Did God create the earth before the sun and moon?

[masonTganes]

This is exactly like watching the TOM & JERRY cartoons where the mouse paints a hole and runs through it.... Just making up impossible BS as you go.

The bible was a fairytale written by MEN who had no idea about the understandings of ANYTHING.

[linkuei83]

holy shit, more creationist bullshit.

[newfagscanttrif0rce]

In this video: mental gymnastics.

[liellibg]

Be careful of who and what so called experts tell you. So called experts hung Jesus Christ on a cross to die. I've found you can show people even experts what is written in the word, put it right in front of their eyes to read. Unless it's what they were told taught even if wrong, they will hold crosses up like your some vampire as they did with Christ.

[liellibg]

The book of Gen does not tell of the earth's age. It only records the time from the last flood, The written word is what is 6-7 thousand years old not the age of the earth. The 4th day is also discribed as the day after the Noah flood, but also links it to the 1st day.The Holy Spirit brooded over the waters, Noah sent out a dove, As Jesus came up out of the water the Holy Spirit came upon him in form of a dove. See how the symbolic pic links Noah as another 1st day of a new earth age?

[angryspidertv]

@liellibg Well I'm an old earther as well, it's just that I hold to what the experts say on the matter......

[liellibg]

I have to give this guy credit for looking past the book of Gen to see what happened. Job predates Gen. In Job: Satan was able to go to & fro Heaven patrol the earth. Gen: Satan is earth bound on his belly in the taste of dust due to sin with the woman. Gen is three or more parallel stories of the different earth ages. Before Adam was an early earth age that went from paradice to throns & thisles. Just as Noah went into the Ark before the flood, Adam went into the Garden before paradice died.

[SakuraSymphony]

That's pretty intresting...that the person who is telling the tale of creation is telling it from the point of view of an observer, so the observer would say things as a matter experience, a watcher. So things sound out of order, but not necessarily because they are, but rather because the point of view of the observer...grasp/perspective wasn't complete as to what was really going on?

[SakuraSymphony]

@SakuraSymphony

I think he's saying that the author was telling the truth from his experiences, now his "experiences" where he got this info, is to be determined. Was it through God/Vision/ Stories from ancestors? But many great minds came up w/ truths/understandings of the universe & humanity, Darwin, Aristotle, Socrates they had it right to a certain degree, But because of they're limited perspective, they never FULLY grasped it, but we appreciate them, forgive them, why not Moses?

[angryspidertv]

@SakuraSymphony It's written from an Earthly perspective, not a celestial one, so we puny humans could understand it earlier on, then gain fuller understanding now. Makes sense doesn't it? :D

[ChipArgyle]

Yes, He did create the earth before the sun and the moon. It says so very clearly in the first 50 words of the Bible. It's the very first error/ lie in the Bible. The next glaring error is that the moon is a light source. It isn't. It's a reflector of a light source. What's the debate about?

It is kind of entertaining watching Hugh Ross pull all this stuff right out of his ass though.

[angryspidertv]

@ChipArgyle You're ignorant... you've got to look at the original Hebrew, not the translated English, to gain full understanding of what is written in the scriptures.

[ChipArgyle]

@angryspidertv Of course you have to read the original version! How silly of me to assume the English versions of the Bible would make any sense whatsoever!

Now, off you go, tell EVERY Christian on the planet to throw their Bibles in the garbage, oh wise one.

[angryspidertv]

@ChipArgyle I meant if you wanted a deeper understanding, like finding if the age of the earth is consistent with the Bible (which it is) or a local flood (also is) but we can trust all the hundreds of translators that tell us it's right. Knowing the meanings for ancient Hebrew words is good if you want to find things out that aren't in plain reading... little things that aren't necessarily essential but would make you more knowledgeable.

[ChipArgyle]

@angryspidertv If you think the earth is less than 4 billion years old, or that a flood 5 miles deep covered the entire planet a few thousand years ago, and you learned it from a book written in Hebrew, well, frankly, it doesn't matter what language that book is written in, because it's a work of fiction.

[angryspidertv]

@ChipArgyle I am an old-earth creationist. If there was a God (which there is) who created us (which He did) He would reveal himself to us from the beginning of humanity. This is what the Bible us, His inspired Word. You can keep parroting on that the Bible is a work of fiction, no matter what I say -_- but you'll never present any viable evidence that it is.

[ChipArgyle]

@angryspidertv The burden of proof isn't in disproving the Bible. It's in proving it to be true. So much of it has been disproved at this point that what remains is on pretty shaky ground. The fact that it's rife with contradictions should convince you that it's a work of men, not the work of a deity.

If there is a god that created us, how do you know it's the god of the Bible? You don't! You hope that to be the case, but most of humanity doesn't.

[angryspidertv]

@ChipArgyle If God was real, he would reveal himself to us from the beginning. The Bible makes it obvious many people and races fall away from God because of their cultures and different belief systems.  I think that the Bible is true because it doesn't conform to man's petty desires and doesn't make God with any mistakes or problems. Please show me one contradiction in the Bible.

[ChipArgyle]

@angryspidertv Uh-oh, another lazy Christian unwilling to do his own research, afraid of what he might learn. It's tough to learn with your eyes shut and your fingers in your ears. However, ignorance is unforgivable now that we have the Internet.

Type the term 'bible contradictions' into Google to find a number of sites that contain some real jaw dropping information about this infallible book to which you cling. There are dozens of contradictions for your reading pleasure.

[angryspidertv]

@ChipArgyle I already did that, found a counter-argument for every one. In fact there is a page (101 cleared up 'contradictions' in the Bible on Debate Topics, apologetics; as well as Countering Bible Contradictions) that addresses all of them, as well as other pages. Most misconceptions are derived from misunderstanding, exclusion of other verses, and misunderstanding the common society and culture of the ancient Hebrews.

[ChipArgyle]

@angryspidertv Of course you did. Typical dodges are: translation errors, taken out of context, it was metaphorical not literal, etc. Did it ever occur to you that if that book was truly divine it would have been written much, much better than it was?

Check Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Each one has a decidedly different account of the area, people in attendance, and events immediately after the resurrection. How can that be?

Enjoy your delusion!

[angryspidertv]

@ChipArgyle hmmm, basic. You could visit 101 cleared up 'contradictions' in the Bible

(most of which don't look like contradictions if you read the whole test), or you might visit Countering Bible Contradictions (personal favorite) perhaps that'll show you what I mean by 'counter-arguments'. I'll bet you won't even visit the site, but oh well.

[JungleJargon]

Excellent response. Although he did say translucient on day four one time instead of transparent.

The text says, "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."

When were the heavens and the earth created, class?

In the beginning! That is the only logical conclusion.

How long it took to stretch out the heavens and form the earth is irrelevant to the age of life on earth.

It took six rotations of the earth in relation to the sun to make life on earth.

watch?v=qZev7hb40uk

[ItsAboutWhatUDo]

The existence of evening and morning as elements of a single day is only conceivable after the creation of the earth and its rotation under the light of its own star, the Sun!

[DebunkingEvolution]

Fucking bullshit. Hugh Ross is an agent of Satan for coming up with that 4.5 billion year old myth. The Earth is 6-10 thousand years old you crackpots!

[LiveTheWild]

It's painful watching Ross trying to legitimize the book of Genesis.

[GodKillerAtheist]

Wanna know about the universe? Buy a telescope. Read a science book

Want to get your money stolen on boring apologetic videos trying to twist their bible to keep up with science from even 300 years ago? Buy this dvd

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist Hey. I just want to make a comment on your nick. 'GodKilleratheist'. If atheists are those people who deny Gods existence, how could you kill something that's not even there? Maybe you should consider change of nick so it would be consistent of atheism - if my definition is true.

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen My name was designed to piss off fucktards. No it doesn't reflect anything about me or what I do or do not believe. So no the name will stay the same because it's perfect in drawing out the nuts.

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist why nuts? cool with loose claims

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen huh? Sorry are you a nut? Maybe that's why you care. =)

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist I care about loose claims.

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen maybe that's why you're nutty. =)

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist I meant: I care when people bring loose claims to the discussion.

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen I agree people with that think it's a scientific theory that an invisible magic sky wizard who uses magic spells to create the universe and everything in it are very loose claims indeed.

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist First off; God is not only within the physical realm but also beyond it. like Logic. It is dependent on not being in the same matter perspective is origin from. Loose claim to say that God doesn't exist, since this is not provable.

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen "God is not only within the physical realm but also beyond it"

And your proof for that empty claim is??? nil!

"Loose claim to say that God doesn't exist, since this is not provable"

So logically it disproves itself. I agree God is as real as all the other things just as provable as it. Leprechauns, unicorns, ghosts, Yes Myths and fairy tales are loose claims that occupy the land of fiction, not fact. The only thing beyond logic is stupidity. Stupidity like invisible Wizard worship

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist It doesn't disproves itself. When folks talk about 'proof' of a God, they are talking about 'likelyhood' as I understand it. You cannot prove a God or absence of God. I haven't claimed that I have evidence of Gods existence. unicorns or ghosts manifests them self through this world, we're talking beyond this world. Logic is beyond this world. My question: Do you believe in Free Will, and if so; how can you have one if this very centre is inside the same materie as the choice?

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen Sure it does because it lacks actual proof. Proof doesn't equate to likely hood. Actually the likely hood of a being that is infinity complex is infinity unlikely. The universe is deterministic. This simple fact disproves magic wizards. You think fiction is fact yet you have no supporting evidence.

The universe is deterministic, freewill is a lie. everything you do is for a reason even if that reason is to try and prove you can do something for no reason at all.

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist and everything you say is a lie; you don't choose these words appearing in this post. good luck.

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen So you can only demonize truth..Figures. More nonsense to cover up your failures. Yes the universe is deterministic. Prove me wrong! Shit if you can I'll give you $100000000000000000000 not only will you be wining all that cash you'll be proving the magic of your invisible wizard God. Peace!

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist It's not correct because you says so; and the funny stuff is that you even claim that you don't claim the claim! LOL. deterministic robot you are! aren't you embarrassed? Oh noes, you are randomly so stupid! ur excused. kthxbyebye!

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen So you can't refute determinism? You apparently don't understand determinism if you think that if I make a claim I'm not making a claim because it was already determined. I'd rather be a limitless robot of nature than a simple minded toy for some super ego. 1 you didn't refute determinism with your childish uneducated remarks. 2 your only alternative to determinism is invisible wizard magic gave you the ability to do whatever you want regardless of universal laws. Yes you're stupid

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist Can you disprove choice?

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen "Can you disprove choice?"

Choice doesn't disprove determinism. For instance if your body lacks nutrients the lack of such chemicals in you cause a reaction that tells your brain that you're hungry. The chemicals in your brain causing hunger out weigh the chemicals in your brain to try to disprove determinism. Or maybe they don't and you don't eat. Still you have chosen, but your choice has followed deterministic means. Did you choose or did you think you chose?

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist : yes, but you can starve if you want to.

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen and you still prove determinism by fulfilling that sense of a need to starve to try to prove a point.

You can find no proof that something can go against determinism in this entire universe because that is the main law of this universe

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist You don't know that determinism is the law and rule of this universe. This is only your assumption. And It's ok that you belive this, but that removes you from all type of moral and this allows lil' stalins to utter their pervert nature upon others - with the only argument that they are not to be blamed!

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist you cannot have peace with those who don't believe in that you are responsible for your actions. not possible.

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen You can't have peace when your religion is divisive and racist. And it's not possible to have any peace when your cult has an apocalyptic world view.

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist Why anger? You cannot choose to change anything, nor can those who are 'rasist and divisive' either. so. why care? btw. i think those who believe in a hell do think more about what they do.

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen "i think those who believe in a hell do think more about what they do."

So people need to fear hell to be good? That's not an honest reason to be good if your just concerned about your own hide. This is a good example of why dogmatic morals cause people to do horrible immoral things. For example a woman only has two choices, either steal food to feed her child or let them starve to death slowly. By fearing hell the mother would let her child starve slowly and painfully.

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist in determinism no one is good, nor evil cause that is a choice which is not allowed in your system Don't you understand this contradiction? And don't you think its funny that you gave the woman with kids a choice between steal or let them die? Hmm. Are you traitor of your own beliefs? :)

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen Good and bad are determined by the criteria. Determinism isn't an allowing or disallowing process so the fact that you and your opinion deem it necessary that everything have good or bad nature doesn't make determinism contradictory.

Still you don't understand determinism you think that someones choice invalidates why they made the choice. You have an opinion that by choosing they are doing it for no reason at all and yet you have not showed any examples of choice without reason.

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist How would you know if the criteria gives good, or bad conclusions? Then you need standards. Where you have good or bad standards. No one know why people choose what they choose. It boils down to belief of which system you want (to choose). No, I don't understand where you are going with this. Can you choose to educate me about this topic?

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen " How would you know if the criteria gives good, or bad conclusions? "

Depends on the desired outcome.

"Where you have good or bad standards." and you determine your standards based on your desired outcome.

" It boils down to belief of which system you want (to choose)"

yep, you can believe in the religious cults apocalyptic world view or you can believe in a caring intelligent humanistic world view.

Determinism is a tough subject for people who only understand invisible wizards

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist Ok. you admit that there is good and evil. nice. that enables perspective. A logical being can have a perspective, then choose between those two options. I have also a feeling that I don't want to be cared for of other people than my self. I don't believe this to be nice for me. So. I want my kids to go into hardcore, christian cult-a-like school. Would you politically deny me this? absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Did you never see detective when you were young?

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen "you admit that there is good and evil" one nations martyr is another's terrorist. I personally believe what helps humanity survive is good and what oppresses and holds us back is evil.

" absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

Anything with an absence of evidence is proven fiction. You seem to think that since something has no evidence and can't be proven wrong it is fact. The only fact is that something with no evidence is fiction.

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen " christianity /ban/ schools. Is this a good thing?"

Well you know my side on this and I would say yes, school is no place for cults. how would you feel if we allow all religions into the schools Muslims and Jews and satanists teaching your children when they should be learning critical thinking, math spelling, geography, science?

"If I killed you/ claiming this as a fiction?" no because there would be the fact of my death

"Have you smoked crack?" No why did you run out?

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist I don't know your side before now, but I had a suspection. Most atheist I meet are socialists and are collective-minded. Which is sad for me, since they usually talk about free from religion, but the end of the story is that I have to obey they're world view. You seem to be fed up with having religion on school. Do you know that I could feel the same if you rejected me to have christian teached for mine kids? Wouldn't this be hypocritical of yoU?

[larsiemannen]

"no because there would be the fact of my death" - You are avoiding the point. Your body won't be found, nor would anyone know if you would ever be killed - or you just ran away. OK? Do you agree that the absence of evidence is not sufficient to conclude if it's true or not? You do understand that 'God or not' is a question of faith and will never, ever, be proven as long as you live?

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist Atleast you are admitting evil and good. Is it more important with argument of the collective than of the individual? Let's say that the politically leaders have discussed, and found out that _they_ (or majority) thinks christianity oppresses and hold us back and will ban it from all schools. Is this a good thing? If I killed you right now, and there would be no evidences; you are claiming this as a fiction?

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen I've already answered these comments look one post up.

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist "For example a woman only has two choices" - Yesss. The problem is choice, ain't it? You haven't answered me on this one. And it's important for me to know what you really mean, cause you start this debate with that universe is ruled by determinism yet you claim that this woman has a choice. Are you really honest? You are responsible for your self. Even inside of your own head.

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen You're not understanding that choice doesn't refute determinism. Choice actually supports determinism. If it was possible to refute determinism Then the lady could magically create some food out of nothing. Actually if determinism was invalid hunger would be meaningless. Nothing would make sense because nothing would have to follow the logic of cause and effect. up would be blue, left would be Saturn, cow would be the emotion you feel when someone pwnes you on youtube.

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist Well. You are free to jump of a 10th floor of a building, but you are not free to survive it - and this is your disproof of 'free will' ? :) The thought of a free will do not abolish laws which all have to obey to. Like gravitiy. I don't feel pwnd. I ask them if they could teach me, or enlighten me - like I'm doing with you know. I don't think we disagree that much after all after you included 'free will' into your theory of determinism.

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen Let me help you out here because you're not actually refuting determinism. First you need to find something indeterministic that has no reason. Free will is said to be granted by an invisible wizard you call God, so you must find and prove this God and than prove that he/it created free will and gave it to us. Basically you must show that we have the ability to go against determinism. You will need to establish an effect without any cause. reply when you can

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist You said that we have free will within determinism. So, if this is true, and that there is a reason for everything - which I agree upon, that only means that I choose between reasons, and that's where the perspective comes into picture, the choice between what reasons (to which cause) we want! Like God made our universe, he had his reason. Right? I thought determinism was about not having the option of choice. Maybe I was wrong.

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen " You said that we have free will within determinism" I Never said that. Choice is not free will. If you had free will you could be anything or do anything because free will is magic. Choice is a confusing subject when we talk about determinism. Yes you can choose, but in reality you only chose because of a prior circumstances that led you to that choice. Factors were determined to be the best and that's what you did. Did you really have a choice No but you thought you did.

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist Ok. You are able to choose between where you want to end. That something is prior circumstanced to your choice is understandable, but I don't see this as contradictionary to the bible. God made us as earthly beings with ristrictions.

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen So you don't see how an invisible wizard granting people the ability to have free will that invalidates a naturally deterministic universe is contradictory to the entire universe? Man I just don't know what to tell you if you can't see the obvious.

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist As I've read your definition of free will, I do understand why you think this is a contradiction. But you are actually not critisizes the creation, but the creator - with no reason. Whats wrong with how God made it? I do not understand. We are able to choose between different reasons and causes, which are not limitless - ofc, the universe in itself is not limitless.

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen "Whats wrong with how God made it?" God didn't make it. You're not getting the point Determinism refutes your invisible wizards magic. Creationism limits us to the will and purpose of some super ego and it's also racist because it makes white men humans and the blacks and other races animals. because the bible states we were made in our current form and didn't evolve from each other.

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist "God didn't make it. You're not getting the point Determinism refutes your invisible wizards magic" - that's atleast their claim. racism and discrimination is OK.

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen " racism and discrimination is OK."

At least you're not denying what you believe for once.

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist yes, my problem is when politicians want to enforce their views upon others through laws and regulation! Discrimination is perfectly fine, and nice. You cannot be married without discriminating all other girls in the world. And I perfectly understand that atheism and socialism, by large, go hand in hand.

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen What does being a nonbeliever because theists fail to produce any evidence for their empty claims have to do with A political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole?

On the other hand Communism comes straight from the bible. Marx used the bible to come up with Communism. Communism is Government worship a theocracy that is it's own God.

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist The bible preaches property right. Marx doesn't. Atheists don't believe in God, nor their laws. Many of the same men do not believe in Moral (i.e darwinism). It's easy to think you'll get away if you just don't get caught, or if you get people on your side. The bible have nothing to do with marxism. Karl Marx must've been seriuosly drunk if he thought so.

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannenAll that believed were together, and had all things in common; And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.

(Acts 2:44-45) Marx’s famous line “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need”

So we see the bible is not for property right. The bible founded marxism only the deniers of reality drunk on their ego would deny that fact.

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist No one was forced to believe. No one was forced to give away their old stuff. If its volountarly, it means that they don't force others to do the same. That is; property right -has- to be, even in the bible, which is contradictionary with marx. Marx sucks. Atheists too, when it comes to politics.

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen When you say Marx sucks you're saying the bible sucks seeing how he took everything he did from the bible. So the only real question is why are you a hypocrite that calls yourself a christian and at the same time you say the bible sucks? I just don't understand please help me to understand why you hate the bible as a christian. Thanks!

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist No. there are huge difference with marx and bible. You own what you create. You are responsible for your self. Stealing is a sin. You should not get guilty consciousness if you kill another man breaking in your house. All those are anti-marxist claims. bible != marx. I don't hate the bible.

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen YES! Didn't you read the bible verse I posted? No you didn't because you can't accept the truth. Communism is the bible come to fruition. No one would sin if the Government their God owns all the property NO one could steal. You act like there are no laws in communism, you're stating anarchy and calling it Communism. If you're against communism you're against your own bible. Either you hate your bible or you don't understand communism one bit END OF SUBJECT!

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist No. It's volountarly to believe, thus, its volountarly to give. They need to give theirs consent which excludes govt. since it's not a choice. I cannot exist in a country without paying taxes. thats illegal. It's also said in acts 2:45 that they -sold- their property; to whom they sold if no one needed it? and how to sell stuff that you don't own? lulz. dont you see ur contradictions?

[GodKillerAtheist]

@larsiemannen "It's volountarly to believe" it wasn't during the dark ages while the inquisition was taking place. Tell me that wasn't a form of communism your religion imposed on everyone who wouldn't bow down to the Theocracy of the time.

"to whom they sold if no one needed it?" in verse 38 we can clearly read " 38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you" So they were not Christians and not even baptized so your point is moot. plus this is an entirely different book.

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist No, but it is volountarly to believe. That they interpreted the bible wrong back in the days doesn't have anything today. Christianity is still not communism. Is this hard to comprehend? Search around, and you'll see the differences. They were not christians, but many of them (if not all) became christians that day. You'll understand when you read the context. And so? Should this be an argument of bible being communistic?

[GodKillerAtheist]

@rizvis8360 If allah hasn't the power to convince someone now than allah is powerless eternally.

[larsiemannen]

@GodKillerAtheist You cannot help someone who don't want it. Never worked. Never will.

[CraigDeth]

What a total crock.

This guy is so used to manipulating what is written to suit his own agenda, maybe he doesn't realise what a fool he makes of himself. And by the way, he doesn't have a book to promote, honestly!

[chesster423]

so God magically did it...... -_-

[IncognitoShhh]

This guy must have got his degree from a crazy religious university. His so called theories are fantasy.

[pestmanpat]

Of course they didnt.They only wrote what they were told to write.The fact that today with modern science we can have insight into the creation account only highlights how

scientificly viable the genesis account is.

[Tapiola2007]

There's so much wrong with this that it's difficult to know where to begin. One point that I wanted to ask is the Bible talks about "the two lights" but the moon does not have it's own light. Moonlight is simply reflected sunlight - hence a permanent dark side to the moon. Now, I know all you believers will interpret "the two lights" to suit your theory but little points like this, as well the truck load of BS this guy just spoke, makes rational people laugh at your nonsense.

[pestmanpat]

@Tapiola2007 It doesent matter where the moon gets its light from any more than if a lamp gets is light from kerosine or wax.It is from the point of view of the observer.

[Tapiola2007]

@pestmanpat My point was that the Bible talks about two lights when we know today that the Moon is not really a light at all. The point is more about what was believed at the time the Bible was written and what we know today. I know believers will split hairs and argue it is still consistent with scientific fact but I find it further evidence of the fact that the authors of the Bible didn't know the Moon's 'light' was refelcted sunlight, proving it is man-made myth rather than revealed truth.

[bryanjblake]

@Tapiola2007 Ha! Permanent dark side of the moon? You showed your ignorance, man. There is no permanent dark side of the moon!

[Tapiola2007]

@bryanjblake Read again dip shit! I said that as the Moon is not a source of light itself and any light that is seen from the Moon is merely reflected sunlight, there is a permanently dark side, i.e. the whole of the Moon is never lit up at any one time. I did not say that there are parts of the Moon that are never lit up.

[bryanjblake]

@Tapiola2007 I guess you don't know what the word PERMANENT means? LMAO

[Tapiola2007]

@bryanjblake Is that you backtracking because you've just had your arse handed to you? Here, permanent means always. If you need it spelled out further, it means that there is always a part of the Moon that is dark because it is not itself a source of light, unlike the Sun which emits light no matter which side of it you are looking at. I hope that helps you. If not, perhaps a picture would do the job...

[bryanjblake]

@Tapiola2007 Man, you are a real dumb @ss. The moon can't have a PERMANENT dark side! It ain't dark when the sun is shining on it! Just because something isn't giving off it own light doesn't make it "DARK". Permanent implies that there is a place where the sun NEVER shines...which is total BS.

[Tapiola2007]

@bryanjblake Wow, you really are stupid. Most first graders know that the Moon is never fully illuminated but that information seems to have passed you by.

[bryanjblake]

@Tapiola2007 You really need to work on your reading comprehension. I never said the entire surface of the moon is lit at one time. For there to be a PERMANENT DARK SIDE, there would have to be a side that NEVER RECEIVES SUNLIGHT. Do you understand? You said permanent dark side, which implies there is a place on the moon that NEVER RECEIVES SUNLIGHT, and that's not true. If you can't understand that...you're handicapped.

[graceteam]

nice!

[Victor63372]

point of view of the observer..the one who has not been "created" yet.

[itsallgood21211]

he explained that in th video just have to pay attention

[lautz73]

But where was the light without the sun? Let there be light? Where was the light if he hadn't created it yet? Day 1 and day 4 have the atmosphere becoming clear? Care to rethink your statmenets?

[mcdinkity]

things like this is the reason religious people are seen as idiots

[ElevenDestinys]

You can't argue with this kind of flawed logic. Talk about manipulating the data to fit your hypothesis. 

[seonidh]

How can someone be so clever as a doctor be so stupid at the same time. Blinded by faith

[al3699]

do you need any help moving those goal posts?

[WickedGravityVideo]

belief in the supernatural is a a mental disorder.... that is you, christians.

[marklmansfield]

I do not agree with all Hughs theories, but any one who cannot percive the level of this mans genius should not reveal their own ignorance by making statements like; this is stupid. Proverbs 17:28

[mjh012363]

@marklmansfield A Christian has to either re-interpret scientific data to fit the Bible (Kent Hovind) or re-interpret the Bible to fit the science (Hugh Ross). That's just a fact. Hugh Ross is willfully ignorant of this fact. That means stupid on purpose.

[James5877]

@mjh012363 Hugh Ross is simply stating what the Bible has taught all along.

[seonidh]

@mjh012363 someone marked your comment as spam

[larsiemannen]

@marklmansfield WoW. So nice passage, and so true!

[Kuth70]

Youtube needs to allow us to flag something as "COMPLETE BULLSHIT"

[ytubeact123]

What about the beasts on the next day?

Did god not make them either?

Answer: No, the beasts were hiding behind a bush and they just came out and appeared!

[ytubeact123]

Wow ... This is just RIDICULOUSLY fallacious.

The questioner reads: "God MADE the two great lights...he also MADE the stars"

And he goes right in the guys face: "yeah,he didn't make them".

In the WHOLE chapter god goes: "Let there be something"- and then god MAKES that something"

Let there be light, god MAKES light

Let there be a firmament, god MAKES the firmnt.

Let there be beasts, god MAKES the beasts

Let there be lights in the firmnt., and god.. oh wait... and god vanished the cloud.. ;)

[Phaseme0810]

@ytubeact123 If you were to know about how the earth was made, the Sun didn't illuminate like it did today and this is before any beasts of the anything was created, this is how the Cambrian Explosion happened because the Sun illuminated just right for life to appear.God said Let their be light but Job says when the angels were made their was light, the Big bang says in Darkness and then came light when the stars was made.

[ytubeact123]

@Phaseme0810 Do you really not understand the level of stupidity this guy is offering in the above video? Are you really that deluded?

[graceteam]

great video:)

[Venusheart813]

Phenomenal!!!!!!!

[juStjoKinG67]

ummm where does this guy get his info he seems a little far fetched

[kmiroshkhin]

He would make an amazing lawyer.. nothing like defending an obviously guilty person, when all the evidence show that it is the case, and still argue that he is not guilty.

Stop bullshitting!

[nolobede]

This video, and the panelist is an insult to human intellect.

It is amazing, the length some creationists will go to twist fact into fiction to fit their agenda.

[graceteam]

@nolobede so what point do you deem unintellectual from Hugh Ross?

[nolobede]

@graceteam

Seriously? Did you listen to the guy?

Ok... how about wildly deluded?

[wachnathan]

Science and Christianty are not compatable science doesn't not support Christianty. This guy just puts thems together to justife his belief and blind side people.

[luvdomus]

Wow. That guy really does some fancy footwork to dance his way out of that one. Obviously the Biblical writers meant that the sun and stars were created after the earth because the earth seemed to them larger and more "basic", whereas the sun and stars seemed to be merely hung in the sky. I can forgive Bronze Age myth makers; but a shameless modern day snake oil salesman trying to weasel his way out of a contradiction is pathetic.

[MoskowFreak1111]

hmm, I am more on BIG BANG side now, Sun and then all the rocks around it.

I BELIEVE IN SCIENCE, BUT GOD GUIDED BIG BANG TO HAPPEN, HE GUIDED EARTH TO BE MADE, HE GUIDED LIVING things to be made

he was happy, then he wanted humans, he threw a rock at earth killing dinosaurs and guided evolution to make monkeys and humans :)

i am 50/50 science/religion

well 25/75 science/religion cuzz god made science :)

[kmiroshkhin]

@MoskowFreak1111

It's perfectly fine in my opinion to accept god and live morally. However why do you still choose to stick to Christianity, when it is obviously written by people who had relatively limited knowledge on this universe in comparison to us.

In my opinion, existence of god is a matter of yes or no (50-50), however the existence of particular god mentioned in Christianity, Buddhism, or Islam is almost zero. It is foolish of us to claim that we know the creator, it he exists.

[Thepreeexsistance]

Earth came before the sun and moon

[wachnathan]

@Thepreeexsistance oh really and you know that from reading a two thousand year old book writen by a bunch of jewish nut cases

[kolb49]

You know I found Earth was not always called Earth It acually has had other Names like Gia, Eden, Mother Goddess, We all came together to agree on the Name of the Planet, Just like we did with the Bible agreeing Jesus was God, Now we all have to Agree as a whole on something else

[tm2cruz]

Wow, nice explanation... I haven't seen that in Genesis... Really cool! :D

[maxaveniko]

He just stated that earth is over billion years so how can it only be 6,000 years old? Some people will said anything just to support their argument or belief! Science is the truth but science does not have all the answer because there are things that are too profound for their knowledge.

[stinkfinger630]

Really? Really -- do people actually read the bible 'literally'? It's poetry people!! Poetry and science can coexixt. Stop trying to read the bible as science -- it ain't!

[TheHonestTheist]

It does make scientific claims, you can't escape that.

[Kefko]

^^^ Total moron who knows a book verse by verse and therefor thinks it's real.

tsk..tsk.

No scientificly valuable info was given. Only quotes from an old book when people didn't knew how the world worked.. =/

[marshmallowchips]

I believe in god, but i cant believe that he made earth & living organisms. they say in the bible that he created earth in 7 days, but 7 days to him is like thousands of years....its too impossible though!!

I think earth was just a broken piece of a planet that began evolving as time passed. Then the first living organisms came to earth. and so on and so forth!

its like, Who made god? Who is god? How can god make us? the world?

so many questions, so many possible answers...

[2eelShmeal]

Wow- Did you follow all that crapola? I think these guys make this shit up as they go.

[TheHonestTheist]

owned

[farvision]

Boy these guys are totally crazy. They make up all this garbage to shoehorn science into the bible. What about the molten sea of rock that the earth was?  This is blatantly silly.

[nonthiestnc]

silly title to video. as if we can prove god created earth.