The Genesis Code: Science v. Faith Synopsis

[szghasem]

Think about it. Science digs for the answer & truth to everything, even religion. Religion has been trying to poke holes into science to justify ignorance. Just a few decades ago, the technology we take for granted today was considered blasphemy & witchcraft. These are the monsters we should protect our kids against! Just look at countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc. Religion disguised in charity spends billions on spreading ignorance. Let's unite and protect our youth against stupidity!

[MissCocoChanel95]

anyone know where I can watch this? (without having to pay or anything.)

[chrisjh0]

I ONLY BELIEVE IN MY GOD...(The Creator of heaven and earth)

[TheBatteryIsEmpty]

@chrisjh0 Don't you believe airplanes can fly? Don't you believe medicines heal people?

[stickman2012]

Hmmm....intriguing.

[whythegoatcries]

if you are at all scientifically educated, this is creationist hogwash nonsense...lol

[ThePlatoon4]

@whythegoatcries wtf hogwash?

[ThePlatoon4]

i choose faith cuz it promises me happiness and eternal life :D

sciences tells me there is no life after death and that we are doomed to extinction no matter what we do :D

[stickman2012]

@ThePlatoon4

Science shows me the glory of God's creation and allows me to have better faith.

[hughring]

@hellavadeal So it is literal in Gods perspective. So is Gods "day" eternal? The word day becomes meaningless. How are we to ever know what anything means? when there is details in the Bible why would we take them seriously when their true meaning is only something this supposed "God" can understand?

[hellavadeal]

@hughring That is why we need His guidance in interpreting His word. This means you have a problem . Sense you do not believe in a god you will never be able to understand it. In fact the words of the bible will probably baffle and piss you off. You must first believe and then ask for understanding. So unless you have a spiritual awakening ... It was wrote that way on purpose. The same reason Christ spoke in parables. Look it up and see what Jesus said about it. Be open minded.

[hellavadeal]

@hellavadeal It is all symbolic metaphor. Even the history parts. It was not meant to teach scientific truth but deeper spiritual truth . If you look deeper into it it will become more clear. I am not a fundy. Nor am I religious.

I am a none religious believer and follower of the way. More of a personal relationship then anything else. You to could find God without religion . I know it is hard for you to understand this. You must be open to the possibility first. Be open minded .

[hughring]

@hellavadeal Nice condescension there. Typical of Christians to say they have the great truth and elevate themselves above others. Fact is, you dont have any truth. Truth is the opposite of faith. Faith is self-manufactured truth. I consider believing as closing your mind. YOU pretend to know, YOU pretend to have the truth, and YOU mislead yourself. And you know it. My mind is a river delta. And your believe is a distributary in my mind that has dried up.

[hellavadeal]

@hughring So you turn to insults to justify your beliefs? These end the conversation. Have a good life.

[hughring]

@hellavadeal Umm, who said who has a problem?

[MihaiBorcan]

This video should include a disclaimer:

"WARNING: This video does not present scientific principles in a truthful manner."

[fagballs91]

WARNING! May contain pseudoscience and starwman fallacy in place of real science.

500 characters isn't nearly enough to point out all the misrepresented science in this trailer alone.

[fagballs91]

WARNING! May contain strawman arguments and pseudoscience in place of real science. Viewer digression is advised.

"the oceans and dry land appeared aswell as the first forms of plant life"

Derp!

[ThePlatoon4]

ill just say god exists :P

now prove me wrong

[Vaultzero]

@ThePlatoon4 Prove to me Zues, The Titans, Ra, Aliens and Sea Monsters don't exist. Sure we haven't found them to be true, like God, but we can't rule them out. Now can we?

[hughring]

@ThePlatoon4 I'll just say a trillion other explanations to the universe exist. Prove one of them wrong!

[ThePlatoon4]

@hughring most of them are theorys and cant be proven at all

[psychobartus]

The problem with this is that religion starts out with the hypothesis that it is correct and sets out to prove itself correct where science sets out with a null hypothesis (the opposite of what is expected) and aims to prove or disprove this. BY setting out with the opinion that you are correct many biases and or errors can be introduced by the experimentor who is actively seeking a particular outcome.

[PFVF]

@hughring, you are correct. If you cannot believe that the Hebrew word "yom" modified by an ordinal number and the term "morning and evening" means a literal 24-hour period, then you cannot believe anything else the Bible says. But, the Bible has proven to be reliable in matters we can confirm, therefore no reason to try to change it to accommodate faulty atheistic beliefs about origins based upon unprovable uniformitarian assumptions. Big Bang Theory is going "poof". Why try to accommodate it?

[freedomfrombots]

Time did not pass more quickly when the universe started, it went more slowly, due to gravity and expansion. The dilation effects of gravity would be neglible after the first 500 million years because you can bet that the entire universe did not have even 1G of gravity otherwise things would have collapsed & 1G has negligible time dilation. Psuedoscientific hookum is trying desperately to connect superstition with fact. I don't know if God exists or not, but I do know Genesis has it all wrong.

[myke23111]

in the end an atheist chooses to be an atheist and that no matter what movie you put out showing any interesting theory regarding God-it makes no difference. An atheist can and will always choose the out. its very easy to do so because they LOVE to debate. it has nothing to do with FAITH. they CHOOSE to never believe in a higher power because an atheist looks for factual data and science. in relation to this trailer i find it to be a very interesting theory.

[coasteragent99]

So God created the world in 6 pots. Was he smoking the 7th? HURR DURR GURRGOL

[hughring]

If we can't take the word 'day' literally in the Bible how can one take any word literally? I thought Gods word was "perfect"? Why must we interpret and decode?

[hellavadeal]

@hughring It was a literal day in Gods perspective. Didn't you listen? If He is the one behind the writhing of the Bible it would be wrote in His perspective.

[vincentjdrummer]

@hughring You make it sound more simple than it is.

The Bible was written by people with a different world-view and language, so you can't say that the word day would have to be the exactly same as it is now in our english translation and meaning. Especially Hebrew words can carry different meanings, because they have way less words than there are in English

[hughring]

@vincentjdrummer So in Hebrew, what other definition of time would it possibly have that has any meaning? And if it describes God creating the universe as nature does, over 14 billion years, what is miraculous about that? Nothing. Thats JUST nature! HOW do you know the story of Jesus is accurate if the story of creation isn't?

[vincentjdrummer]

@hughring I guess the best argument you can make is that day is meant figuratively meaning some period of time. Creation, in whatever way it happened is miraculous. Creating the heavens and the earth and all laws of nature that are in it is as miraculous as it gets. Creating life is too. Even if it just put evolution into motion which is a system taking care of the rest it would be a miracle. However, if evolution would be true God would have to be active in it all the time I think

[vincentjdrummer]

@hughring Life is about Jesus and anything else is secondary. I think you can believe whatever you want about creation and still be saved, because of faith in Christ. God conserved the Bible to get people saved, not to get people to know about creation, so you can trust the Bible on salvation. It would be silly in my mind to go to shady, not so important, passages and abandon the whole message of salvation. You should believe the message of salvation and find anything else less important

[hughring]

@vincentjdrummer Why not stop at nature alone? Why the need to go further and attribute everything to anything remotely human-like? Why take the word of other people and believe their belief's? Why take the word of an ancient text that can't even be taken literally? Why think singularly? Why be close-minded? Why think I need to be "saved"? Why are you lying to me right now?

[vincentjdrummer]

@hughring Oh sorry, I thought you were christian, so I allowed myself to speak to you like that. I assume you're not christian now, my bad!

[Daytimeofnight]

It makes me angry to see so much money spent to propagate such a complete distortion of science. None of this lines up with science. How can Day 5 be 500 Mya to 250 Mya? Genesis says that Day 5 is when birds and "every living thing with which the water teems" are created. But the oldest bird fossils don't show up until 150 Mya and primitive whales don't appear until about 50 Mya. That's Day 6 according to this ridiculous scheme.

[TheDubya1]

@Daytimeofnight  fossills are a record of the birds death not life

[Daytimeofnight]

@TheDubya1 I'm trying to make sense of your comment. I pointed out that the first bird fossils don't appear in the fossil record until 100 million years after the Day 5 time span (according to the Genesis Code). You respond by saying that fossils record death not life? Are you suggesting that the birds God made on Day 5 all lived for 100 million years and then finally started dying?

[TheDubya1]

Respond to this video... this makes perfect sense

[Daytimeofnight]

@TheDubya1 I have responded to the video at length on my blog. Google "cognitive discopants genesis code" and you will find a series of posts addressing the claims of this movie in detail.

[kwith]

Wow, talk about a stretch. Religious people will never stop thinking of ways to make the supernatural work within the realm of science.

I will admit, its an interesting story, but in the end, its not science. Its just spin to make something that is non-science sound like science.

[pac6010]

I love how they just say a bunch of science facts and words then add a bunch of crap about god in.

ITS NOT SCIENCE PEOPLE, and you will never get away with calling it that.

[tsmith1724]

@pac6010 Way to contradict yourself. You love how he states science facts, but then suddenly it's not science! Where did it become unscientific?

[pac6010]

@tsmith1724 What I said is Correct. You can't use Random bits of science Facts or information to prove a God or Religion to be true. It can't be proven that way. For Example, If I say Gravity acts on Objects, so that means God is real. How does Explaining the laws of gravity Get you to prove a God exsits or is real.

It doesn't, and it can't. So like I said before, he can state every scientific theory in the world, but drawing conclusions that God Exsists because of it is plain NOT SCIENCE

[tsmith1724]

@pac6010 I agree...but that isn't what this film is doing. It's taking what's said in Genesis and applying it to scientific facts showing them work together.  It's about New Earth vs. Old Earth - it basically debunks the New Earth theory, but still keeps God as the Creator. This movie never makes the claim that "God exists because science proves the Bible to be true," it's saying that the creation of the world is divided into 6 time periods that coincide with the "days" of Creation in Genesis.

[pac6010]

@tsmith1724 Well of course he is trying to prove a god, otherwise Genisis and the story within doesn't matter. As with anything, its the interpritation of the facts. Are you using Facts to fit your pre determend hypothesis or are you building a hypothesis to suit the facts you have collected. He is doing the first in this case. Does science have all the answers, no, does that mean we should top thinking about it, Obviously not. This video does nothing to advance our understanding of anything.

[tsmith1724]

@pac6010 This film is targeted toward people who are saying "No! The Earth was created in 6 days!" It's saying "Look, we are using 6 days as 6 times periods that fit with each 'day', because time is relative." It isn't meant to advance our understanding of anything, if anything it is meant to broaden the minds of those who are saying that there is no way that "evolution" and "Creation" can work together.

[jsgehrke]

@pac6010 Forget about God and religion. Is the initial premise that the life of the universe is divisible into six POTs? Would the release of energy associated with the Big Bang affect the velocity of time? Those are the questions. Forget about infant baptism and guardian angels for a moment.

[chineseboxer108]

Yay! science supposedly proved the bible is true. Now we can all go back to killing people for violating the ten commandments and killing people because they are gay (only the men though because the bible never says anything bad about lesbians) and we can even have slaves too.

Women are property to be bought and sold.

The rules of war have changed too we can now rape the female captives once, shave their heads and give them one month to morn and decide if they want to marry us.

How immoral

[rpcrawford]

(13) in the various parables that was consistent with the time, place, daily life, and vocabulary that were contemporary to the understanding of the audience. Jesus wasn't toting a Bible around and preaching out of it, but adapting the sermons to the intelligence level of the audience. Go, and do thou likewise.

[rpcrawford]

(12) modern times the method of getting the message through people's thick skulls probably needs to change. If ethics and morality are taught on the basis of the intrinsic worth of the concepts themselves, {rather than that they are being applied out of a centuries-old text} they might be more readily accepted by modern doubters who need to be convinced. After all, that is the technique Jesus used by telling parables. Parables show the value of the idea, and Jesus used concepts and wording

[rpcrawford]

(11) inherently good and inherently evil factors out for themselves without having it spelled out for them. Just as old Chaucerian or Beowulfian English is nearly impossible for modern Joes to understand, the old Biblical approach is difficult for modern people to get in tune with, especially after their airplane trips. So, since the heaven and hell motivation lacks the clout it used to have, and since the bible stories had to have inherent worth to get into the Bible in the first place, in

[rpcrawford]

(10) so. Rather, someone was inspired or perceived or reasoned that this or that was good and this or that was bad (with or without divine inspiration) and AFTER understanding what was what THEN wrote it down into what step by step became the Bible. For instance, tending to the sick was good before it was ever written down as good. Adultery was bad before it was ever written down as bad. The basic purpose of the Bible has always been to instruct people who couldn't figure these types of

[rpcrawford]

(9) seldom master it. And if we were to try to teach old scientific concepts of a flat earth or phlogiston or quintessence, such teachings would be laughed out of any intelligent institution. So, in language and religion and science, we have to keep up with the latest. Language and science are self-modernizing, but religion requires more conscious effort.  How to do it? Simply consider how the Bible was written in the first place. Good isn't good and bad isn't bad because the Bible says

[rpcrawford]

(8) does its best as it can, modernizing as new discoveries warrant. So, how does all this fit together? Some words and sentence structures do not change over time. Religious standards have their eternal truths. And science has basic facts (like 2+2=4) that aren't going to be changing over time either. If we rely on the 1780's verbiage of the Constitution, modern students can seldom master and apply it. If we rely on the Bible as written 2,000 and more years ago, today's students can

[rpcrawford]

(7) them. So, in much the same way that many old English language habits of speaking have become outmoded, and old Biblical dietary or cloth-mixing rules have become outmoded, scientists 300 years from now (and especially 2,000 years from now) will laugh about how backwards and primitive scientists were in the antiquated 21st century. English does the best it can year by year (and will be very different 300 or 2,000 years in the future), religion does the best it can year by year, and science

[rpcrawford]

(6) Like English has changed over time, the evidence to encourage religious faith has changed over time, and people's willingness to follow the Biblical teachings has changed over time. Some parts of the Bible will always be seen as true by reasonable civilized people-- for instance, the obvious evil of murder. Other parts of the Bible are meeting with more and more resistance. Science itself is changing over time, with old scientific discoveries being thrown out as newer discoveries replace

[rpcrawford]

(5) observing Christian standards benefitted from the altruism it engendered, especially compared with brutal and selfish competing societies. Now, however, modern people can fly above the clouds and see for themselves there are no angels or souls or saints to be seen. Extensive drilling into the Earth reveals no sign of devils or Hell or punished souls. So, it is harder to convince the average citizen to adopt standards of Christian decency without enforced places of reward and punishment.

[rpcrawford]

(4) produce. For instance, when the Hebrews were seriously in need of a Messiah due to Roman oppression, the Christian Messiah appeared. Christianity progressed and came into stronger belief because the people needed the salvation of a Messiah, and they were willing to believe a system of heavenly rewards and hellish punishments. The duality of rewards and punishments motivated people to behave well whether they actually believed or not because of a desire for eternal life. And those nations

[rpcrawford]

(3)..one God. Writings were assembled over time into what we now call the Bible, and because, historically, those who followed it tended to prosper and those who didn't follow it tended to fall by the wayside, the Jewish and then Christian followers prospered accordingly. Like the various stages of the English language, the various stages of religious development were products of the times they went through. At each stage, the current developments were the best that that period in time could

[rpcrawford]

(2)..early humans explained the world with tribal superstitions, then oral traditions that were the best they could figure with available technology. Once writing was invented, inferences about biology, history, geology, astronomy, and genealogy were recorded. Rulers gave laws and wise men who observed who prospered and who died young developed philosophies of morality and ethics. Those who believed their ideas came from divine inspiration attributed these thoughts to gods and finally one...

[rpcrawford]

(1) At one time, there was no English language. Then early English appeared from native Celtic tribal languages combining with inputs of Nordic and Saxon invaders. Eventually English evolved to Beowulf level, then Chaucer's level, then Shakespeare's level. Later it progressed to the style we see in the US Constitution, then what we see from the Civil War style, and then modern English. Similarly, once we got out of the caves and started thinking about the world around us, early humans...

[Corvette131]

Cosest to God according to astrologist (closest to the big bang) and awakening to a new era, and pretty much having a collective thinking which I am sure would happened with or without the IT. With the end of the 250kk next year 2012. It seems that we are pretty fortunate to live next year to see whether God exist or we are a living thing that can for first time in 17kkk years hear its creator (meaning earth)

[Corvette131]

Oh, I want to add something they do not say. According to my calculations, and if God rested the 7th day. This means that for the past 250kk years he has been resting hence the caos on earth. But, the good news is that next years those 250kk comes to cero. So we are apparently at the same point where the universe was created, the earth is aligned together with the unisummum, and we are all awakening. Collecting time looks like to me...

[Corvette131]

it happens? Or does really means that the earth is alive and we are all connected to it and what really happens is that profets are really gifted people with the ability to hear the earth language? Then earth is god and god is earth all in once with the unity of unisummum (the holly trinity) but to complet it means we need to exist? we are the third link of the holly trinity? Interesting...

[Corvette131]

From the time I was 8 y.o. and after seen a book of eath evolution and time all in one beautifull ilustrated page, I realized that genesis was all a figured speaking of the universe evolution (let´s try to call it unisummum.) The wonder is how did Moises knew it? Why was it called laps (tranlated to days in modern tongs...) Does this means that the earth goes back to its original position every time it reaches this time lap AKA day? Does this means that at that moment will we meet god, next time

[Morgandog2010]

To Chineseboxer, the belief in the bible takes faith, just like believing that you will take your next breath, you probably will. The Genesis Code is an effort to understand the miracle of the universe, for this i applaud the effort. But i already believe, because i have Christ in my heart, this gives me an insight that is incomprehensible unless you submit to the will of our Lord. As for science proving the existence of God, of course, common sense reveals that.

[SuperNick1228]

@WVvideo1 I don't think they are trying to make Religion look bad, but explain what they perceive to be the "proof" that Religion & Science have been disagreeing all these years, yet actually believed the same thing. I think proof is what the individual perceives it to be. What is right for you isn't necessarily right for others. It doesn't matter who caught up with who, as long as we agree.....right?

[chineseboxer108]

Yay! science supposedly proved the bible is true. Now we can all go back to killing people for violating the ten commandments and killing people because they are gay (only the men though because the bible never says anything bad about lesbians) and we can even have slaves too.

Women are property to be bought and sold.

The rules of war have changed too we can now rape the female captives once, shave their heads and give them one month to morn and decide if they want to marry us.

Thanks YHWH

[thegenesiscode]

What this movie is: An engaging Drama that presents a compelling argument for Science and Faith to co-exist. We do in fact hold to a literal six day creation. We also know for a fact that time is variable and God is not inside of time (see St. Augustine for an explanation as to why this is the case).

What this movie is not: An attempt to undermine the inerrancy or infallability of the Bible in any way, or to promote any view that leaves God out of the equation. Thanks for the comments.

[PFVF]

@thegenesiscode, what you consider to be a "compelling argument," I see as nonsense that gains no atheist naturalists, yet alienates young-earth creationist scientists who see no disconnect between the Bible (which is true) and knowledge gained by the scientific method (to the extent that it also is true). Real scientists distinguish between observational science and vain imaginings that constitute alternative religions to Christianity. The so-called "science" of origins is just such religion.

[zippydoogun]

What time was it before the BIG Bang? Are we talking about the FIRST big bang? When did the first Creationists crawl on two fins out of the world's oceans?

[biblegirl]

Super intriguing argument. I really can't wait to see this film.