evidence *by itself* only points to the fact that DNA logically had an Intelligent Source; it doesn't necessarily identify who that source was. Are you suggesting that you believe in Odin or Zeus, or perhaps Aliens like Richard Dawkins proposed as a "Possibility" in this video? In any case, that's a different conversation - A) DNA contains information, B) information observably always has an intelligent source, therefore C) *if consistently interpreted* the information in DNA likewise had an intelligent source. *How do you handle this observable evidence?*
*"The evidence of God... has been clearly seen since the beginning in all that has been created, so they will have no excuse"* (Romans 1:20)
@@michaelg377Your not asking a question, your making a statement, and that’s just a bad faith argument in the making
@@froginabucket7294 No, I'm asking a question - the fact that you see it as a "statement" is significant though. This is a linear, logical, evidence-based argument. What are your thoughts?
A) DNA contains information, B) information observably always has an intelligent source, therefore C) if consistently interpreted the information in DNA likewise had an intelligent source. *How do you handle this observable evidence?*
I am so glad that I was born in Christian family. God is so great all the time!
@@musicaleer4536 I haven't watched this video, but I can tell everyone that the age of the earth & universe is less than 15,000 years old. This has been proven by many scientific facts, as well as findings of soft tissue of the vascular system in dinosaur bones & blood cells in the horn of a triceratops. The young age of the earth was well documented by scientists, including Prof A.E. Wilder-Smith in his documentary ORIGINS How the world came to be. And his many books. None of the aforementioned facts have ever been debunked or proven to be incorrect.
Another interesting video is 100 Reasons why evolution is stupid by Kent Hovind. Neither has any of the information in this video ever been debunked or proven to be incorrect. Then there are the lectures by Dr Grady McMurtry demonstrating a young age for the earth. I can only suggest all Christians watch Prof A.E. Wilder-Smith's documentary ORIGINS How the world came to be & check out his other lectures & books. The same goes for all ignorant atheists, agnostics, other non believers & those of other religions.
I wondered for decades if there was any science behind the young earth teaching. When I actually looked, lo & behold I found the above. So do yourself a favour & investigate the facts. Unfortunately there are still many Christians, & especially Catholics who are totally ignorant on these matters. And the Catholics are being seriously mislead by the evil Pope on these & many other matters; as are all the ignorant atheists, agnostics, other non believers & those of other religions.
Amen
Amen.
Amen
@@musicaleer4536 where does right and wrong come from? Do animals have morals?
All of my questions/doubts were logically answered. Thank you Dr. Ham
Where did Ham receive his doctorate from?
@@johnnynotenglish9751
I don't know if this was meant in a mean / sexist way, or, if it is a joke I am misunderstanding, but regardless, that is no way for one to conduct themselves, and, no way to treat another person.
To the recipient of the presumed insult, I sympathize with having to put up with this level of incivility.
Forget, carbon, dating. Do you think you have more than 200 ancestor to Adam and eve? If so, that means the world order than 6000 years. 😂
no, they were not. this was 8th grade thinking mixed in with magic
@@johnnynotenglish9751 Then show us how smart you are by telling how creation happened on its own. 1LofT states that energy can't be created or destroyed, it can't happen naturally. One aspect of the 2LofT shows that the universe is winding down, usable energy is becoming less usable. Creation had to be done supernaturally at some point.
More from the conversation me and friend had regarding this video:
A quik breakdown.
You've heard of the Canaanites and the Isrealites?
The Canaanites lived in Canaan. The Isrealites were a warrior nomad people. At the time Abraham creator of religions, Conquering and enslaving some regions, they took on and adobted some of their ways.
He told his people 2 abandoned the many gods they worshipped and start worshipping 1 god that some of these regions worship. So god then was a Just god. A vengeful god (reflecting the time period). A powerful god. He was the god of the Isrealites (as is reported in parts of the bible) and smite any enemy who dared 2 rise against his chosen people.
So that post from the bible text would be written about the Hebrew god. Written about those those times. That's why the text is so vicious, vile and evil. That's how it was in them times.
That's wot l mean wen l said the bible was not written 4 now. But 1000s yrs ago.
Now if Abraham is the creator of religions who introduced the one god. (Which is why u shouldn't worship no other god but me, you'll find that phrase in the bible) Abraham told his people 2 stop worshipping gods.
That is wot these people don't do Bert. They don't study the history of their religion. Everthing has a starting point. If they stop 2 think, like why is some of the bible so evil and nasty they would realise wots its all about.
But this is the point l am making. There were people b4 Abraham. Abraham introduced the one god. Remember, that is not disputed, Abraham is the father of religions. But after god was introduced 2 his people. And after he was introduced he said this "You should worship no other god but me. I am the creator of all things!"
That guy on the video has got 2 deal with that tiny little fact, b4 he can deny how the grand canyon was formed, and convince young minds that it was actually created by a god who did not exist until the canyon was millions of years old.
Dont kno if you did watch that video l sent you? But l would love 2 see that twat explain god creating the vastness of the universe that it would take billions of years, (longer than the earth's existance) 2 cross. And if he did, why did he?
There are some major, and basic misconceptions about what Scripture actually says on all of those topics. I highly recommend checking out GotQuestions to clear some of them up, they're already answered. For example, did you know that those Canaanites engaged in ritual child sacrifice using the burning red hot metal hands of their statues to do it, for the sake of getting a good harvest from their false idol? Also Abraham is not "the creator of religions who introduced the one god" - God revealed Himself to many before Abraham?
Most importantly, *why are you blaming the Bible for "evil and nasty" things that you believe Atheism and Evolution caused? Evolution caused "evil," it's "Natural" - why blame God?*
We can actually observe about 46 billion light years in any direction, which means our observable universe is about 92+ billion light years across... and the temperatures on opposite "ends" is the same, which should only be possible through thermal contact. There hasn't been enough *time* for light to travel 92 billion light years in a 14 billion year old (atheistic) universe. The 1st law of thermodynamics doesn't allow energy to "Naturally" come from nothing. The 2nd law of thermodynamics doesn't allow energy to remain usable forever. So if our universe couldn't have a beginning from nothing, and if it couldn't have just existed forever (or else all of its energy would have been infinitely used up), then how can you "naturally" explain the beginning of the universe?
As an Atheist, you ironically have no choice but to invoke Super-Natural phenomena to explain your "Natural" worldview at this point: *Infinite* alternate universes, an *eternal self-existent* singularity, alternate unobservable metaphysical phenomena, *pre-existent* phenomena... supernatural qualities of God, suspiciously.
*"The evidence of God... has been clearly seen since the beginning in all that has been created, so they will have no excuse"* (Romans 1:20)
@@michaelg377 Reply from my friend:
I must send my apology. If you read YOUR bible you would see that as an atheist l am WRONG! And l am big enough 2 admit!
But it Doesn't change the fact that Evil comes from your god the almighty, your loving god. The creator of everything. He who CREATES EVIL... Deuteronomy 23:1.
Not Isaiah 45:7. But you should know that!
And what do you think the belief in god is? That is believing in the supernatural. Just like witches and witchcraft... and you are being presumptuous thinking that I'm a believer in the big bang THEORY. But l would be lost along the brainwashed masses 2 think that a supernatural being was the creator.
@@NorbieGonthemic My friend, you're ripping those verses out of context. God created everything "very good" (Genesis 1:31) and then when we decided to sin, everything became "evil." In that regard, He did "create evil because He is *sovereign over everything, including all good and evil,* but it is false to say that "evil comes from God." He has the ultimate authority, and whatever free will "evil" we decide to do, He has the power and promised to punish all "evil" (ie. "sin") wherever it is found. *"It is appointed for a man to die once, then comes Judgment"* (Hebrews 9:27). *He isn't evil - we are.* But tell me something - as an Atheist, why are you even complaining about "evil"? In your worldview, pain, suffering, death, injustice... these are merely the products of evolution over billions of years. It's all just "chemicals."
In fact, consider things like r@pe - is it objectively always evil? Or is that subjectively sometimes morally permissible? *Objective morality requires an objective and universally applicable source (God).* If you have any sense of morality, then you should agree with me that r@pe is always wrong - but why? Animals do it all the time, it's normal, it's "natural" - and we're all just "evolved animals," right? So what's the difference? The difference is that you're not just an "evolved animal" - you were made in the image and likeness of God with morality and a sense of justice (Genesis 9:6) and a conscience which reflects the principles of His law (Romans 2:15), and *every time you recognize something as "evil" you are borrowing from that image and likeness programmed into you to make that moral judgment.*
I love that He put that into you, because that is powerful evidence you can see in your own behavior that He exists, and that He created you.
*"All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God"* (Romans 3:23)
*"But God showed His love for us by sending His Son to die for us while we were still sinners"* (Romans 5:8)
*"Unless you repent, you will all likewise perish..."* (Luke 13:5)
@@michaelg377 I will forward your comments to my friend.
The following is my own comment:
I grew up as a Christian, because all around me were Christians/god-believers on the small Island I was born and lived until I arrived in Britain at the age of 14. My Great-grandfather was a pastor, and as a kid, I had no choice but to believe in god. However, after arriving in the UK my belief in a god changed, because I was at the age where I could think for myself; and because of the racism and hardship that my mother and I had to endure that set me on the course of disbelieving in god.
As the years went on where I am now 77, I got to disbelieve in a god even more, because of what I have seen and what is happening in the UK and worldwide. Different religions fight over this one god, starvation, homelessness, racism, discrimination, persecution, injustices, etc..., etc... But where is your god in all of those? Why is your god hiding?
I don't care what is written in the bible by men, who were also corrupt in those days, as those who write the tabloids and books today. I now believe in reality, practicality, and facts. But from what I've seen and noticed none of those is coming from your god. Christians/god-believers are living their lives on promises in the bible. The bible is not logical, practical, or realistic in today's world. You can dress the bible and your god up as much as you like, make excuses and speak for your god to those who are scared and weak-minded people who can't think for themselves; but you wouldn't brainwash me! Because the action of practicality and reality speaks louder than promises made in the bible.
Why do you Christians/god-believers always refer to verses from the bible for your answers when asked practical and realistic questions about your god? There ain't no god speaking there! And ain't no god wrote the bible! I'll tell you who are the almighty and powerful god/s. They are the politicians, world leaders, and the rich! And there is no god more powerful than them! That's the facts, practicality, and reality!
@@NorbieGonthemic My friend, an injustice in this world doesn't rationally disprove God's existence - if anything it corroborates His Word which says that we live in a fallen world. Without God, you have no room to complain about things like "racism" anyway, because those things are just the "natural" product of billions of years of Atheistic evolution. God promised to judge all evil in the world *"It is appointed for a man to die once, then comes Judgment"* (Hebrews 9:27), and further promised the destruction of this sinful world (2 Peter 3:7) - *but He delayed that judgment for your sake because He loves you, and "He is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish, for all to reach repentance"* (2 Peter 3:9).
Let me ask you a few questions - can you agree to be honest with me?:
How many lies have you told in your life?
Jesus said "If a man so much as looks at another woman with lust, he has already committed adultery with her in his heart" (Matthew 5:28) - ever done that?
Have you ever stolen anything, regardless of value?
Have you ever used God's name as a curse word, or otherwise disrespected Him?
Have you ever worshipped something more than your Creator? Yourself...?
If so, then you are guilty of lying, stealing, adultery, blasphemy, and a number of other mostly common sense moral crimes. Jesus said *"But I tell you that everyone will have to give account on the day of judgment for every empty word they have spoken"* (Matthew 12:36). *Will you be guilty?*
When you commit a crime, a fine is due, and for your moral crimes against a Holy God that fine is paid in blood. That's the bad news. The good news is that God loved you so much that He did something so that He can legally dismiss your case. *"But God showed His love for us by sending His Son to die for us while we were still sinners"* (Romans 5:8). God sent His Son Jesus to live a perfect sinless life, and to die a horrible death in your place on the cross, and then He was resurrected on the third day conquering death itself. You committed numerous evil crimes, and Jesus paid your fine. It is a free gift - no works, no money, no "magic" required - just real faith characterized by repentance from your sins to Jesus the prophesied Christ as your Lord and as your Savior. Either way your fine will be paid in blood: either your own blood, or through Jesus who shed His blood for you in your place. Once you die, it's time for your sentencing. *"It is appointed for a man to die once, and then comes Judgment"* (Hebrews 9:27). Will you be guilty on Judgment Day?
"By the same word *the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.* 8 But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. 9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. *Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance."* (2 Peter 3:7-9)
Atheism does nothing for the terrible things you've had to endure - and this meaningless amoral chemical universe literally does not care about you or your suffering. God does, and He promised to judge all evil, but also offered you mercy by taking your punishment onto Himself, paying your fine for your sins for you, because *He loves you* - and He promised to make it right. Are you going to continue to put your faith in the amoral universe, or in the God who shed His blood in your place so He could legally grant you mercy and give you His righteousness and eternal life as a free gift?
*"The wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord"* (Romans 6:23)
9:35❤❤❤❤ ripple effect
A higher life form coming to earth, dropping off much lower life forms is like talking a domesticated dog, cat, gator, gerbil dropping them into the Amazon, Death Valley, the moon and expecting them to become what we are to day.
We have a lot to learn. But we may never know. The world is full of secrets.
Honestly you know what I think God is? I think in all of reality and creation, there are only really 2 things, the mother and the father, and they need each other for life to continue existing, so woman asked man what it would take to prove she loved him and he said you would have to show me and let me feel your love when I'm my strongest or weakest, when Im good to you or I'm cruel to you, when I am the infinitely best to you or infinitely the worst as in when I kill you, you will always show me your love and beauty. Woman said I can do that, and what would it take for you to deserve that love? And man said well I suppose for every slight against you, I will see that it is damaging that beauty, and so I will punish myself as a way to clean you up to show you that no matter what we do to each other we will always need each other and you will always be beautiful for me and I will always work to prove to you that you have that beauty to give, and the two of them made the agreement and that is what all of life is. God is the love between the man and the woman, the light and the darkness, the sick and the healthy, the weak and the strong, literally two halves of every conceivable coin possible and the two of them just create the world together feeding off of each other just to make an interesting and exciting world to live it together and experience every conceivable moment together across all of time.
Wow, I am a born again Christian! Thank you so much for this! I was shook the whole time!!!!
Hi I get the idea you are being sarcastic with this born again christian statement: for the record you cannot become born again by yourself you can only wishing for it or declare that you want to be born again: God is the only one who can actually make you born again since you need to be born from God.
@@rsempel1 - Who made you judge and jury about their Christianity?
@@foxfire7604 He's not - what he said is scripturally accurate.
*"For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith-and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God- 9 not by works, so that no one can boast."* (Ephesians 2:8-9)
*"“I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing."* (John 15:5)
“Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that *at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,"* (Matthew 19:4)
@@rsempel1 Being "born again" is by Baptiism. That is Scriptual and that is how the early church believed it and taught it. no one believed what you believe until 16 centuries after Christ.
@@foxfire7604 Right On~!!!!
Combine the differing narrations and both questions will be addressed.
What he misunderstands is that we are living within an entity so vast it is difficult to comprehend - containment is why the mathematical laws that fascinate him seem to work within this context of imagination - similar to virus building blocks living within us that form the human genome may realise their world - the reason for life wars etc is transposition of energy through death thereby enabling growth of the vast entity within which we live - outside of the vast entity within which we live there are other vast entities ad infinitum from our perspective - near death experiences suggest that even a personalised hologram formulated from transposed energy & life experience - within our vast entity - might not be so ridiculous as it might once have seemed !!
I have a question In modern terms we consider " a day" a 24 hr period that the earth on its axis, with respect to the sun. The Sun , Moon, and stars were not created until the 4th day. But in the beginning, there was " light , that was called day, and " Darkness that was called "night"How can " A 24/7 period be determined? I do not doubt the creation simply confused about the timeline.
There is no confusion. God set the timeline of a day then. The same day we've always used is the same day He created. How is this known? Even the aborigine people in the middle of the bush who can't speak and know no other, know how long a day is. God ingrained this information into our beings. The creation only took the time the Bible claims. In order for it to have a moveable meaning behind those words used, God would have to be lying. God cannot tell a lie. Let God be true and every man a liar.
You see, the devil Is as a ROARING LION IN YOUR EARS! Whereas God is a still small voice in the heart of the saved man. Confusion and doubt are what the devil always desires us to have. God is not the author of confusion.
The folks who have an issue with God creating all things in an instant (even though He's all-powerful, all-knowing, ever-capable so on and so forth) have a serious issue with coming to terms with the Word of God.
Read the Authorized Word and believe it.
A thousand years on earth is a day with the Lord. It isn't twenty four hours. Don't let anyone tell you different...
@@angelamccrackin5243I don’t think it’s responsible or productive to tell someone not to let anyone tell them anything, without actually knowing, especially coming from a believer about God. The only reliable person (or any person) who was there was God and although sometimes He does speak to us in parables and poetry, He also doesn’t lie. You have to jump through some serious hoops to say that what the Bible teaches is not a week worth of days of creation. I’d never give that advice to myself. I’d never say to myself “never let anyone tell you anything different than you already think”. It’s just bad advice. Instead, anything anyone is trying to tell you, ask them to justify it. “Why do you believe that”, and “why should I believe that” are good starting points.
@@artax7664 i thought about what you said and you are correct. I dont know these things for sure and I made a mistake in declaring it to be truth. I dont want anyone to get frustrated with not knowing and turn away....
@@angelamccrackin5243 such a rare and humble response brother. May God bless you and be glorified by you.
Praise be to our All Mighty God. Hallelujah! 😊🙏🏽🕊👑✝️👑🕊🙏🏽😊
I have a quick question about the “observational science vs historical science”; what would you consider the Big Bang to be? Here’s why I ask:
In the few years after Lemaître posited the idea of the Big Bang, physicists from around the world began to make predictions about what we would have to see and find if his hypothesis held water. At the time we didn’t have the technology to test those predictions, but today they do. We can observe them today. Such as the background radiation left over from the event, the existence of neutrinos, specific elemental compounds of other galaxies, etc.
It would be very much like walking upon a car crash that you didn’t see yourself, but you can see the evidence of. Debris on the road, one car’s on fire, backup in traffic, etc.
Would you consider that to be historical or observational?
I concern that the Big Bang is the moment our universe was created. Originally, many scientists didn't like the idea of the Big Bang because it meant our universe has a beginning and an end. A question that scientists can't answer but have many theories about is what caused the Big Bang. No human was around to observe that. Some force outside the universe caused energy, matter, and atoms to form. I believe that it was God who spoke the universe into existence. That moment could be what is referred to as the Big Bang.
you explained this beautifully
How about both? I like the way you think.
You could repeat the car crash, but you can’t repeat the bigbang, sceintefic approach is repeatable, historical science is not
@@astrawboiii1853 Let’s say they were both 1of a kind cars so you can’t accurately recreate the crash. Using what you can see though, you can determine the direction they were heading, the speed they were going, and even who’s at fault. You can even take the data collected and recreate the crash on a computer.
The Big Bang is no different. When it was first hypothesized, physicists made several predictions against the model. If the Big Bang really did happen, these things would have to be true. To date, all but one has been proven to be true, and the only reason why the last one hasn’t yet is because we currently lack the technology to do so. For instance, we can see the radiation left over from the event, hydrogen is the most common element in the universe by far, the Higgs Boson does exist, etc.
We can use current observations to recreate past events with a high level of accuracy.
23:00 i love how he forgor about mutations
I'm not sure what you mean, he addressed that directly. Do you say that because you are a believer in the modern mythology that fish evolve into philosophers, and if you just wait a long enough *time* puddles of chemicals can fizz themselves into people?
@@michaelg377 not sure when anyone said puddles turn into humans and also humans aren’t a direct descendant of fish. Could you elaborate?
@@antmoundsock1122 What do you mean, do you not believe that humans have fish ancestry? That's a staple doctrine of evolution?
Let me ask you this.. Charles Darwin gave a testable hypothesis for the validity of his theory, saying "if an organ were discovered which could not possibly be explained by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down..." and he didn't have access to the fields of genetics or microbiology when he made up his theory. *If evolution is true, then how did male and female (organs) evolve?*
Before you answer, consider that we're talking about *two separate, yet interdependent sets of organs* that had to evolve "by numerous, successive, slight modifications" (Darwin) and which are precision tuned with numerous single-points of failure. For example:
The fallopian tubes are lined with millions of these little hairs that all wave the same direction, and their purpose is to guide the egg from the ovaries down into the uterus. If they stood still, laid flat, waved the wrong direction, or didn't exist - the egg would either die or it would implant in the fallopian tube thus killing the mother. Some of these are known medical conditions that prevent pregnancy - "Evolution" had to get these millions of hairs just right.... "by numerous, successive, slight modifications."
*Simultaneously* the sperm has a whip like rotor, a motor encasing, a bushing like material, a nutrient transfer system, and several other components that all have to be working *just right* or the sperm can't find the egg. Reproduction and life fails. "Evolution" had to get the interdependent parts of the sperm "just right" ... "by numerous, successive, slight modifications."
*Then* you have the placenta which does everything for the baby including keeping the mother's and baby's blood separate, the expanding and contracting uterus and cervix, the mechanism which only allows one sperm into the egg, and numerous other components that all had to be *designed* just right, or reproduction and life fails. "Evolution" had to *SIMULTANEOUSLY* get all of these just right "by numerous, successive, slight modifications."
Which gender evolved first, and how did it reproduce while the other hadn't evolved yet? And going backwards in time, which of these critical organs do you gradually reduce first "by numerous, successive, slight modifications" without causing reproduction, life, and evolution to fail?
I had read the book, “It couldn’t just happen" which was very helpful. THIS video REALLY explains in depth, but in easy to understand language, the answers to questions many of us have had. When confronted with the Ark account, I didn’t understand, but would rationalize it in my mind by thinking that God may have made it so the animals hibernated, or (being God) he made it so the animals didn’t need to eat or poo while on the Ark…things like that. Now I can explain the truth in ways that both I and others can understand. Thank you, Ken Ham! Thank you, God, for everything you have and continue to do for us! Thank you, God, for being there for us in good times and bad.
Emily Ferris that's exactly what I think about the animals on the ark...they were ALL asleep!
@@michelleblackburn8071 …yes! Being God, He is more than capable of that!
Ohhh. So God used to be magic and help people survive catastrophic events?!?!
What's going on with starving children?!
How about.... ya know..... hurricanes?!!
Couldn't God just intercede and help a brother out?! Or is he no longer magic?! Lost his touch?
@Michelle Blackburn Sleeping?!
Even if that were true.
You saw where the Ark allegedly landed, yeah?!
So, after the flood and they crashed.... how did Kangaroos get all the way to Australia?!
Or...... how would he have gone and retrieved the Roos in the first place?!
And even if he did.... why would they go back... travelling across multiple continents and across the ocean....??!
Does that make sense?!
@@ericchin739 I respect your right not to believe in God. After all, He gave us free will so we could choose to live our lives and believe what we want. I do not denigrate you or your beliefs; I ask that you afford those of us who believe in God the same courtesy.
This guy has the best explanation of any one person that I’ve come across yet he’s saying what a lot of us have been saying just has so many more details great job I’m sending this to everybody I know that is questioning God
Ken's point here is...support for the Bible, NOT god. Two entirely unrelated subjects.
IOW. MEN wrote the Bible, NOT GOD!
What?
It took 2000 years of you bozo's analyzing the "Greatest Story" ever told, and Ken Ham-bone's version of this BS is the best you could come up with?? SAD!!
You ought to be ashamed..
@@daveyjones9930 *"All Scripture is God-breathed* and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:16)
@@michaelg377
H!
Who said "all scripture is God-breathed"?
God or some fallible human?
And, are they around so they can be questioned?
If not, it's just hearsay...😊
@@42apostate Do you say that because you believe in the modern mythology that fish evolve into philosophers, and that if you just wait a really long time puddles can turn themselves into people? Do you believe these things despite not being able to question anyone from the unobservable past about them? I have an informed faith my friend - yours is ironically blind faith. We have 27 books from 8+ authors and their amanuenses, plus 20+ extrabiblical and even *hostile* testimonies that corroborate their claims, including eyewitness and secondary witness accounts to Jesus' life, death, and resurrection, interaction with God, witnessing miracles, fulfilled prophecy, etc. That's enough witnesses/evidence to sink a modern court case my friend.
Someone said "George Washtington was the first president of the United States". "And, are they around so they can be questioned? If not, it's just hearsay..."
....can you see the problem? Do you normally just reject all of history and all historical documentation because you can't observe the unobservable past?
Besides, Jesus fulfilled over 300 prophecies that we can prove were written before His time against incredible odds. For example, Daniel 9 accurately predicted the rebuilding of the 2nd temple, the coming of the Messiah, and the destruction of the 2nd temple, including accurately predicting the year of Jesus' death on the cross 476 Babylonian Calendar years after Artaxerxes historically ordered the temple to be rebuilt in 445 BC as prophesied, and we can prove this was all written before Jesus' time 2000 years ago. And that's just one, there are over 300 others that He also fulfilled (Isaiah 53, Psalm 22, Isaiah 7:14, 9:6, Micah 5:2, Zechariah 9:9, 12:10, etc.). Prophecy is a supernatural phenomenon - What are your thoughts on that?
@@michaelg377
I never said I believed Evolution. Quit attempting to put words n my mouth. That's dishonest!!
I don't know....just like YOU don't know about creation. You're assuming your story is correct because someone else told you the story. Or because it was hinted at in some random ancient book written, compiled, translated, REtranslated and repeatedly redacted by ignorant, biased humans with a *CONTROL* agenda, be it religiously motivated or political. An axe to grind.
The real story doesn't have to be one way or the other.
More than likely creation of everything occurred in ways we humans can't even imagine. But, we'll get there....and I predict it won't be by or through religion.
No, I don't reject "ALL" of history. I hold some of it in "time out"....until I am sufficiently satisfied by the weight of the evidence (AND IF I'm interested).
I accept Washington only because there are many sources that attest to his realty...the weightiest being his ancestry many of whom are alive today, and their long list of journal entries.. not to mention Washington's land ownership documents and military records...along WITH his verified signature attached.
*Show us comparable records of Jesus' existence.*
Do you accept Mohammed as a Prophet sent by God?
Why not?
His history is also attested to by ancient scripture written by equally ignorant savages.
Cheers, Mr. Gray!!
Wish this have Indonesian Subtitles, but hopefully it translates accurately. This will change the minds of many people, mostly to them that believed Hindu was the right way to god.
I am so glad I came across this video as a new Christian doubting my faith time to time. To simply put it for all of you guys watching this video; think of god as the pushing force of a dominos effect. There has to be SOMEONE that pushes one domino for the others to fall into place
If you're willing to believe the stuff AiG put out, your "faith" is in no danger as you are already impervious to reality.
@@richardgregory3684 Is that because you believe in the modern mythology that fish evolve into philosophers, and if you just add copious amounts of *Time* puddles can fizz into people by chance?
*"Even a single protein could not arrive at its native structure in biological real time because conformational space is far too vast": ~10^95 possible conformations for a chain of 100 residues, so that "even a small protein that initiated folding by random search at the time of the big bang would still be thrashing about today."* (Peter Tompa and George D. Rose, "The Levinthal Paradox of the Interactome," Protein Science 20 (2011): 2074.)
*"The evidence of God.. has been clearly seen since the beginning in all that has been created, so they will have no excuse"* (Romans 1:20)
Ken Ham: There is no new information. Genes get rearranged but they're still the same genes.
Also Ken Ham at 27:09: Mutations: changes in our genes occurred.
🤦♀
Mutation or deformity is not new information. It's a corruption of the information that changes what should be there originally. Say the order should be abcdefg and a mutation comes along and eliminates a letter or makes the sequence acbedfg. It seems you may have confused create with change. A mutation doesn't create anything new no more than a man takes wood and carves it into whatever his heart desires. A new shape or form has been achieved but it is still just wood.
All the information is before your eyes it's just you. You're on the road and there is no fork in it. It is choice.
To let the physics explain who and what you are or somebody that's making a guess, their opinion of misunderstood information. Only pure facts matter there are no wrong answers only correct. The Human Condition is what you make it, for yourself. If you do not adhere to the scale of physics you'll never understand this. For this is where language is derived from. Also music. It is of scale, it can go up or down but it is unscalable in it's Mass. The physics within it, is the answer. Physics started when someone asked, what am I. Around a campfire. From there it led to philosophies which are all over the world, and just a repetition of itself.
For there must be balance, or there would be none. Meaning if it can't hold it shape it won't exist/ no Foundation to it. So what you see the cosmos yourself everything is in balance, or it would not exist in the first place. Just Like Music it has to be in balance for you to enjoy/ hear it in the first place.
It's just an understanding of the balance in, the presence of you in the first place. Understanding this will lead you to a compendium of understanding of all things. For the math it does not lie.
@@CWRobinsonMusic look up insertion mutations. new material can be added.
@@cynthiaayers7696 not hatred just rational disbelief. You might not believe that, for example, a Bigfoot exists. That doesn't mean you hate the idea of Bigfoot. You just haven't been able to find any good evidence for it.
@@johnmacleod3421 doesn’t happen in the natural world though. Takes an intelligent mind to do so.
Well done sir.
That is why building automation and telegraph antena install in each building and human eye and ear are antena
This is a very informative AND educative video, especially for teenager. Perhaps there is plan to produce similar video related to increasingly popular LGBTQ worldview and the bible and christianity point of view about it.
Amen. I believe God's word from start to finish. This was very educational to watch. Love it
Do you kill people that are working on sabbath (Exodus 35:2)?
@@sebastiannolte1201 if they were in the congregation of the people of Israel of Moses in the wilderness (the context) then yeah. That's not for today.
@@chrislachat459 So how do you choose which rules from the bible were only valid for the people back then and which still today?
@Sebastian Nolte, just make sure that in your discussion you stay respectful so that we don’t muddy the atheist name
Do you believe in elves and leprechauns?
I thank you for this video. I believe and love God almost all my live, but I was not sure about the timetable of creation, because of the quote '1 day 1000 year'. Now I know earth is really created in one week.
I stood in aw after seeing your video. How great is our God. I love him with all my heart.
Is there a possibility to translate it in Dutch, so I can send it to a lot of people in my neighbourhood? A lot of people here still doesn't understand English so good.
Please don’t spread this nonsense what has it ever done to help the human race
@@hectorpatton9401 It teaches us that nothing we do really matters in the grand scheme of things, that we're just animals, so our lives don't count. It leaves us with the impression that nothing we do has consequences, that we're free to destroy each other over the most petty things. The idea that there is no higher power is...
OH, I thought you were talking about evolutionism. Well nevermind, I've nothing to say.
Amazing. Thanks 🙏
Thats great lecture! The animal thing, Gen 1 24 25 states that God greated both the wild animal and the demestic animal. Just wanted to say that.