@Zed1967 That's quite a claim, considering God sent Jesus to die a death which people deserve, saving us out of love. Not to mention His caring enough to create us in the first place despite our shortcomings.
@Zed1967 That's quite a claim, considering that they interact with billions of people daily, and that God is responsible for the creation of the universe.
You have no evidence what so ever for God, Creation or anything supernatural what so ever. In fact based on the Bible science can prove that God is imaginary. You are suffering from a delusion. Do yourself a favour, accept that God does not exist and start living the only life you will EVER have.
It's very simple. There is no evidence what so ever for the existence of God or an afterlife. Life requires a body, so if that body is dead then buried or cremated you cannot have any form of life.
If you believe in God then a belief in unicorns, goblins, pixies, the tooth fairy and Santa Clause are also valid beliefs to you.
@Zed1967 Only physical life requires a body. True life, one's spirit, cannot be seen with the senses. The existence of emotion and thought reveal the spirit that resides in men's bodies while on earth. Where do souls go after their body no longer houses them? There are many cases of near death experiences, which at least show there is something beyond this world.
None of the latter figures are valid, because none have interacted with us; but God interacts with His followers constantly.
@Zed1967 There are many things that are known to be, without using the senses. You can't see people's thoughts, but you know their presence when the thoughts are expressed vocally. You can't see people's feelings, but reactions show that their feelings exist. Likewise, the elements of life that are not seen, but are clearly there, are described here as "spirits" or "souls"; the life of a person.
NDEs are a mystery; no one truly knows.
There are thousands of sane men who have talked with God.
@Zed1967 MRIs can't read minds; they'e only tools to examine the body.
The parts of people's lives that are invisible.
If all thought and mind are just chemical reactions, how can you trust what you are saying to be truth and reason?
I've read much on the subject; there are numerous opinions and theories on near-death experiences. There is no final consensus among scientists, nor the general public.
That is a very good point, unless God is talking back, and what He's saying proves true.
MRI's can detect brain activity though, the point I am making is that we cannot see thoughts but we can detect them with instruments which brings me onto my other point that is if God was real and all powerful we would be able to detect him with instruments.
The invisible and the non existent look exactly the same.
Truth is not thought dependant, something is either true or it isn't, reason is a product of logic and so something is either reasonable or it isn't.
@Zed1967 The invisible and nonexistent are different: the effects of the former are noticed. (Romans 1:20) Nature reveals God's invisible Creator identity, for an example.
Yes, truth is truth. How can you trust chemical reactions to find truth?
There is often a pattern, but not always. There are theories and hypotheses, but no final truth yet found.
Yes, talking to a "god" doesn't prove a religion. If the faith is any good, its God will reveal Himself instead of being proven by fallible men.
The physical process of thought is just a fact of bio-chemistry, it doesn't necessarily determine thought in a healthy brain.
Have you ever noticed when you have read about NDE's that there is a pattern usually? One of them is the classic ''going into the light'' scenario, you should ask, or find out why this should be so, I have a pretty good idea as my psychology tutor told me about it. There is evidence to suggest chemicals released by the body during an NDE is the cause.
People allegedly talking to or hearing from God is more in line with mental illness than anything and this action neither proves the existence of God or what is written in ancient books is to have any basis in truth.
There is a FREE audio Bible online! Google Bible Gateway adds audio NASB bible! There are other versions if you google them as well, such as the KJV, but I enjoy the new American standard version!
free audio bible!! I just found this site today!!!
There is a FREE audio Bible online! Google Bible Gateway adds audio NASB bible! There are other versions if you google them as well, such as the KJV, but I enjoy the new american standard version!
free audio bible!! I just found this site today!!!
@ndrthrdr1 We do not command God to heal amputees; we ask Him to. If His will is consistent with our request, our God is mighty enough to do that and even more spectacular things. All other gods have not the tiniest fraction of the Lord's power though.
You missed the part where jamming the mass of the Earth together in such a short period of time turns the earth into a sun because the friction of jamming that much mass together in such a short period of time creates so much heat is passes the threshold of fusion. See the video for the mathematic proof.Too bad, so sad.
@Vexillographer~ Creation: The earth had to be formed; it was formed from matter; matter has mass;putting the mass of the Eath together causes friction; friction causes heat; the amount of mass caused so much heat it passed the point of fusion, ergo Earth is a sun, not a planet. What is wrong with this picture? Reality: over several billion years (about 7) matter coalesced to form a ring system with proto planetary masses; 5 bya, Earth formed into a molten ball; over the next billion yrs, it...
@pontecanis The entire Bible is correct, including the description of creation. Yes, the earth was formed, but the Good Book does not say it was created from matter. Because our God is awesome (included in that is all-powerful), He can do anything He wants however He wants. Even if all that goo goo ga ga is correct, God could have made exceptions for the universe's origins with no trouble at all, for He is the everlasting Supreme Ruler.
@Vexillographer ~Sorry...see the Perodic Table of the Elements: these are the only known forms of matter here on Earth ( and some hypothesized as the atomic weights have not been filled). This is what the Earth was made from, as there isn't anything else. The Bible doesn't mention matter because the concept wasn't known, just as it says nothing about carrs, aircraft, and modern medicine. Big deal. Religionists like to argue god is outside of time and space. EVERYTHING within the universe IS...
@pontecanis God is eternal, and this universe is not. He created the universe, but exactly how He did we are not certain of. Whether it was made of something or nothing, we can surely trust the Bible to be without error. Man's ideas that are claimed to be "science" or "fact" can always have flaws, which is often the case. God's word, however, endures forever, and must be trusted far above man's best guesses.
@Vexillographer Deuteronomy 13:6-9. How many 'non-believer's' have you stoned to death? According to YHWH you should be doing this. Are you aware that all children are born 'non-believer's' in your made up deity? (Santa too) Sounds like your magic sky daddy is a prick to me.
@jerkification Actually, that law covers the punishment if family or a close friend of Israel secretly entices one to follow a false god. It doesn't say to stone all unbelievers we come across. Also, the situation back then was different from today. Verse 11 shows that God had the nation of Israel in mind, but this wasn't a command for the entire world for all time in all situations.
Our God is the true creator, not made-up. God has made Jesus available for all, for which we should be grateful.
@Vexillographer Please help me understand how you can surely trust that the bible is without error when so many flawed humans have removed portions that did not suit their political interests, when it has been interpreted differently by so many cultures. Do you not believe it is possible to live a responsible, compassionate life, dedicated to benefitting all beings if there is no imnipotent creator?
@dalvara68 The Old Testament was preserved very well, and the New Testament compiled and copied very carefully and prolifically. The men collecting the 66 books were believers interested in God's truth, not simple politics. Interpretation must come from God, not opinion, fitting with all the Bible, not parts, to be correct.
In the world's eyes, it's very possible. However, people are not in charge of the universe (thank goodness!): God is the boss, which works better since He's perfect.
@adam3251 Sounds about right, considering how many different kinds of manuscripts have been made. However, by using only the consistent manuscripts such as the Textus Receptus, and leaving out some of the inconsistent ones like the Septuagint, the Biblical text is extremely more reliable through a process of elimination with certain texts.
@gastrolBTR Well, we don't know for sure the exact age of the earth, but the 6,000-year estimate comes from mainly the genealogies of the Bible along with other historical data of the later events it describes.
Just curious, by the way: why did you add 6,000 to 1513 BC? It's been approximately 6,000 years from creation to the present day, not from creation to the first Scriptures (though we don't know for sure of course). Interesting comment, thanks! :)
Well, I did that computation becaus if the earth was made in 4000 BC, at the time of First Scripture (I got that from an answer website from google search) a earth made 6000 years ago would make not-much sense...
@gastrolBTR Oh okay, thanks. Using ~1500 BC as the first Scripture date, and ~4000 BC as the creation date, the world would be around 2,500 years old at the time of the first Scripture. Why wouldn't that make sense? (Not trying to debate, just trying to learn more about your suggestion. :)
@gastrolBTR Oh I see. Well the Bible does not give a date of 6000 years anywhere (unless there is a verse I'm unaware of?); that estimate was calculated from historical information that the Bible provides such as genealogies, kings' reigns, and other events which we use to date creation around 4000 BC. So when we refer to "approximately 6000 years ago" for creation, we mean from the present day.
What's more likely? That the interpretation of the world that has given us electricity, lights, cars, vaccines, artificial insulin, airplanes, and landed us on the moon is correct? Or that the truth lies with Iron Age mythology and we just haven't bent the facts to fit the story enough?
I treat people who believe Yahweh is real the same way I'd treat someone who believed Zeus was real. Nod politely until the crazy person walks away.
@TacticusPrime Technology, the result of actual knowledge, has led to those inventions. But faulty science leads only to a lack of knowledge.
God is beyond man-made religion in that His power has been made known to everyone, and that He clearly communicates with us in multiple ways. Refusing all the evidence as crazy is ignorant and dangerous. (2 Peter 3:5)
@Vexillographer Technology arose because people rejected superstitious explanations for things and sought out the real truth. What is lightning, and why does it strike some buildings and not others? What are things really made off? How do birds fly? What is our place in the universe? Why do the planets move the way they do?
There's nothing faulty about Evolution. It's an observable and testable fact that its occurring, and there's no reason to think it hasn't occurred in the past.
@TacticusPrime While many superstitions may indeed contradict some knowledge, the Bible does not in any way, nor is it superstitious. It gives us the most valuable information of all.
Natural selection occurs today. But that is different from evolution, which is only a false hypothesis.
@Vexillographer That simply isn't true. The Bible suggest someone held up his hands and the sun stayed up in the sky, that the world is only 6,000 years old, that a god spoke out of a burning bush, that some possessed miraculous powers of healing, etc., which are all manifestly superstitious fact claims.
Natural selection is only different from evolution in so far as evolution is the combination of natural, artificial, and sexual selection over time. Evolution is an observed phenomenon.
@TacticusPrime To my knowledge, no verse describes the sun staying in the sky due to the raising of hands. That approximate age of the earth is not unreasonable when examined with history and other knowledge. Miracles are not superstitious because they are not inconsistent with reality. Because God is an active God, He has performed wonders quite often.
With that definition, "evolution" may be part of what can be seen today. But molecules-to-man evolution is a false hypothesis, nothing more.
@Vexillographer I was confusing Joshua 10 and Exodus 17. Still, Joshua 10 specifically claims that the Sun stayed in the sky for an extra day, to give the Israelites time to massacre their enemies. That's preposterous. Did the Earth's rotation stop? Nonsense.
There is no possible way for the Earth to be 6,000 years old. Maybe it's closer to 4 billion than 4.5 billion, but even then the measurements are so precise, there's not much of an argument to make.
@TacticusPrime There is an answer to that question, and it is wiser to offer possible explanations than to instantly label it nonsense just because you don't believe in miracles. God may have caused the Earth to stop spinning, or instead caused the heavens to revolve around the Earth for a while, or something unimaginable to us. However it happened, it was notably miraculous (Joshua 10:14).
If God created the world in six days, and the Bible's history is true, that age is perfectly reasonable.
@Vexillographer But there would be evidence for it, if it were true. Why do we have Uranium that shows an age of greater than 4 billion years if the Earth was made 6,000 years ago? You can't just twist the facts to fit a preconceived guess based on the musings of Bronze Age mystics. Being the Bible doesn't make it true. Evidence makes it true.
BTW If the Earth stopped spinning everyone on it would begin moving quickly, and terminally, east. There would be evidence for such an event.
@TacticusPrime Radiocarbon dating cannot work accurately because we cannot observe the original conditions of what is being examined. The Bible is not a guess, but is the authoritative works of the Supreme Lord. It is true because everything from God is true.
We do not know whether the earth stopped spinning or not. We can only guess, but because God's power was involved (and that we are still here) we know that the events in Joshua worked in Israel's favor supernaturally, however it happened.
@TacticusPrime "nothing faulty about evolution," except that is it a fable fabricated by men who prefer to replace the ONLY ONE TRUE GOD, the true story of creation, with making themselves into god and believe a silly story about spontaneous generation of life and spontaneous mutations resulting in different plants and animals that actually survive.
@Evangeline220 Who believes that he is a god? You'd be a lunatic to claim that. Scientists just look at the evidence and created logical frameworks to fit it. We have hundreds of fossil records of our ape ancestors, and DNA evidence of our kinship. We have produced primitive proteins without prior biological components. It's just the theory that best fits the evidence, based on truth, not the ravings of Bronze Age madmen.
@TacticusPrime Exactly, sir. People created explanations without a God, supposing that God has no place in the evidence. Only the Creator can tell the whole story; the creation cannot.
We may look back on the Iron or Bronze Ages claiming how wrong they were, but if this world continues for future millennia, people in the future could make the same comparison to our current times, claiming we were just as wrong. We might be what the future calls the ill-informed "Silicon Age". :)
@Vexillographer Yes, I think people in the future will look back at the widespread adherence to make believe "religions" as a kind of primitive madness. In that way, so many in our community are hardly above those Bronze Age sacrificers of children.
@TacticusPrime It will most likely all be thought of differently in the future, including our understanding of science. New theories (possibly even laws) could replace our ideas of gravity, light, and other fields. But while new knowledge is gained, and fake science continues to change, the one true God will always be the same, no matter how many believers there were, are, or will be. People have loved Him throughout world history; not because of culture or religion, but because of His Word.
@Vexillographer That simply isn't true. If you tried to implement Old Testament law today, then you would rightly be seen as an evil maniac. Stoning girls for not being virgins on their wedding day, making them marry their rapist, selling them into slavery; the Law is a barbaric and reprehensible thing. Not to mention its just weird parts, like rules against fabric blending. Matthew 5:17-20, Jesus says he hasn't come to abolish the Law, so don't think Christians get out of it.
@TacticusPrime People's opinions don't matter. The law was given by God, and all punishments within it are just. In fact, we deserve much worse.
As for Deuteronomy 22:28-29, it states that they must marry if "they are found". The preceding verses more clearly describe the crimes of forced rape (the rapist must be stoned) and adultery (both must be stoned), but the marriage requirement is for different situations.
Christ fulfilled the law; it no longer enslaves us. (Romans 7:6)
@Vexillographer You, sir, are a sociopath. Anyone who thinks that the Law is truly moral is either a lier or a sociopath, and I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume your honesty.
"If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death—the young woman ***because she was in a town and did not scream for help*** THIS IS EVIL, not some kind of perfect standard.
@Vexillographer And the difference between the preceding verses and Deuteronomy 22:28-29 is that the women is pledged to be married in the others. Therefore, she can't be made to marry her rapist.
The Bible made be progressive for 3000 years ago, but that doesn't make less wrong today. It's truly astonishing to see how many people continue to fall victim to its insanity. MEN wrote this book, and MEN have kept it alive. There is no God, or even god.
@TacticusPrime The Old Testament law is mild compared to the torture we all deserve for our sin. The law does not save; our perfect Lord does.
Yes, that appears to be a difference, though in verse 25 it uses the phrase "if the man force her". Verses 28-29 do not; therefore it could very well leave room for situations other that forced rape. Also, even if forced rape is the case, it could certainly be considered better to marry one's rapist than to live on without virginity. (2 Samuel 13:16)
So are you saying that all of those plants were there before the sun and the rest of the stars? How did they photosynthesize? Why were they green?
What did the animals breathe in a reducing atmosphere, or did those plants photosynthesize (in the absence of sunlight for the most part) the carbon dioxide into oxygen in a day or two? Is that the logic behind this? I don't get it.
No, no no, this is all starting to sound a bit fishy to me, I've got to say.
@Nilguiri Yes, there were plants before the sun was created. Their survival was possible because daylight had already been created (Genesis 1:4) on day 1. I hope this helps. :)
But daylight, i.e. electromagnetic radiation in the form of photons, comes from the sun. Without the sun there is no daylight, no plants and obviously no photosynthesis or oxygen.
What was this daylight supposed to come from? As electromagnetic radiation, it must have been radiated from something by definition. From what?
Free Oxygen (O2) comes exclusively from photosynthesis, so the plants made the oxygen without the sun for the animals to breathe, right? What am I missing?
@Nilguiri Assuming that understanding of light is correct, it stil does not necessarily have to come from the sun. The source of the light before day 4 is not specifically explained in the Bible. However, John 1:1-7 describes Jesus Christ as the Light. Because "all things were made by him", the light from the beginning is Genesis 1:1-5 quite possibly radiated from the Son of God. This would also be consistent with Revelation 21:23-24.
No, light doesn't have to come from the sun, (although "daylight" does) but it does have to be radiated by something, e.g. a hot body.
So, you are saying that Jesus hovered near the earth and literally emitted electromagnetic radiation? I thought Jesus didn't arrive until much later.
Carbon dioxide for the plants is not mentioned. That is also essential life on earth. That is where the free oxygen comes from via photosynthesis. It seems an important detail to miss out.
@Nilguiri Assuming your understanding of light/radiation is correct, Jesus could very well have provided this at the beginning of creation. Jesus has always been God, but He arrived here on earth as a man to die in our place about 2000 years ago.
Assuming your understanding of carbon dioxide is correct, it was most likely made available fro the plants on day 3, created sometime between days 1-3. The Bible does not mention it, however, for it is not crucial to our understanding of the message.
Also, if the stars were created in the first few days, how did their light arrive immediately on earth given the finite speed of light? Or did god create those stars up to billions of years before "the beginning" to give their light (also EM radiation... photons) time to arrive at the earth?
e.g. photons emitted from a star which is 10 billion light years away takes 10 billion years to get to our eyes. Light from our 2nd nearest star still takes 4.3 years to get here.
@Nilguiri Assuming your understanding of starlight is correct, it is up to our imaginations to consider how the light from the stars reached the earth so quickly, for the Bible does not specifically describe the process of this. A possible explanation, based on Isaiah 45:12 and other similar passages, is that the stars were spread throughout the universe by being "stretched" out by God's powerful hand, so the light from such bodies would require much less time to reach the earth.
Yes, the universe is being stretched out (expanding), but that does not answer my question "if stars were created in the first few days, how did their light arrive immediately on earth given the finite speed of light?"
Far into the future, light from distant stars will not reach us as they will be receding from us faster than the speed of light and we will be able to see only our own galaxy. We're lucky to be alive now.
@Nilguiri We do not know for sure how the starlight reached earth so quickly; we can only imagine how it happened with possible explanations.
A possible explanation is that the stars were not originally created in their current position far away from earth, but that they were created near the earth and moved away while the heavens were being "stretched out". However, this is only one possibility.
Also, if god created "night and day" without the need for a sun, why did he bother to make a sun if the plants were getting along just fine without it? Why can't we see this light which you say that Jesus emits now if it was literal and not metaphorical. Did he deliberately "snub himself out" after the sun was made, in which case, why did John say Jesus is the light instead of saying he WAS the light for a couple of days until after the sun was created?
@Nilguiri Why would God create the sun if the light was enough? Well, Genesis 1:14 shows that the sun, moon, and stars were intended to serve "for signs, and for seasons, and days, and years". Our understanding of all these is based on the positions of the celestial bodies. A simple light would not have provided such complex accuracy.
I am not saying Jesus emitted physical light; only exploring it as a possibility. Assuming it, however, this light still shines in His truth, salvation, and life.
@Vexillographer You're trying to rationalize your answers to the questions he asked you. If we only need the sun for "signs, seasons, days and years," then why do we depend on it for our survival? If God created light, and then created the sun, then why don't we have light and energy regardless of the sun? And if the sun is just there for marking time, then why do its rays pose a threat when we weaken our atmosphere? Can you rationalize a Biblical explanation for that one?
@instereovideos We depend on God for our survival. The sun doesn't have just one sol purpose (pardon the pun). Another use of the sun is described in Genesis 1:17, "to give light upon the earth". There are also probably many more uses for the sun the Bible doesn't even mention.
There can be too much of a good thing, and that includes sunlight. However, assuming this understanding of solar rays is correct, God provided the ozone layer to protect us on earth, and all through history it's worked.
Are you saying that if you are a "sinner", sun's rays are more harmful?
So, god deliberately made the sun dangerous to be used literally as a weapon against them, but protects people without sin? How does he do that? How can the earth's magnetosphere protect some and not others from harmful radiation?
Or are you saying perhaps that sinners' melanin level is lowered?
@Nilguiri We are all sinners. Because of our disobedience, the entire created universe has been cursed, including the sun's rays. Because of this, sunlight can sometimes become harmful.
God did not intend nature as a weapon, but as a perfect home for His created children. But it has been falling apart for ages since we left Him, which caused problems to arise.
Those who are saved now are still affected by the problems of this world, but they have the promise of a perfect future in heaven.
@AbusiveAntitheist And you obviously aren't a literature major; the Bible is a collection of different kinds of book, and very few parts are metaphorical. :)
i love fantasia. but seriously, is it not obvious that genesis was written with the knowledge of MAN? and not that of a god? everything in genesis is based on the knowledge that MAN had at that time. For example, the moon being a light (we all know now that the moon's light is not its own). And how it says "He also made the stars" as if the were really not that important or spectacular. This is because, to man, the stars were only small specks of light which did no require a detailed explanation
@nuttertools888 God was the only witness at creation; obviously Genesis's information comes from him.
The Bible does not say the moon was a light source, but that it gives light upon the earth (Genesis 1:17), which is true.
The stars are clearly special, since God created them and told about their creation in the Bible. And they are most spectacular; Psalm 19:1 says, "The heavens declare the glory of God."
@Vexillographer Gen 1:16 For God made TWO great lights, the sun and the moon(we also know now that the sun IS a star).
Also in Matthew 25:29 Jesus prophesies "the stars will fall from the sky" and Rev 6:13 also states that the stars will fall to the earth!
Now, is this to be taken literally? back then im sure it was because they didnt realise the magnitude of the stars. Surely jesus knew that stars couldn't literally fall to the earth, so why would the bible say such a thing?
@nuttertools888 The "lights" in Genesis 1 aren't necessarily light sources; the Bible just says they "give light upon the earth", which is true.
That verse doesn't mention stars; you probably mean Mark 13:25. This verse and the one in Revelation are prophecies. Prophecies aren't always literal, but sometimes they are. We won't know exactly what they mean until they are fulfilled.
@Vexillographer oh sorry its Matt 24:29. And yes creating a GREAT LIGHT wouldn't that mean it produces light? if God inspired genesis then why didnt he mention the fact that the moon just REFLECTS light? also God somehow created light before he made the sun, moon and stars. how is this possible?
And if a prophecy is not 'literal' than its not a very good one is it.
How do we know which parts of the bible to be taken literally or as symbolically?
So do u believe that the earth was created in 6 literal days? therefore the earth would only be 6000 years old as well as the universe? how can u explain the fact that we can see light from stars that would take millions of years to get to earth? all evidence biological, geological and astrological all point to an ancient earth and universe. If the bible were truly the word of God it shouldn't need to be interpreted. it should make sense to anyone who reads it, Christian or not.
@nuttertools888 Yes, the Bible says God created the world in six days (Exodus 20:11), and other dates in the Bible give a date of somewhere around 4000 B.C.
The Bible says that God stretches out the heavens (Job 26:7, Isaiah 40:22, Zechariah 12:1). This would explain why we can see the light from so far away.
The truth comes from God. People who reject God can't know his truth, but those who ask God for wisdom can receive it (James 1:5).
so your saying that god made the stars with their light already reaching millions of lightyears? so that when we developed telescopes and try to figure out the age of the universe it would give us an age different to that of the bible?
@nuttertools888 No, that's not how the idea works. If God literally stretched out the stars through the universe starting from somewhere near Earth, the light would take very little time to reach Earth on day four. See 3:00 on this video for how it might have looked.
But remember the Bible doesn't say exactly how; this is just one way it could have happened. There's also a cosmological model that uses the theory of relativity to explain how the light might have reached earth.
@Vexillographer like the bible "knowing" the earth is round by taking a circle and translating it ten times and using metaphors with everything. it seems like if the bible know something, then it knows it, then it it is wrong, it's a metaphor.
@FlyinSpaghettiMnstr7 I didn't even mention the Earth being a sphere, and as far as I know, the Bible doesn't say that at all. Please do not accuse me of making claims I did not make.
@Vexillographer sorry, but most christians do. and either the bible thinks it's flat or you have to think the bible knows it's round. it it says flat, it's wrong.
@FlyinSpaghettiMnstr7 That would be an appeal to majority fallacy; the Bible is the authority, not the people who believe it. As far as I know, the Bible neither says the world is flat nor mentions it as spherical, probably because there's no reason to mention it in books about far more important things.
@adam3251 The Bible's authority is that is it God's word. It is proven by God Himself in the promises it gives, and the rest of the world is consistent with its teaching as well, to add further assurance.
@FlyinSpaghettiMnstr7 the bible doesnt specifically say the world is flat but it does make other retarded claims, in genesis alone it says god created the waters below (the sea) and the waters above (the sky) and that the sky is held up by a firmament like a ceiling. it also says the moon is a light (if the moon is a light then how do they explain the lunar eclipse i witnessed last night?)
@robertwc82 The "waters above" could have many possible meanings; some say they are clouds, others say there was a canopy of ice. The Bible doesn't say specifically.
The Bible says the moon "gives light upon the earth", which is true. "Light" doesn't always mean "light source".
I decided not to put dinosaurs in this video because I wasn't sure that'd be Biblically accurate; that's the same reason there are no clouds.
@Vexillographer "and god made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night" is what the bible says. it doesnt say "the moon gives light upon the earth"
and the fact dinosaurs arnt "biblically accurate" is just another example of the bible's ignorance of reality
@Vexillographer oh, then let me make it clear for you. Dinosaurs are nopt in the bible.
Genesis states that the moon is a light, like the sun, only the lesser of the 2.
("god set them...."? yes? .......in the firmament? oh thats right, there is no firmament, is there? no, only empty space in all directions.)
so are you saying the moon lights the earth? because the moon, as everyone knows does not emit light, yet this is exactly what the bible is claiming. you keep clutching at straws in vein
@Vexillographer Actually behemonth was a hippo or perhaps alligator and leviathan some sort of a snake or fish or something.
You know how hard it is to explain to stupid people what animals are alike when you're telling stories about 'em.
Or perhaps the person in question wrote a sort of a poem and people didn't quite comprehend it was a poem thus they decided that it was a miracle of a sort wich it ofcourse wasn't but the writer of that poem didn't expect people go retarded about it.
@Bastiest The Bible doesn't identify the behemoth or leviathan, actually. It could have been one of those animals, though the description of them in Job makes them seem much more than that.
Job, however, is clearly not a poem, as Job was mentioned alongside other history in Ezekiel 14 and James 5:11.
The sequence of events of creation; that are written in the Bible do not correspond with reality. Earth was not created before the stars. The Bible also doesn't include God's creation of the oceans and skies. It just says God separated ocean from the sky... did they always exist? An interesting myth, but we should stick with science :)
@redcapedjoker Thanks for commenting. Since God was the only one present at creation, only His Word can tell us the true order of events, so we know by the Bible that the earth was indeed made on day 1.
Good question. Genesis 1 calls the sky a "firmament", created on day 2. It separated the waters (most likely created as part of the earth on day 1) into upper and lower divisions. The lower one was called the sea, as it is today.
True science is knowledge, which God's Word is full of. :)
Since as you say "God was the only one present at creation" your argument fails at the starting point because there was no one to witness and therefore the "word" is not really reliable. You can choose to ignore that fact but it will still hold true.
You are making assumptions and not even realizing it. If God was the only one present, then what you have written is not an eyewitness account. I agree that God's word is trustworthy but you must realize that hundreds of religions claim to have God's word. If you can tell me a method of telling which is true apart from just accepting your version (faith) then I will consider.
@D20018200 God is the ultimate author of the Bible, including Genesis. The words of the creation could only be witnessed by Him, the author, making the creation account an eyewitness account.
You may compare the Bible to a letter; we know it is from God because it has His "signature" and "handwriting": it is truthful and powerful.
It does not matter if you consider or not; that is entirely up to you.
His signature and handwriting????? I suppose you don't know that there are more than 40 different authors compiled in the Biblical text, many of whom write a disagree on many details from eachother. Can something be both true and false? I think not but apparently you disagree.
@D20018200 Signature/handwriting was an illustration. Yes, those 40+ authors were inspired by the Holy Spirit so that their writings, even covering different topics, were all consistent as the message from God.
Modern Bible translations don't have "many" conflicting details. If they do, there are only a few, which are only found in genealogies and other insignificant areas due to different texts used. However, the original manuscripts that were inspired by God are fully consistent.
Really!!! Seriously!!!! How about I quote an off hand "insignificant". according to you, quote from John about Jesus. Did Jesus come into the world for judgement? Yes if you read John 9:39, no if you read John 12:47. It's from the same book by the same author for goodness' sake! Is it also a trivial matter???
I am not trying to convert you cos I know nothing anyone can say will change your belief but you can at least be honest and admit the plain truth.
@D20018200 This is not a contradiction, but merely something to be understood. Jesus is the Judge, but He came to earth to save, not to judge. In John 9:39, Jesus does not say He is judging the world, but that He came "for judgment". Jesus was the one being judged in John 9:39, not us.
I am being honest right now; there is nothing for me to "admit" other than that I will not have all the answers for you. However, the knowledge of God is more than enough to see that His Word is perfect and true.
It's always the same. Interpretation is a good excuse. When things are contradicting or wrong, one can easily say - that's not what he meant! Look, I shall leave this argument here because obviously it can do neither of us any benefit. I'd like to know your take on slavery. Slavery is obviously an accepted and clear rules are written in the bible on how it should be practiced, when clearly it's an immoral thing. Would an all knowing, benevolent God not know this?
@D20018200 There are no inappropriate "excuses" to be made. Because the books of the Bible were inspired, those original texts were fully consistent. Otherwise the Bible would be untrustworthy. You are correct in this observation.
I would love to further discuss the topic of slavery, but because it is quite irrelevant to this YouTube video, I'm sorry we'll have to continue via messages or another more appropriate video if you wish to continue.
@robertwc82 In the bible they mention several "Dragons" that appear here and there. Besides the word "Dinosaur wasn't invented till the 19th centuray. PWNAGE!!
@robertwc82 The bible mentions several "dragons" here and there. Besides, back then dinosaures were as small as chickens and even smaller. But after sin came they started to grow. Besides the word dinosaur wasnt invented till the late 19th century.
so there was light before there was the sun? and at the end of the first day there was man and woman, but then in genesis 2 is when Yahweh has to make woman...huh?
@RavenBlaze Yes, the sun came after light was created (Genesis 1:3, 5, 16, 19). Some Christians guess that Jesus was the light, based on John 1:5. And Genesis 2 is a more detailed version of what happened on the sixth day, so the woman in Genesis 1:27 and 2:22 is the same person. I hope this helps. :)
Ok, aside from the whole religious thing about it, This is a great work of art. For something like this to be done in Powerpoint could take hours. I'm a powerpoint master, and I wouldn't even have dared to do something to that extent of movement and such. Awesome job!
One question though, how did you add the glow effect of the sun? Photoshop?
Thanks! :) I used a rectangle with a white-to-black vertical gradient for 0:12 and 1:07. For 0:23, I used the same rectangle, but grouped with black and white rectangles, slightly rotated, with custom animation "fly up". For 2:33, I used a circle with a yellow-to-transparent central gradient. For 2:47, I used a four-pointed star with a white-to-transparent central gradient. For 3:07, I used a circle with a white-to-transparent gradient. I used the preset sunset gradients for 4:00-13.
It's common among creation scientists. If you Google "Cain's Wife", there should be plenty of articles that include the answer to the deformities question. I'd recommend the first two (Answers in Genesis, ICR) if you're interested.
Sorry, I worded that wrong. I meant that the genetic problems that cause these deformities today were not originally present in the first created people, since they and their offspring were created to live forever and produce more offspring.
Incest is mentioned throughout the Bible (Genesis 19:21-36, 20:12, Exodus 6:20, 2 Samuel 13:1, 11, 14), and it would not be surprising if it happened with Adam's children, especially since they were the only people.
Clearly, some of their children survived (though it is not made clear whether they all did). Adam and Eve were created "very good" (Genesis 1:31), so the genetic problems that cause inbreeding might not have been with them, nor their children.
Where did the people come from? They were born. Every person who ever lived was a descendant of Adam and Eve (Genesis 3:20, 1 Corinthians 15:22).
Where did different peoples come from? Most likely, they were a result of the event at Babel where God scattered everyone around the world and changed their languages (Genesis 11:9).
This is not what happened. Science which has given mankind EVERYTHING we have to date including the computer and internet you are using to post this nonsense says otherwise. I trust science a bit more than some 2000 year old book written by primitive man who was afraid of thunderstorms and lightning.
" false histories of earth built from clues and ideas have no practical use"
What contrasting method are you using to determine whether the asserted history is true?
If science is able to change then it is superior to a fixed information system. Any book that wants me to murder my sister for trying to convert me to a strange religion is immoral. Deut Ch 13. Read it.
Science cannot be the authority for anything if it is not constant. Science is not the truth; it is a passionate search for the truth, which sometimes fails.
God hates false gods, and to protect his people in Israel, he gave this command to destroy any people and places where such lies came from. It is not wrong to punish evildoers.
Murdering people who worship other gods is not moral. In fact you dont practice this today, why not? There are billions of people worshipping false gods including me. God commands you to murder me, right?
LOL!!!! this gave me a nice chuckle XD
XDjkwestarX 2 weeks ago
Dude, this is awesome. How did you do this?
safwan1099 3 months ago
@safwan1099 it says in the title *facepalm
SmibsProductions 2 months ago
The Bibles got nothing on the Brothers Grimm, now that's a REAL fairy tale!
horatio50000 4 months ago
Even if God was real I still wouldn't worship him because God and Jesus are evil characters. They make Satan look like a good Samaritan.
Zed1967 5 months ago
@Zed1967 That's quite a claim, considering God sent Jesus to die a death which people deserve, saving us out of love. Not to mention His caring enough to create us in the first place despite our shortcomings.
Vexillographer 4 months ago
@Vexillographer
God, Jesus, Satan are all fictional characters. They are not real you delusional fruit loop.
Zed1967 4 months ago
@Zed1967 That's quite a claim, considering that they interact with billions of people daily, and that God is responsible for the creation of the universe.
Vexillographer 4 months ago
@Vexillographer
You have no evidence what so ever for God, Creation or anything supernatural what so ever. In fact based on the Bible science can prove that God is imaginary. You are suffering from a delusion. Do yourself a favour, accept that God does not exist and start living the only life you will EVER have.
Zed1967 4 months ago
@Zed1967 Life is evidence of his power. Nature is evidence of his glory. Emotion is evidence of his character. Everything is evidence for the Lord.
Name one way science can prove such a claim that God is imaginary.
Please provide an example of this so-called delusion, and a bit of evidence against the afterlife.
Vexillographer 4 months ago
@Vexillographer
It's very simple. There is no evidence what so ever for the existence of God or an afterlife. Life requires a body, so if that body is dead then buried or cremated you cannot have any form of life.
If you believe in God then a belief in unicorns, goblins, pixies, the tooth fairy and Santa Clause are also valid beliefs to you.
Zed1967 4 months ago
@Zed1967 Only physical life requires a body. True life, one's spirit, cannot be seen with the senses. The existence of emotion and thought reveal the spirit that resides in men's bodies while on earth. Where do souls go after their body no longer houses them? There are many cases of near death experiences, which at least show there is something beyond this world.
None of the latter figures are valid, because none have interacted with us; but God interacts with His followers constantly.
Vexillographer 4 months ago
@Vexillographer
If you cannot ''feel'' this spirit or even detect it with instruments how do you know it's there?
Show me empirical evidence that we have ''souls''
NDE's are not evidence of anything and they have been explained by neurologists as to why they happen. Google it.
God doesn't exist so he can't interact with anything, people who say otherwise are delusional and suffering from hallucinations.
Zed1967 4 months ago
@Zed1967 There are many things that are known to be, without using the senses. You can't see people's thoughts, but you know their presence when the thoughts are expressed vocally. You can't see people's feelings, but reactions show that their feelings exist. Likewise, the elements of life that are not seen, but are clearly there, are described here as "spirits" or "souls"; the life of a person.
NDEs are a mystery; no one truly knows.
There are thousands of sane men who have talked with God.
Vexillographer 4 months ago
@Vexillographer
We can detect brain activity (thoughts) using things like an MRI scanner.
''The elements of life'' What do you mean??? Elements like on the periodic table. What?
Our very consciousness is just billions of electrical and chemical signals and we can detect these too.
NDE's are not a mystery, I've already told you. Try Googling the subject.
They may be sane talking to ''God'' but they are delusional.
Zed1967 4 months ago
@Zed1967 MRIs can't read minds; they'e only tools to examine the body.
The parts of people's lives that are invisible.
If all thought and mind are just chemical reactions, how can you trust what you are saying to be truth and reason?
I've read much on the subject; there are numerous opinions and theories on near-death experiences. There is no final consensus among scientists, nor the general public.
That is a very good point, unless God is talking back, and what He's saying proves true.
Vexillographer 4 months ago
@Vexillographer
MRI's can detect brain activity though, the point I am making is that we cannot see thoughts but we can detect them with instruments which brings me onto my other point that is if God was real and all powerful we would be able to detect him with instruments.
The invisible and the non existent look exactly the same.
Truth is not thought dependant, something is either true or it isn't, reason is a product of logic and so something is either reasonable or it isn't.
Zed1967 4 months ago
@Zed1967 The invisible and nonexistent are different: the effects of the former are noticed. (Romans 1:20) Nature reveals God's invisible Creator identity, for an example.
Yes, truth is truth. How can you trust chemical reactions to find truth?
There is often a pattern, but not always. There are theories and hypotheses, but no final truth yet found.
Yes, talking to a "god" doesn't prove a religion. If the faith is any good, its God will reveal Himself instead of being proven by fallible men.
Vexillographer 4 months ago
@Vexillographer
The physical process of thought is just a fact of bio-chemistry, it doesn't necessarily determine thought in a healthy brain.
Have you ever noticed when you have read about NDE's that there is a pattern usually? One of them is the classic ''going into the light'' scenario, you should ask, or find out why this should be so, I have a pretty good idea as my psychology tutor told me about it. There is evidence to suggest chemicals released by the body during an NDE is the cause.
Zed1967 4 months ago
@Vexillographer
People allegedly talking to or hearing from God is more in line with mental illness than anything and this action neither proves the existence of God or what is written in ancient books is to have any basis in truth.
Zed1967 4 months ago
There is a FREE audio Bible online! Google Bible Gateway adds audio NASB bible! There are other versions if you google them as well, such as the KJV, but I enjoy the new American standard version!
free audio bible!! I just found this site today!!!
TheNancySikes 6 months ago
There is a FREE audio Bible online! Google Bible Gateway adds audio NASB bible! There are other versions if you google them as well, such as the KJV, but I enjoy the new american standard version!
free audio bible!! I just found this site today!!!
TheNancySikes 6 months ago
I have to go research "Powerpoint presentation" now. Suddenly it doesn't mean what I thought it meant.
EatMAndSml 8 months ago
Pray for an amputee to be healed. You know that he won't grow new legs. Prayer doesn't work because gods are imaginary.
ndrthrdr1 9 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 We do not command God to heal amputees; we ask Him to. If His will is consistent with our request, our God is mighty enough to do that and even more spectacular things. All other gods have not the tiniest fraction of the Lord's power though.
Vexillographer 9 months ago
@ndrthrdr1 There was a man who was without an, after being prayed for, he grew back a full eye ball in seven days.
Domodeath 7 months ago
So in the beginning, there was music
TheNameIzMatt 9 months ago 10
@TheNameIzMatt Hahaha!! "And God heard that it was good"
cycodevilboy 8 months ago
Well...uh... er... hmmm... the music is nice at least.
bozzutoman 10 months ago
You missed the part where jamming the mass of the Earth together in such a short period of time turns the earth into a sun because the friction of jamming that much mass together in such a short period of time creates so much heat is passes the threshold of fusion. See the video for the mathematic proof.Too bad, so sad.
pontecanis 10 months ago
@pontecanis A) Nowhere in the creation account is "jamming mass" mentioned. B) Our God is awesome.
Vexillographer 10 months ago 2
@Vexillographer~ Creation: The earth had to be formed; it was formed from matter; matter has mass;putting the mass of the Eath together causes friction; friction causes heat; the amount of mass caused so much heat it passed the point of fusion, ergo Earth is a sun, not a planet. What is wrong with this picture? Reality: over several billion years (about 7) matter coalesced to form a ring system with proto planetary masses; 5 bya, Earth formed into a molten ball; over the next billion yrs, it...
pontecanis 10 months ago
@pontecanis The entire Bible is correct, including the description of creation. Yes, the earth was formed, but the Good Book does not say it was created from matter. Because our God is awesome (included in that is all-powerful), He can do anything He wants however He wants. Even if all that goo goo ga ga is correct, God could have made exceptions for the universe's origins with no trouble at all, for He is the everlasting Supreme Ruler.
Vexillographer 10 months ago
@Vexillographer ~Sorry...see the Perodic Table of the Elements: these are the only known forms of matter here on Earth ( and some hypothesized as the atomic weights have not been filled). This is what the Earth was made from, as there isn't anything else. The Bible doesn't mention matter because the concept wasn't known, just as it says nothing about carrs, aircraft, and modern medicine. Big deal. Religionists like to argue god is outside of time and space. EVERYTHING within the universe IS...
pontecanis 10 months ago
@pontecanis God is eternal, and this universe is not. He created the universe, but exactly how He did we are not certain of. Whether it was made of something or nothing, we can surely trust the Bible to be without error. Man's ideas that are claimed to be "science" or "fact" can always have flaws, which is often the case. God's word, however, endures forever, and must be trusted far above man's best guesses.
Vexillographer 10 months ago
@Vexillographer Deuteronomy 13:6-9. How many 'non-believer's' have you stoned to death? According to YHWH you should be doing this. Are you aware that all children are born 'non-believer's' in your made up deity? (Santa too) Sounds like your magic sky daddy is a prick to me.
jerkification 9 months ago
@jerkification Actually, that law covers the punishment if family or a close friend of Israel secretly entices one to follow a false god. It doesn't say to stone all unbelievers we come across. Also, the situation back then was different from today. Verse 11 shows that God had the nation of Israel in mind, but this wasn't a command for the entire world for all time in all situations.
Our God is the true creator, not made-up. God has made Jesus available for all, for which we should be grateful.
Vexillographer 9 months ago
@Vexillographer Please help me understand how you can surely trust that the bible is without error when so many flawed humans have removed portions that did not suit their political interests, when it has been interpreted differently by so many cultures. Do you not believe it is possible to live a responsible, compassionate life, dedicated to benefitting all beings if there is no imnipotent creator?
dalvara68 8 months ago
@dalvara68 The Old Testament was preserved very well, and the New Testament compiled and copied very carefully and prolifically. The men collecting the 66 books were believers interested in God's truth, not simple politics. Interpretation must come from God, not opinion, fitting with all the Bible, not parts, to be correct.
In the world's eyes, it's very possible. However, people are not in charge of the universe (thank goodness!): God is the boss, which works better since He's perfect.
Vexillographer 4 months ago
@Vexillographer You do know that there over 350,000 differences between the various manuscripts of the Bible?
adam3251 4 months ago
@adam3251 Sounds about right, considering how many different kinds of manuscripts have been made. However, by using only the consistent manuscripts such as the Textus Receptus, and leaving out some of the inconsistent ones like the Septuagint, the Biblical text is extremely more reliable through a process of elimination with certain texts.
Vexillographer 4 months ago
hmm.
The first scriptures were revealed to man, by god, in 1513 BC..
Lets do some maths!!
First we have to add 6000 to 1513, which is 7513 BC.
Then we have to account for the time since christ was born, which is 2011 years.
The final result gives you 7513 BC.
The maths say that the earth should be closer to 9524 yrs old.
But I could be wrong.
gastrolBTR 10 months ago
@gastrolBTR Well, we don't know for sure the exact age of the earth, but the 6,000-year estimate comes from mainly the genealogies of the Bible along with other historical data of the later events it describes.
Just curious, by the way: why did you add 6,000 to 1513 BC? It's been approximately 6,000 years from creation to the present day, not from creation to the first Scriptures (though we don't know for sure of course). Interesting comment, thanks! :)
Vexillographer 10 months ago
@Vexillographer
Well, I did that computation becaus if the earth was made in 4000 BC, at the time of First Scripture (I got that from an answer website from google search) a earth made 6000 years ago would make not-much sense...
gastrolBTR 10 months ago
@gastrolBTR Oh okay, thanks. Using ~1500 BC as the first Scripture date, and ~4000 BC as the creation date, the world would be around 2,500 years old at the time of the first Scripture. Why wouldn't that make sense? (Not trying to debate, just trying to learn more about your suggestion. :)
Vexillographer 10 months ago
@Vexillographer
Because then the Scripture would be-excuse me for the word- wrong if it said 6000 years when it was actually 2500 years old...
gastrolBTR 10 months ago
@gastrolBTR Oh I see. Well the Bible does not give a date of 6000 years anywhere (unless there is a verse I'm unaware of?); that estimate was calculated from historical information that the Bible provides such as genealogies, kings' reigns, and other events which we use to date creation around 4000 BC. So when we refer to "approximately 6000 years ago" for creation, we mean from the present day.
Vexillographer 10 months ago
@Vexillographer Also, an extra note- I believe in an old earth. Just throwing some logic at the 4000 BC date.
gastrolBTR 10 months ago
cool ! this video is very nice !
ncalzone 10 months ago
this is beautiful!
MegaCool3000 1 year ago
What's more likely? That the interpretation of the world that has given us electricity, lights, cars, vaccines, artificial insulin, airplanes, and landed us on the moon is correct? Or that the truth lies with Iron Age mythology and we just haven't bent the facts to fit the story enough?
I treat people who believe Yahweh is real the same way I'd treat someone who believed Zeus was real. Nod politely until the crazy person walks away.
TacticusPrime 1 year ago
@TacticusPrime Technology, the result of actual knowledge, has led to those inventions. But faulty science leads only to a lack of knowledge.
God is beyond man-made religion in that His power has been made known to everyone, and that He clearly communicates with us in multiple ways. Refusing all the evidence as crazy is ignorant and dangerous. (2 Peter 3:5)
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer Technology arose because people rejected superstitious explanations for things and sought out the real truth. What is lightning, and why does it strike some buildings and not others? What are things really made off? How do birds fly? What is our place in the universe? Why do the planets move the way they do?
There's nothing faulty about Evolution. It's an observable and testable fact that its occurring, and there's no reason to think it hasn't occurred in the past.
TacticusPrime 1 year ago
@TacticusPrime While many superstitions may indeed contradict some knowledge, the Bible does not in any way, nor is it superstitious. It gives us the most valuable information of all.
Natural selection occurs today. But that is different from evolution, which is only a false hypothesis.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer That simply isn't true. The Bible suggest someone held up his hands and the sun stayed up in the sky, that the world is only 6,000 years old, that a god spoke out of a burning bush, that some possessed miraculous powers of healing, etc., which are all manifestly superstitious fact claims.
Natural selection is only different from evolution in so far as evolution is the combination of natural, artificial, and sexual selection over time. Evolution is an observed phenomenon.
TacticusPrime 1 year ago
@TacticusPrime To my knowledge, no verse describes the sun staying in the sky due to the raising of hands. That approximate age of the earth is not unreasonable when examined with history and other knowledge. Miracles are not superstitious because they are not inconsistent with reality. Because God is an active God, He has performed wonders quite often.
With that definition, "evolution" may be part of what can be seen today. But molecules-to-man evolution is a false hypothesis, nothing more.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer I was confusing Joshua 10 and Exodus 17. Still, Joshua 10 specifically claims that the Sun stayed in the sky for an extra day, to give the Israelites time to massacre their enemies. That's preposterous. Did the Earth's rotation stop? Nonsense.
There is no possible way for the Earth to be 6,000 years old. Maybe it's closer to 4 billion than 4.5 billion, but even then the measurements are so precise, there's not much of an argument to make.
Supernatural = superstition
TacticusPrime 1 year ago
@TacticusPrime There is an answer to that question, and it is wiser to offer possible explanations than to instantly label it nonsense just because you don't believe in miracles. God may have caused the Earth to stop spinning, or instead caused the heavens to revolve around the Earth for a while, or something unimaginable to us. However it happened, it was notably miraculous (Joshua 10:14).
If God created the world in six days, and the Bible's history is true, that age is perfectly reasonable.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer But there would be evidence for it, if it were true. Why do we have Uranium that shows an age of greater than 4 billion years if the Earth was made 6,000 years ago? You can't just twist the facts to fit a preconceived guess based on the musings of Bronze Age mystics. Being the Bible doesn't make it true. Evidence makes it true.
BTW If the Earth stopped spinning everyone on it would begin moving quickly, and terminally, east. There would be evidence for such an event.
TacticusPrime 1 year ago
@TacticusPrime Radiocarbon dating cannot work accurately because we cannot observe the original conditions of what is being examined. The Bible is not a guess, but is the authoritative works of the Supreme Lord. It is true because everything from God is true.
We do not know whether the earth stopped spinning or not. We can only guess, but because God's power was involved (and that we are still here) we know that the events in Joshua worked in Israel's favor supernaturally, however it happened.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@TacticusPrime "nothing faulty about evolution," except that is it a fable fabricated by men who prefer to replace the ONLY ONE TRUE GOD, the true story of creation, with making themselves into god and believe a silly story about spontaneous generation of life and spontaneous mutations resulting in different plants and animals that actually survive.
Evangeline220 1 year ago
@Evangeline220 Who believes that he is a god? You'd be a lunatic to claim that. Scientists just look at the evidence and created logical frameworks to fit it. We have hundreds of fossil records of our ape ancestors, and DNA evidence of our kinship. We have produced primitive proteins without prior biological components. It's just the theory that best fits the evidence, based on truth, not the ravings of Bronze Age madmen.
TacticusPrime 1 year ago
@TacticusPrime Exactly, sir. People created explanations without a God, supposing that God has no place in the evidence. Only the Creator can tell the whole story; the creation cannot.
We may look back on the Iron or Bronze Ages claiming how wrong they were, but if this world continues for future millennia, people in the future could make the same comparison to our current times, claiming we were just as wrong. We might be what the future calls the ill-informed "Silicon Age". :)
Vexillographer 11 months ago
@Vexillographer Yes, I think people in the future will look back at the widespread adherence to make believe "religions" as a kind of primitive madness. In that way, so many in our community are hardly above those Bronze Age sacrificers of children.
TacticusPrime 11 months ago
@TacticusPrime It will most likely all be thought of differently in the future, including our understanding of science. New theories (possibly even laws) could replace our ideas of gravity, light, and other fields. But while new knowledge is gained, and fake science continues to change, the one true God will always be the same, no matter how many believers there were, are, or will be. People have loved Him throughout world history; not because of culture or religion, but because of His Word.
Vexillographer 11 months ago
@Vexillographer That simply isn't true. If you tried to implement Old Testament law today, then you would rightly be seen as an evil maniac. Stoning girls for not being virgins on their wedding day, making them marry their rapist, selling them into slavery; the Law is a barbaric and reprehensible thing. Not to mention its just weird parts, like rules against fabric blending. Matthew 5:17-20, Jesus says he hasn't come to abolish the Law, so don't think Christians get out of it.
TacticusPrime 11 months ago
@TacticusPrime People's opinions don't matter. The law was given by God, and all punishments within it are just. In fact, we deserve much worse.
As for Deuteronomy 22:28-29, it states that they must marry if "they are found". The preceding verses more clearly describe the crimes of forced rape (the rapist must be stoned) and adultery (both must be stoned), but the marriage requirement is for different situations.
Christ fulfilled the law; it no longer enslaves us. (Romans 7:6)
Vexillographer 11 months ago
@Vexillographer You, sir, are a sociopath. Anyone who thinks that the Law is truly moral is either a lier or a sociopath, and I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume your honesty.
"If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death—the young woman ***because she was in a town and did not scream for help*** THIS IS EVIL, not some kind of perfect standard.
TacticusPrime 11 months ago
@Vexillographer And the difference between the preceding verses and Deuteronomy 22:28-29 is that the women is pledged to be married in the others. Therefore, she can't be made to marry her rapist.
The Bible made be progressive for 3000 years ago, but that doesn't make less wrong today. It's truly astonishing to see how many people continue to fall victim to its insanity. MEN wrote this book, and MEN have kept it alive. There is no God, or even god.
TacticusPrime 11 months ago
@TacticusPrime The Old Testament law is mild compared to the torture we all deserve for our sin. The law does not save; our perfect Lord does.
Yes, that appears to be a difference, though in verse 25 it uses the phrase "if the man force her". Verses 28-29 do not; therefore it could very well leave room for situations other that forced rape. Also, even if forced rape is the case, it could certainly be considered better to marry one's rapist than to live on without virginity. (2 Samuel 13:16)
Vexillographer 11 months ago
@Evangeline220 ITS NOT SPONTANEOUS! ffs..read up on the subject bfore you start japping bout it!
MasterOfFlash92 1 year ago
even if i'm not religious, it' s really well done!
axiabetty 1 year ago
Hiya. Is there any chance I could download a copy of this lovely powerpoint for use in my school assembly (I am a teacher)?
I would love it if possible.
Thanks
Helen
topomostro 1 year ago
So are you saying that all of those plants were there before the sun and the rest of the stars? How did they photosynthesize? Why were they green?
What did the animals breathe in a reducing atmosphere, or did those plants photosynthesize (in the absence of sunlight for the most part) the carbon dioxide into oxygen in a day or two? Is that the logic behind this? I don't get it.
No, no no, this is all starting to sound a bit fishy to me, I've got to say.
Nilguiri 1 year ago
@Nilguiri Yes, there were plants before the sun was created. Their survival was possible because daylight had already been created (Genesis 1:4) on day 1. I hope this helps. :)
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer
But daylight, i.e. electromagnetic radiation in the form of photons, comes from the sun. Without the sun there is no daylight, no plants and obviously no photosynthesis or oxygen.
What was this daylight supposed to come from? As electromagnetic radiation, it must have been radiated from something by definition. From what?
Free Oxygen (O2) comes exclusively from photosynthesis, so the plants made the oxygen without the sun for the animals to breathe, right? What am I missing?
Nilguiri 1 year ago
@Nilguiri Assuming that understanding of light is correct, it stil does not necessarily have to come from the sun. The source of the light before day 4 is not specifically explained in the Bible. However, John 1:1-7 describes Jesus Christ as the Light. Because "all things were made by him", the light from the beginning is Genesis 1:1-5 quite possibly radiated from the Son of God. This would also be consistent with Revelation 21:23-24.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer
No, light doesn't have to come from the sun, (although "daylight" does) but it does have to be radiated by something, e.g. a hot body.
So, you are saying that Jesus hovered near the earth and literally emitted electromagnetic radiation? I thought Jesus didn't arrive until much later.
Carbon dioxide for the plants is not mentioned. That is also essential life on earth. That is where the free oxygen comes from via photosynthesis. It seems an important detail to miss out.
Nilguiri 1 year ago
@Nilguiri Assuming your understanding of light/radiation is correct, Jesus could very well have provided this at the beginning of creation. Jesus has always been God, but He arrived here on earth as a man to die in our place about 2000 years ago.
Assuming your understanding of carbon dioxide is correct, it was most likely made available fro the plants on day 3, created sometime between days 1-3. The Bible does not mention it, however, for it is not crucial to our understanding of the message.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer
Also, if the stars were created in the first few days, how did their light arrive immediately on earth given the finite speed of light? Or did god create those stars up to billions of years before "the beginning" to give their light (also EM radiation... photons) time to arrive at the earth?
e.g. photons emitted from a star which is 10 billion light years away takes 10 billion years to get to our eyes. Light from our 2nd nearest star still takes 4.3 years to get here.
Nilguiri 1 year ago
@Nilguiri Assuming your understanding of starlight is correct, it is up to our imaginations to consider how the light from the stars reached the earth so quickly, for the Bible does not specifically describe the process of this. A possible explanation, based on Isaiah 45:12 and other similar passages, is that the stars were spread throughout the universe by being "stretched" out by God's powerful hand, so the light from such bodies would require much less time to reach the earth.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer
It's up to our imaginations? What do you mean?
Yes, the universe is being stretched out (expanding), but that does not answer my question "if stars were created in the first few days, how did their light arrive immediately on earth given the finite speed of light?"
Far into the future, light from distant stars will not reach us as they will be receding from us faster than the speed of light and we will be able to see only our own galaxy. We're lucky to be alive now.
Nilguiri 1 year ago
@Nilguiri We do not know for sure how the starlight reached earth so quickly; we can only imagine how it happened with possible explanations.
A possible explanation is that the stars were not originally created in their current position far away from earth, but that they were created near the earth and moved away while the heavens were being "stretched out". However, this is only one possibility.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer
Also, if god created "night and day" without the need for a sun, why did he bother to make a sun if the plants were getting along just fine without it? Why can't we see this light which you say that Jesus emits now if it was literal and not metaphorical. Did he deliberately "snub himself out" after the sun was made, in which case, why did John say Jesus is the light instead of saying he WAS the light for a couple of days until after the sun was created?
Nilguiri 1 year ago
@Nilguiri Why would God create the sun if the light was enough? Well, Genesis 1:14 shows that the sun, moon, and stars were intended to serve "for signs, and for seasons, and days, and years". Our understanding of all these is based on the positions of the celestial bodies. A simple light would not have provided such complex accuracy.
I am not saying Jesus emitted physical light; only exploring it as a possibility. Assuming it, however, this light still shines in His truth, salvation, and life.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer You're trying to rationalize your answers to the questions he asked you. If we only need the sun for "signs, seasons, days and years," then why do we depend on it for our survival? If God created light, and then created the sun, then why don't we have light and energy regardless of the sun? And if the sun is just there for marking time, then why do its rays pose a threat when we weaken our atmosphere? Can you rationalize a Biblical explanation for that one?
instereovideos 1 year ago
@instereovideos We depend on God for our survival. The sun doesn't have just one sol purpose (pardon the pun). Another use of the sun is described in Genesis 1:17, "to give light upon the earth". There are also probably many more uses for the sun the Bible doesn't even mention.
There can be too much of a good thing, and that includes sunlight. However, assuming this understanding of solar rays is correct, God provided the ozone layer to protect us on earth, and all through history it's worked.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer Which begs the question, why would Yahweh make solar rays harmful at all?
henryyydarkkk 1 year ago
@henryyydarkkk Solar rays aren't entirely harmful; only when used improperly. Because of sin, even God's creation can become harmful in many ways.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer
Are you saying that if you are a "sinner", sun's rays are more harmful?
So, god deliberately made the sun dangerous to be used literally as a weapon against them, but protects people without sin? How does he do that? How can the earth's magnetosphere protect some and not others from harmful radiation?
Or are you saying perhaps that sinners' melanin level is lowered?
Please explain.
Nilguiri 1 year ago
@Nilguiri We are all sinners. Because of our disobedience, the entire created universe has been cursed, including the sun's rays. Because of this, sunlight can sometimes become harmful.
God did not intend nature as a weapon, but as a perfect home for His created children. But it has been falling apart for ages since we left Him, which caused problems to arise.
Those who are saved now are still affected by the problems of this world, but they have the promise of a perfect future in heaven.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
you obviously arnt a poetry major! the bible is a metaphor! :p
AbusiveAntitheist 1 year ago
@AbusiveAntitheist And you obviously aren't a literature major; the Bible is a collection of different kinds of book, and very few parts are metaphorical. :)
Vexillographer 1 year ago
at first god says "it will be light!" and chuck norris answered "say please!"
freshd194 1 year ago
AH...yes, beethoven's 6th symphony fits well with this.
SophiaVonHelgastein 1 year ago
i love fantasia. but seriously, is it not obvious that genesis was written with the knowledge of MAN? and not that of a god? everything in genesis is based on the knowledge that MAN had at that time. For example, the moon being a light (we all know now that the moon's light is not its own). And how it says "He also made the stars" as if the were really not that important or spectacular. This is because, to man, the stars were only small specks of light which did no require a detailed explanation
nuttertools888 1 year ago
@nuttertools888 God was the only witness at creation; obviously Genesis's information comes from him.
The Bible does not say the moon was a light source, but that it gives light upon the earth (Genesis 1:17), which is true.
The stars are clearly special, since God created them and told about their creation in the Bible. And they are most spectacular; Psalm 19:1 says, "The heavens declare the glory of God."
I hope this helps. :)
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer Gen 1:16 For God made TWO great lights, the sun and the moon(we also know now that the sun IS a star).
Also in Matthew 25:29 Jesus prophesies "the stars will fall from the sky" and Rev 6:13 also states that the stars will fall to the earth!
Now, is this to be taken literally? back then im sure it was because they didnt realise the magnitude of the stars. Surely jesus knew that stars couldn't literally fall to the earth, so why would the bible say such a thing?
because its bs
nuttertools888 1 year ago
@nuttertools888 The "lights" in Genesis 1 aren't necessarily light sources; the Bible just says they "give light upon the earth", which is true.
That verse doesn't mention stars; you probably mean Mark 13:25. This verse and the one in Revelation are prophecies. Prophecies aren't always literal, but sometimes they are. We won't know exactly what they mean until they are fulfilled.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer oh sorry its Matt 24:29. And yes creating a GREAT LIGHT wouldn't that mean it produces light? if God inspired genesis then why didnt he mention the fact that the moon just REFLECTS light? also God somehow created light before he made the sun, moon and stars. how is this possible?
And if a prophecy is not 'literal' than its not a very good one is it.
How do we know which parts of the bible to be taken literally or as symbolically?
What about adam and eve?was that just symbolic?
nuttertools888 1 year ago
@nuttertools888 No, it doesn't have to produce light; that would be desperate.
God could describe sunlight reflection, but Genesis is a more important story.
With God all things are possible, including light. Some people think Christ provided the light, based on John 1.
Prophecies don't need to be literal. Many true dreams and visions had to be interpreted.
We read the Bible to find out, but when we don't know, we pray for understanding.
They were real; Genesis is a literal history book.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer
So do u believe that the earth was created in 6 literal days? therefore the earth would only be 6000 years old as well as the universe? how can u explain the fact that we can see light from stars that would take millions of years to get to earth? all evidence biological, geological and astrological all point to an ancient earth and universe. If the bible were truly the word of God it shouldn't need to be interpreted. it should make sense to anyone who reads it, Christian or not.
nuttertools888 1 year ago
@nuttertools888 Yes, the Bible says God created the world in six days (Exodus 20:11), and other dates in the Bible give a date of somewhere around 4000 B.C.
The Bible says that God stretches out the heavens (Job 26:7, Isaiah 40:22, Zechariah 12:1). This would explain why we can see the light from so far away.
The truth comes from God. People who reject God can't know his truth, but those who ask God for wisdom can receive it (James 1:5).
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer
so your saying that god made the stars with their light already reaching millions of lightyears? so that when we developed telescopes and try to figure out the age of the universe it would give us an age different to that of the bible?
thats pretty deceiving dont u agree
nuttertools888 1 year ago
@nuttertools888 No, that's not how the idea works. If God literally stretched out the stars through the universe starting from somewhere near Earth, the light would take very little time to reach Earth on day four. See 3:00 on this video for how it might have looked.
But remember the Bible doesn't say exactly how; this is just one way it could have happened. There's also a cosmological model that uses the theory of relativity to explain how the light might have reached earth.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer oh, come on. you christian really reach out there to try and make things makes sense.
FlyinSpaghettiMnstr7 1 year ago
@FlyinSpaghettiMnstr7 That's my job. :) If there's something you still don't understand, I'd be happy to help.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer no, i like things that make sense without twisted things around a million times.
FlyinSpaghettiMnstr7 1 year ago
@FlyinSpaghettiMnstr7 What such "twisted things" of mine are you referring to?
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer like the bible "knowing" the earth is round by taking a circle and translating it ten times and using metaphors with everything. it seems like if the bible know something, then it knows it, then it it is wrong, it's a metaphor.
FlyinSpaghettiMnstr7 1 year ago
@FlyinSpaghettiMnstr7 I didn't even mention the Earth being a sphere, and as far as I know, the Bible doesn't say that at all. Please do not accuse me of making claims I did not make.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer sorry, but most christians do. and either the bible thinks it's flat or you have to think the bible knows it's round. it it says flat, it's wrong.
FlyinSpaghettiMnstr7 1 year ago
@FlyinSpaghettiMnstr7 That would be an appeal to majority fallacy; the Bible is the authority, not the people who believe it. As far as I know, the Bible neither says the world is flat nor mentions it as spherical, probably because there's no reason to mention it in books about far more important things.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer Why is the Bible the authority? Because it says so? How can you prove the bible with the bible?
adam3251 1 year ago
@adam3251 The Bible's authority is that is it God's word. It is proven by God Himself in the promises it gives, and the rest of the world is consistent with its teaching as well, to add further assurance.
Vexillographer 4 months ago
@Vexillographer Thats what they say about the Torah, and the Koran, and the Book of Mormon and the Vedas and the Upanishads, and the....
adam3251 4 months ago
@adam3251 The Torah is included in God's word. All those others contradict it.
Vexillographer 4 months ago
@FlyinSpaghettiMnstr7 the bible doesnt specifically say the world is flat but it does make other retarded claims, in genesis alone it says god created the waters below (the sea) and the waters above (the sky) and that the sky is held up by a firmament like a ceiling. it also says the moon is a light (if the moon is a light then how do they explain the lunar eclipse i witnessed last night?)
also, where are the dinosaurs in this animation?
robertwc82 1 year ago
@robertwc82 The "waters above" could have many possible meanings; some say they are clouds, others say there was a canopy of ice. The Bible doesn't say specifically.
The Bible says the moon "gives light upon the earth", which is true. "Light" doesn't always mean "light source".
I decided not to put dinosaurs in this video because I wasn't sure that'd be Biblically accurate; that's the same reason there are no clouds.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer "and god made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night" is what the bible says. it doesnt say "the moon gives light upon the earth"
and the fact dinosaurs arnt "biblically accurate" is just another example of the bible's ignorance of reality
robertwc82 1 year ago
@robertwc82 Actually it does say that. "God set them... to give light upon the earth." (Genesis 1:17)
I did not say dinosaurs weren't biblically accurate; I just said I was not sure whether they were or weren't.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer oh, then let me make it clear for you. Dinosaurs are nopt in the bible.
Genesis states that the moon is a light, like the sun, only the lesser of the 2.
("god set them...."? yes? .......in the firmament? oh thats right, there is no firmament, is there? no, only empty space in all directions.)
so are you saying the moon lights the earth? because the moon, as everyone knows does not emit light, yet this is exactly what the bible is claiming. you keep clutching at straws in vein
robertwc82 1 year ago
@robertwc82 Some believe the behemoth of Job 40 was a type of dinosaur, along with the leviathan of Job 41.
A "light" does does have to emit light; it simply provides light, even if it's by reflection. The Bible does not say the moon emits light at all.
"Firmament" means an expanse, which is exactly where the moon is.
Sticking to false assumptions like yours is simply a desperate attempt to find errors in the most truthful book ever written.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer Actually behemonth was a hippo or perhaps alligator and leviathan some sort of a snake or fish or something.
You know how hard it is to explain to stupid people what animals are alike when you're telling stories about 'em.
Or perhaps the person in question wrote a sort of a poem and people didn't quite comprehend it was a poem thus they decided that it was a miracle of a sort wich it ofcourse wasn't but the writer of that poem didn't expect people go retarded about it.
Bastiest 1 year ago
@Bastiest The Bible doesn't identify the behemoth or leviathan, actually. It could have been one of those animals, though the description of them in Job makes them seem much more than that.
Job, however, is clearly not a poem, as Job was mentioned alongside other history in Ezekiel 14 and James 5:11.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
The sequence of events of creation; that are written in the Bible do not correspond with reality. Earth was not created before the stars. The Bible also doesn't include God's creation of the oceans and skies. It just says God separated ocean from the sky... did they always exist? An interesting myth, but we should stick with science :)
redcapedjoker 1 year ago
@redcapedjoker Thanks for commenting. Since God was the only one present at creation, only His Word can tell us the true order of events, so we know by the Bible that the earth was indeed made on day 1.
Good question. Genesis 1 calls the sky a "firmament", created on day 2. It separated the waters (most likely created as part of the earth on day 1) into upper and lower divisions. The lower one was called the sea, as it is today.
True science is knowledge, which God's Word is full of. :)
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer
Since as you say "God was the only one present at creation" your argument fails at the starting point because there was no one to witness and therefore the "word" is not really reliable. You can choose to ignore that fact but it will still hold true.
D20018200 1 year ago
@D20018200 God counts as someone. :) And because He was the only witness, His Word is the only trustworthy and accurate description of our origins.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer
You are making assumptions and not even realizing it. If God was the only one present, then what you have written is not an eyewitness account. I agree that God's word is trustworthy but you must realize that hundreds of religions claim to have God's word. If you can tell me a method of telling which is true apart from just accepting your version (faith) then I will consider.
D20018200 1 year ago
@D20018200 God is the ultimate author of the Bible, including Genesis. The words of the creation could only be witnessed by Him, the author, making the creation account an eyewitness account.
You may compare the Bible to a letter; we know it is from God because it has His "signature" and "handwriting": it is truthful and powerful.
It does not matter if you consider or not; that is entirely up to you.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer
His signature and handwriting????? I suppose you don't know that there are more than 40 different authors compiled in the Biblical text, many of whom write a disagree on many details from eachother. Can something be both true and false? I think not but apparently you disagree.
D20018200 1 year ago
@D20018200 Signature/handwriting was an illustration. Yes, those 40+ authors were inspired by the Holy Spirit so that their writings, even covering different topics, were all consistent as the message from God.
Modern Bible translations don't have "many" conflicting details. If they do, there are only a few, which are only found in genealogies and other insignificant areas due to different texts used. However, the original manuscripts that were inspired by God are fully consistent.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer
Really!!! Seriously!!!! How about I quote an off hand "insignificant". according to you, quote from John about Jesus. Did Jesus come into the world for judgement? Yes if you read John 9:39, no if you read John 12:47. It's from the same book by the same author for goodness' sake! Is it also a trivial matter???
I am not trying to convert you cos I know nothing anyone can say will change your belief but you can at least be honest and admit the plain truth.
D20018200 1 year ago
@D20018200 This is not a contradiction, but merely something to be understood. Jesus is the Judge, but He came to earth to save, not to judge. In John 9:39, Jesus does not say He is judging the world, but that He came "for judgment". Jesus was the one being judged in John 9:39, not us.
I am being honest right now; there is nothing for me to "admit" other than that I will not have all the answers for you. However, the knowledge of God is more than enough to see that His Word is perfect and true.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@Vexillographer
It's always the same. Interpretation is a good excuse. When things are contradicting or wrong, one can easily say - that's not what he meant! Look, I shall leave this argument here because obviously it can do neither of us any benefit. I'd like to know your take on slavery. Slavery is obviously an accepted and clear rules are written in the bible on how it should be practiced, when clearly it's an immoral thing. Would an all knowing, benevolent God not know this?
D20018200 1 year ago
@D20018200 There are no inappropriate "excuses" to be made. Because the books of the Bible were inspired, those original texts were fully consistent. Otherwise the Bible would be untrustworthy. You are correct in this observation.
I would love to further discuss the topic of slavery, but because it is quite irrelevant to this YouTube video, I'm sorry we'll have to continue via messages or another more appropriate video if you wish to continue.
Vexillographer 1 year ago
@robertwc82 In the bible they mention several "Dragons" that appear here and there. Besides the word "Dinosaur wasn't invented till the 19th centuray. PWNAGE!!
dude33ism 1 year ago
@robertwc82 The bible mentions several "dragons" here and there. Besides, back then dinosaures were as small as chickens and even smaller. But after sin came they started to grow. Besides the word dinosaur wasnt invented till the late 19th century.
dude33ism 1 year ago
Loved it....used it for my sons bible study...very good for younger children!
mrsbritneywhite 1 year ago 2
good job
Carlocap11 1 year ago
so there was light before there was the sun? and at the end of the first day there was man and woman, but then in genesis 2 is when Yahweh has to make woman...huh?
RavenBlaze 1 year ago
@RavenBlaze Yes, the sun came after light was created (Genesis 1:3, 5, 16, 19). Some Christians guess that Jesus was the light, based on John 1:5. And Genesis 2 is a more detailed version of what happened on the sixth day, so the woman in Genesis 1:27 and 2:22 is the same person. I hope this helps. :)
Vexillographer 1 year ago
can i get this powerpoint really creative
MrPchelp21 1 year ago
AMAZING and BRILLIANT there's not many words that tell you how great that slide show was.. I want to be as good as you your my IDOL!!
finstar24 1 year ago
if you used adobe flash it would be alot easier
thinktothemax 1 year ago
i loved the copmposition of the slides and the shots
ceciliapotenza 1 year ago
You seriously need to finish high school.
No where does the Bible say that Eve had only boys.
Sex between siblings is possible and common.
The children of such couplings are not doomed to early death.
Good grief, that's how many animals are bred commercially!
Imaginefree69 1 year ago
..........and the dim lighting effect?
Diablocazador 2 years ago
I used semi-transparent rectangles, colored dark blue-violet.
Vexillographer 2 years ago
Ok, aside from the whole religious thing about it, This is a great work of art. For something like this to be done in Powerpoint could take hours. I'm a powerpoint master, and I wouldn't even have dared to do something to that extent of movement and such. Awesome job!
One question though, how did you add the glow effect of the sun? Photoshop?
Diablocazador 2 years ago
Thanks! :) I used a rectangle with a white-to-black vertical gradient for 0:12 and 1:07. For 0:23, I used the same rectangle, but grouped with black and white rectangles, slightly rotated, with custom animation "fly up". For 2:33, I used a circle with a yellow-to-transparent central gradient. For 2:47, I used a four-pointed star with a white-to-transparent central gradient. For 3:07, I used a circle with a white-to-transparent gradient. I used the preset sunset gradients for 4:00-13.
Vexillographer 2 years ago
It's common among creation scientists. If you Google "Cain's Wife", there should be plenty of articles that include the answer to the deformities question. I'd recommend the first two (Answers in Genesis, ICR) if you're interested.
Vexillographer 2 years ago
Sorry, I worded that wrong. I meant that the genetic problems that cause these deformities today were not originally present in the first created people, since they and their offspring were created to live forever and produce more offspring.
Vexillographer 2 years ago
Adam also had daughters. (Genesis 5:4)
Incest is mentioned throughout the Bible (Genesis 19:21-36, 20:12, Exodus 6:20, 2 Samuel 13:1, 11, 14), and it would not be surprising if it happened with Adam's children, especially since they were the only people.
Clearly, some of their children survived (though it is not made clear whether they all did). Adam and Eve were created "very good" (Genesis 1:31), so the genetic problems that cause inbreeding might not have been with them, nor their children.
Vexillographer 2 years ago
Where did the people come from? They were born. Every person who ever lived was a descendant of Adam and Eve (Genesis 3:20, 1 Corinthians 15:22).
Where did different peoples come from? Most likely, they were a result of the event at Babel where God scattered everyone around the world and changed their languages (Genesis 11:9).
Vexillographer 2 years ago
This is not what happened. Science which has given mankind EVERYTHING we have to date including the computer and internet you are using to post this nonsense says otherwise. I trust science a bit more than some 2000 year old book written by primitive man who was afraid of thunderstorms and lightning.
epanek 2 years ago
First of all, only observable science can help us make modern technology; false histories of earth built from clues and ideas have no practical use.
Secondly, science is always changing while God's truth remains the same forever. Trust God to give us valuable and accurate truth.
Vexillographer 2 years ago
What has been done in human history with faith in god that could not have been done without faith in god? Answer: Nothing.
No onto your point. Define false histories -what is the contrasting agent for faslification?
epanek 2 years ago
God and faith are entirely different things.
Vexillographer 2 years ago
I know - thats why I used distinct words to describe each term.
epanek 2 years ago
" false histories of earth built from clues and ideas have no practical use"
What contrasting method are you using to determine whether the asserted history is true?
If science is able to change then it is superior to a fixed information system. Any book that wants me to murder my sister for trying to convert me to a strange religion is immoral. Deut Ch 13. Read it.
epanek 2 years ago
God says otherwise.
Science cannot be the authority for anything if it is not constant. Science is not the truth; it is a passionate search for the truth, which sometimes fails.
God hates false gods, and to protect his people in Israel, he gave this command to destroy any people and places where such lies came from. It is not wrong to punish evildoers.
Vexillographer 2 years ago
Murdering people who worship other gods is not moral. In fact you dont practice this today, why not? There are billions of people worshipping false gods including me. God commands you to murder me, right?
epanek 2 years ago
The law doesn't say to kill all unbelievers. The law says to kill the people who try to persuade Israelites to worship other gods.
Vexillographer 2 years ago
And that is morally superior how? Are you claiming that is Muslims stop me and the street and hand me a Koran I should shoot them?
epanek 2 years ago