Dr. Hugh Ross - The Science of Creation, Evening Lecture #1
2022 ж. 25 Қаз.
31 342 Рет қаралды
Dr. Hugh Ross teaches on the Science of Creation
Check out what else the Anchor House is up to at:
Instagram: @anchorhousekauai
Website: anchorhousekauai.com/
Check out the Anchor House Podcast!
Instagram: @anchorhousepod
KZhead: @AnchorHousePodcast
I think he meant 1,000 word article, not 1,000 pages (!). 26:29
There has to be a bridge between the Bible and science and here it is! Spoken with eloquence, precision and facts. 🇬🇧✝️
I need a scripture reference for that mansion with acres thing
Genesis 1:1 is referring to “sky and land “ when it says “heaven and earth.”
I think it important to respect the entrance of death into time. The suggestion that day-6 fish and fowl existed for a long period (millions of years) without death affecting them or leaving fossils would be consistent with how scripture times the arrival of death, but we are tempted to put its arrival at an earlier point in creation so as to account for old old fossils. But then we allow death on those creation days where we are told God pointedly described what He had made as 'good' and not under a curse. Must we then change our view of God's character to accommodate fossils dated to what our current presumptions say are millions of years old?
Hi Penny.Can we assume that plants didn't die?Would the death and decay of plants not yet be a natural condition of the cycle of life back then before the fall?It is true that plants were not living animals yes.But then Adam was not warned of the death of everything through disobedience,but just his death.There is no mention of death being imminent for animals through his disobedience.It can be assumed that the cycle of life and death in animal as well as plant life would be considered a natural flow of the life cycle back then ,where as Adam and Eve and man kind would not be subject to it.This being a choice by God would make it "good",because God is always good.As well,where would Adam get his point of reference if he had not known or witnessed death?
@@wtsgnon Right, death as a principle I am assuming applied across the board to living things including plants (with my limited understanding). We are not told the length of time Adam and Eve walked with God in fellowship before the fall into rebellion. Perhaps the plant life was still enjoying growth and friut and seed production, their intended use for man. We are not told. Taking God as faithful and consistent, I trust all was as He designed in the beginning: good. Good to think more about this, thank you.
Obviously the death was of the sprit of man and not a bodily death, even Adam didn't die but lived a ripe old age. This death didn't effect any other living creature than man. (neither did Angels die).
This is great. God is good. I needed a clean laugh this morning. We are still in the 7th day.😂😮😂
Please read "Refuting Compromise" by Dr. Jonathan Sarfati
Why?
Great book
Please explain why we should read "Refuting Compromise" by Dr. Jonathan Sarfati
@@MCrelationz he's brilliant (also chess master) and doesn't compromise on Genesis like so many.
@@fzr1000981 thanks
I cannot hear the questions given by the audience! The answers are fine, it's just the questions!!
Why does God sometimes hide things? Because he gives us room to to say “no” to him. If everything was as clear as 2+2=4, we would be FORCED to kneel before Him, but God wants RELATIONSHIP. it’s impossible to have relationship if one is forced. God wants us to CHOOSE him.
To jest wybieranie w ciemno. Najpierw pakiet wiarygodnych informacji, potem wybór. Dokładnie jak przy spekulacji na giełdzie.
❤️🤟
🤟❤️
What about the birds on day 5?There is no mention here of birds on day 5.The Cambrian explosion occurs some time around 535 million years ago,where the fossil record have birds at best arriving around 145 million years ago.And modern birds about 65 million years ago.
Dinosaurs are literally the ancestors of birds...the chicken is a descendant of the T rex
But why came first, the chicken or the egg?
@@MagicalAlpaca Obviously the chicken. For it has the calcium and dna to form the egg. But probably the rooster came first, cause it had sex with the chicken.
@@MagicalAlpaca The chicken evolved first, it evolved to lay the egg.
Why Noah had so much problems fishing in the Ark ? Because he only brought 2 worms.
😆 🤣 😂
@@ByGraceThroughFaith777 Worms, if any in the ark, could multiply. Moreover, Noah brought enough food to the ark.
@@williamtsang8723 It is said the Ark took 120 years to build, in that amount of time the first pieces of wood would have started to rot and be eaten by bugs long before it was completed. We know from modern maritime engineering that wooden ships that size are impossible.....they twist break up and sink .....read about the wooden schooner US Wyoming , it was smaller than the ark by 100 ft, it weighed 10,000 tons !!!!!!! it had to have steel girders retro fitted to stop to twisting in even the lightest seas , but it still broke up and sank .
@@WildPhotoShooter Did you even think about the possibility that if an all-powerful God told him to build it, that he could also protect the wood used to build it? Perhaps God even told him some secrets on how to protect the wood.
@@jiayouchinese The Noah story doesn't mention anything about being told to use wood preserver. He used tar on the outside to stop water getting in , but wood preserver is a chemical product that is man made in factories ....maybe God had a secret factory hidden in the mountains . Another reasonable question is, where did Noah get the tar from ? Do you realise how much tar it would take to paint a ship 500 ft long, 100ft wide and three stories high ? He couldn't do all the internal wood with tar . The writers of this naive story remembered to "waterproof" the ship but they would never have thought in their writing process that anybody would bring up the question, 2000 years later, of the wood rotting . Ooops ! C'mon folks, the Noah fantasy is a seriously flawed naive story, it is impossible, it never happened .......neither did the 6 day creation, the virgin birth , or the resurrection form the dead , it's all just man made fantasy .
Thanks for this. Many will still doubt - but they need a new heart in order to do so. Flesh and blood can't inherit the kingdom of God.
What about all the Young Earth Creationists , who believe the Bible tells them the Earth is 6000 years old .
I thought the continents were formed by the moon smashing into the earth and reforming from the dust?
Most people loose their faith when they read the first page of the Bible.....they are the intelligent people who can think rationally for themselves.
Fortunately, Elohim did not put nature in a book but rather made it our natural experience. We all experience nature for OURSELVES and DO NOT need to read book to understand day from night, etc.
Book of Nature is a figure of speech. Please read the Belgic Confession Article 2 circa 1566 before making snide comments.
@@MutsPub Nope. We don’t need your little book in order to understand nature. Note this is a direct comment to your side comment.
@@goldstream5147 Psalm 19:1 - The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands, Proverbs 6:6 - Go to the ant, you sluggard! Consider her ways and be wise. Few references of scripture to look at nature and admire the handiwork of God. This is what Dr Ross is referring
Creation science is an oxymoron. Naturalism (science) is about things that can be measured / observed. The central unifying element of creationism cannot be measured or observed. Naturalism is about strict, rigid adherence to emergent laws, resulting in strict limits and rules for how they can interact. The laws in creationism are there by decree, so can be anything that can be decreed, limited only by the creator's imagination. Naturalism is about increments of variation over long periods of time. Creationism is about instantaneous appearance of complexity. Naturalism is about process / circumstantial design. Creationism is about intelligent design. The operating agents, mechanisms, concepts, and principles of creationism and naturalism are so fundamentally different that there's no reason for them to resemble each other on any level -- much less down to the level of minutiae that we observe ... unless naturalism itself is the designer.
You're a fool if you don't believe that there is a designer behind this.
@@laurenpatricia411 [Lauen]: "You're a fool if you don't believe that there is a designer behind this." Lol. Anyone who doesn't educate him/her self about this stuff is a fool, Lauren. It's clear you haven't taken the time to learn, and that's nobody's fault but your own. That pretty much disqualifies you from being a credible judge of who's a fool and who isn't. It's called the Dunning-Kruger effect.
@@laurenpatricia411 [lauren]: "You're a fool if you don't believe that there is a designer behind this." You didn't address a single point. I was comparing naturalism and creationism -- showing clearly that each has its own domain or set of rules, and that science aligns with naturalism because science uses naturalistic stuff to measure naturalistic stuff and, by definition, cannot measure / observe / detect supernaturalistic stuff, which is the domain of God. Therefore, creationism is not science because creationism's principle operating agent cannot be scientifically measured / observed / tested. It is placed beyond scientific evaluation by the creationists themselves. We have never seen something supernatural instantaneously create something natural. But we see natural stuff creating natural stuff all the time, especially in changing conditions over longer periods of time. At the end of the day, I don't think anyone wants to believe in God more than I do. But I think it does God a disservice to believe in a God for the wrong reasons, or to blame God for something he didn't do.
atheists seem to really misinterpret that the old testament was a very different time during the bible. things were as they were now exactly, they all say “just read the old testament” like so let’s not read the rest of the scripture? the ole testament was when the world was extremely corrupt and evil, before the flood and up until the flood. i understand why you don’t believe because i’ve struggled with religion most of my life, ive always been a very extremely skeptical person that pursued facts but you really have to come at it in a open way, there’s a lot in this world that doesn’t make much sense and anyone can attest to that. i don’t claim to have every answer, i’m still on my journey. but don’t just talk down to believers because not everyone is in it for a afterlife simply or just some trivial complete self gain, some of us genuinely wanna see the people we love again, we want a method to the madness. if you can live a happy meaningful life without religion, kudos to you man but the majority of people are made to need meaning and atheists ideas of “we create our own meaning” is very bleak. whether it’s a myth or not, jesus keeps a lot of people alive, helps people turn their lives around and i think that’s worth a lot more than atheists want to give credit to it.
the only thing about doing your best so u can receive many crowns, is that it is a selfish motive and what u do will not be from the heart...................
There are a lot of things that he would never understand as long as he continues to look at everything in the Bible through the lens of science. He doesn't even know what the theme of the Bible is, he puts human salvation above all else. The theme or main message of the Bible is not the salvation of man, it is the sanctification of God's name and the vindication of his sovereignty by means of his kingdom or government. It was the rightfulness and the righteousness of God's rule that was brought into question in the garden of Eden and it's that issue that has to be settled once and for all time. Satan lied to Eve claiming that God was holding back good from her and that life would be better if she decided for herself what was good and bad and that contrary to what God said she wouldn't die for her disobedience. Time was needed to prove whether Satan's claims were true. After thousands of years of death, sickness, and untold suffering the answer is PLAIN to see. This court case will soon conclude and the instigator, Satan, will be executed. The kingdom is what will bring about this. The kingdom was what Christ preached about while here on Earth. It's the instrument that will be used to fulfill God's purpose for the earth and mankind. As psalm 37:29 says, "the righteous will possess the earth and they will live forever on it."
God reveals Himself through His Word. And adding even one more hour to the six days of creation inspires a form of evolution and deception, contradicting the Biblical genealogy and prophecies of God's word. What if God, in eternity past, conceived the cosmos fully complete, in a form that is billions of years old? Then when he spoke each day into existence, everything He made, formed and created proceeded forward, including light in real time. That would satisfy the six days of creation and not contradict Biblical genealogies and prophecies of God's word. Can this be proven scientifically? Perhaps some evidence may exist. In a recent discovery within the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation, the Planck data confirms what the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe data reveals, that our Earth and solar system may be cosmically aligned. And according to cosmologists, one thing is evident, the alignments with our Earth and solar system somehow exist! Moreover, because these features do not fit the Standard Model of Cosmology, scientists dubbed it the Axis of Evil because it can destroy everything in their Big Bang hypothesis. However, instead of an Axis of Evil. Could these alignments show an actual Axis of Beginning of a completely new cosmological theory, conceivably, leading to our Creator guiding the exploration? "And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:" ACTS 2:17. The Earth is where the Biblical story begins. Our Salvation is what His story is about, and Jesus, the Word of God, is the story's hero.
Astronomers have looked at collapsing stars from light billions of years old. If the Universe is only thousands of years old then that star never really existed. Why create disception. A bit out of the Character of God who does not lie. If Yom can literally mean long finite periods of time why get stuck on 24 hours? Genesis two tells us what God did on day 6. First he created Adam, God planted a garden, Put Adam in it. They watched the trees and the grass grow. Adam got to know all the animals and named them. Then after all that God created Eve. That is a very very very very long 24 hour day.
If God didn’t flood the whole world then why did Noah need a boat? Why didn’t he just move where there was no water?
The black sea did actually overflow at one point of the middle easts history. It was caused by a break in the glaciers that housed a ocean of water within the glaciers in America and may have been released when a meteor hit the ice cap in the ice age in either modern day Greenland or iceland also this created the scab lands as the torrential amount of water broke through the lands and carved them out on their way to the ocean causing ocean levels to rise and flood over into the middle east.
Why would He flood the whole world when all humans lived in one place in the Middle East? Why would God drown all the animals in the world when there were no humans around to corrupt them?
The science of creation is that the creation never happened.
About sons of God. If Angel’s change into man then they are better than Christ because He needed a woman to have the human body. I don’t think any Angel can become human. Because Christ is the only one. Good lecture
Angels cannot become men. They can appear to look like a men but never be a men. Men are made in the Image of God. That's why, I think, Satan was jealous of Adam and Eve knowing that they would rule over him if they obeyed God, so he set out to deceive Eve. Maranatha
@@gerardmoloney433 sorry I was speaking about when they say sons of God meaning Angels. Maybe I made a mistake. Thanks
The serpent in the garden of Eden was Satan, the donkey speaking to Joana was an Angel. Angels have the power to manifest in other forms. (flying saucer UFO believers call some of the aliens "shape shifters", but they are demons)
@@fudgedogbannana that is a good answer and true. Thanks. But I still don’t believe Angels turned into humans. Do you think maybe the things you mentioned are like imposed without actually turning in say a serpent. Thanks again
Christ didn't need a woman to have a human body, he could have materialized a body like those disobedient angels. He materialized a human body on a number of occasions after his resurrection and it's possible that he did so before he came through Mary. Throughout the scriptures, there are accounts of angels who materialized human bodies. Because of the role he had to play in the outworking of God's purpose he needed to have the whole human experience, from birth to death. Matter which we see is just a concentrated form of energy that we can't see so the same applies to flesh and spirit.
Jesus is God☦️🇺🇸
Perhaps the most profound mystery of all is why on earth does You Tube keep putting up this drivel ?
I was a fan of hugh Ross, but his moon origins theory has some what put me off.
#111_Jan07_6min🇺🇸🇮🇱✝️
Everybody Talkin abt some BS cheating that didn’t even happen…. Nobody noticed Tobin could’ve protected the Audino to tank for the wish 😂
Are you taking drugs?
God created the earth, but he did not create everything in six twenty four hour days. I don't know what the measurement is based on evening and morning but too many things show that it's millions of years.
Creation is not science -
It does not take millions of English words to translate the first few words of the Bible. Ross is just interpreting and interpreting more and more. THE BIBLE WAS NOT MEANT TO BE INTERPRETED.......IT WAS MEANT TO BE BELIEVED LITERALLY AS THE WORD OF GOD . HOWEVER NAIVE WE FIND IT IN THE MODERN 21ST CENTURY IT IS STILL THE WORD OF GOD AND SHOULD NOT BE "INTERPRETED" OR CHANGED IN ANY WAY.
Um... parables? Song of songs? Revelation? Any time there is translation there is interpretation. Any sermon is interpretation.
If you take genesis literal you’re saying God is a liar who tricks us by making the earth seem old while it’s young. Believing the earth is old proves to us the eternal God and our beloved Jesus Christ of Nazareth
@ufindmehere76 interpretation is definitely required in this modern world where people are not easily fooled by the literal word . Ancient people didn't question what the hierarchy told them because they were just peasants.
Stop this nonsense. Creation is not science, it is religion. You know nothing.
i DON'T believe OLD EARTH CREATIONIST I trust Ken Ham over you.
sorry but he got the age of the earth wrong. its more like 6,000 years old according to the rate of the magnetic field decreasing and the erosion of the continents, etc
So I assume you don't believe in radiocarbon dating? It's used to find the age of fossils which extend way further back than 6,000 years. Now to make a comment on the erosion of continents, 1. Erosion rates are not constant, they change over time making it hard to predict past erosion rates and 2. The continents would still be around even though erosion has been occuring for billions of years because of simple plate tectonics. Most of the erosion from coastlines is due to subduction, which is when one plate slides under another, usually its the ocean plates being forced under by the continental plate as ocean plates are more dense so a lot of weathered coasts gets dragged along with the ocean plate as it subducts so you would assume that at some point over time, a lot of the continents would be barely anything, but when subduction occurs, a ton of friction and heat is created which melts some of the rock. The magma then acts like hot hair and begins to rise which pushes up on the continental crust above it. Sometimes you get mountains and volcanoes from this process but what you mainly get no matter what is more surface crust after that magma cools. If you go to Hawaii you can see this. Hawaii is full of "lava beaches" which are great examples of cooled magma creating new coastline. One more note about the magnetic field, the magnetic field is also not a constant thing, over time it waxes and wanes, and even flips every 300,000 years, and it's estimated to only have been decaying for last 3,000 years, so that doesn't really match up with your 6,000 year old figure.
How can you fit Pangea, ancient animal fossils, many meteor collisions, ice ages etc in 6000 years?