Believing in a recent creation is a good thing but without salvation you will still go to hell so please if you haven't repented of your sins yet and if you haven't believed on the Lord Jesus Christ as your personal Saviour yet consider doing that today ... don't delay this because no one is promised tomorrow. So please get saved today.
I don't understand the nasty responses to this video. I guess if one has an opposite view to the theory of evolution one must keep quiet. Why? ... Creationists do not attack evolutionists with improper speech. I think anger is a last resort before defeat.
That was a very awesome video, I've learned a lot. Thank you so much for the share. God is really if full control, He knows that I need to know this facts on your video. God bless you mightily
Google Search, the SAME RANGE of amounts of Carbon-14 have been found in ALL of the Fossil-Bearing Strata, from the TOP LAYERS Even down to the BOTTOM LAYERS of the Cambiums, in which we are told are almost 600 Million years old!
It is common knowledge Carbon 14 would decay away in less than 70,000 years?
The Carbon 14 dating method PROVES that they formed in the last few 1000 years and those layers were LAID DOWN in the SAME EVENT! Selah
One would think that Job's statement that 'He... Hangeth the earth upon nothing" would be more than enough to convince atheists. After all,unless Job had a Space Shuttle how could he have known this?
Of course its because God revealed it to him.
Tell that to an atheist and they will tell you that obviously the Bible has been tampered with.
Amazing.
I guess that star that couldn't take the pressure and blew itself apart is an analogy of an atheist...
Uranium-lead dating method, Samarium-neodymium dating method, Potassium-argon dating method, Rubidium-strontium dating method, Uranium-thorium dating method,
Radiocarbon dating method, Fission track dating method, Chlorine-36 dating method, Optically stimulated luminescence dating method, Isochron dating, Isotope geochemistry, Isotopic signature, Radioactivity,
Radiohalo, Sensitive High Resolution Ion Microprobe (SHRIMP)
Copies of this Analysis have been sent to over 500 Centers for Agnostic and Atheistic beliefs including Universities or Centers of Learning conducted by Non-Christian Organizations.
The Challenge was Issued: "Disprove the Report and its data OR produce any other text written by men as the scribes,that will contain any of the same phenomena?"
No one has ever taken up that challenge, and they are still waiting after three years~
Darkened and ghastly our demons shall fly. Flittering of the macabre under a cold moon. Decadent worship of black magic and sorcery. God is in the womb of the devil's dungeon. You can see your god writhing in agony. Necrosis is festering in his face. Venomous pins sticking in the skin. The poison prepared by our demons. God will be drawn and quartered. His skull will be chained to your head. We fold the life-less body to fit it in a casket. We shall then cross out the crucifix.
amen, only god could have created the exact distrance of the sun. less than an inch further we would burn and an less than an inch bak we would freaze god is truly amazing
I'll tell you whats SAD SAD SAD. It's little presumptuous idiots like you that take the time to write these moronic comments and dont take the time to look at the description where you would see that this video is a seminar by Dr. Jason Lisle. You see you cant use the " Hovind " Arguments against Dr. Lisle. People like you are exactly why ratings are disabled, because you rate falsely based on your presumptions. Moron !!!!!!!
All Other Writings Alleged to be"Additional" Scriptures,FAILED ON EVERY POSSIBLE PHENOMENA when Evaluated by the same criteria as the Tanakh and New Testament.
Such as the Quran, Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price, Doctrine, Covenants and Commandments of the Mormon Church, Jehovah's Witnesses and MANY, MANY,Others!
By adding the Apocryphal Books Not One of these Books contains even One of the Proofs of the Phenomena found in the Bible!
Ok so now you wan to use Mathematical arguments ? Ok answer this why is it that you believe in a Mathematically Impossible Accident ? Odd that have been calculated ( very conservatively mind you) by SCIENTIST show that all the elements needed for life to simultaneously come together and actually create life are mathematically and statistically impossible. You people go on and on about what evidence you have and what we lack yet you ignore the problems with your belief. CONT
PART 2 : Science must be scrutinized by Science as well. Notice how you people totally ignore that you believe in a mathematically impossible accident. Before you say that Cosmology or Big Bang has nothing to do with Evolution or Abiogensis etc... You cant have evolution with an Origin now can you ? and since you cant have it without origins then You are believing on faith just like me. You cant prove Origin no more than I can you're only speculating and that my friend is faith.
You can talk aboiut "Real " Scientific conferences etc.. all you want. What you really mean is conferences that dont allow for any theories or evidence that goes against what you believe. You think what you believe is real science when the truest form of science "Math" shows your belief to be just as full of shit as you think ours is. Thats the bottom line and no amount of you trying to talk your way out of it will change it. You my friend believe in a philosophy and thats all there is to it.
Ok for this one you claim it's a violation of certain laws. I shouldn't have to tell you this but If God created the Universe then he can violate any laws he likes. Secondly man himself has violated these laws in controlled experiments as well. One example comes to mind is the episode that occurred couple years ago when light was slowed and sped up in a laboratory.
And just suppose that God was responsible for dark matter and dark energy, how does this help astronomers figure out what they are and what their properties are, etc.?
If the earth is the ONLY planet in the entire universe (of more than 100 billion galaxies) that hosts (supposedly) intelligent life?! What a waste.
The more astronomers investigate the universe the less it looks 'created' or 'looks' old? or is a "ready-to-go universe."
I intend to leave your comments because they are well thought out and frankly you make your points without all the drama and insults that come from most people that disagree. You did make a point that Astronomers are investigating and appearances to them discount Biblical teachings on the Universe. To that I say you are still on the inside looking out. God is outside of the Universe and even though man sees what he wants he's still only seeing a very small piece of the pie. CONT next part
For example lets take a parade. A person walks onto the sidewalk to watch a parade yet he came too late to see the beginning, he can only speculate how it started. Where as a person hovering over in a helicopter ( outside of the timeline of the parade ) can actually make predictions ( prophecies ) of the parade. He can tell the onlooker exactly how the parade started, he can write a note to the guy and tell him. Since they dont know each other he can either CONT Next Part
have faith in the man in the helicopter told him the truth or he can just say I dont believe it because other people here are telling me different. What if the other people are wrong ? The point is No-one was around to witness creation, However God says he was and he even explained a few things about it. Either way you slice it, you are still looking at it from a Big Bang point of view. Mans point of view, which I dont have to point out Man wasnt there.
As Far as Earth being the only planet with life, I dont see anywhere in the Bible that alludes to the fact that there's no possibility of that. The Bible was written for the inhabitants of earth. It was here that Sin was unleashed, if there are other planets that house life they may live as God intended for us to live. They may not have given into sin as we did. The Bible relates to People on Earth thats who it's for period.
If I remember, Dr. Lisle was the one who had misgivings about intelligent life being out there. Doesn't look like he's on the SETI team or did work on the upcoming soon to launch Kepler orbital telescope. Mind you, some people think they're already here... or crashed near Roswell. Dr. Lisle's supposed 'evolutionary' astronomical problems wouldn't last 2 minutes at an astronomical conference as no real scientist or astronomer would take him seriously.
The Bible Proved INSPIRED? Through the Computer Analysis of Every Letter in the Original Hebrew TaNaKh and Greek NT! And Through 24 Separate Evaluations of sets of WORDS and LETTERS Which Are All DIVISIBLE Evenly By SEVEN?
On the List are the Number of All Words, Letters in the Vocabulary, Names of Men, Women, Words that begin with a Consonant , Vowel, the Number of Nouns and Non Nouns, All will Divide Evenly by SEVEN and 16 Other Proofs of the Evaluation!
... God "Stretched out the heavens". I doubt if 'stretched' means the big bang. Trying to fit biblical passages to scientific discoveries thereby showing how prescient the bible is seems misguided to me. But these vague passages still don't tell us anything about the universe. Observing with telescopes do tell us about the universe. I can see someone mining the bible for passages that mention dark matter or dark energy.
One image showed the Antennae galaxies, which their collision started happening over 900 million years ago. And all images of colliding galaxies for that matter, show collisions that took way longer than 6000 years. (See also Youtube; Galaxy Collision Disproves Young Earth Creationism by Impaler1815.)
Every galaxy pic shown is millions of light years away.
Supernova 1987a is in the Large Magellanic Cloud--about 160,000 light years away.
The galaxy cluster Abell 2218 is about 2 billion light years from earth. It has a mass of about 10,000 galaxies. And one of the lensed galaxies is the oldest known at about 13.4 billion light years.
His big bang horizon problem is solved by inflation - Alan Guth
Inflation is a theory in itself. Unproven at that. You see the Howrizon problem is a very real problem for Evolutionist, so what do they do they create another theory to cover the flaw in the other theory. Inflation is not a solution to the horizon problem it's a theory that you use to lie to yourself and convince yourself that this theory covers the problem. Creationist are bound by honesty, Evolutionist are not. Would be nice if they had integrity enough to admit their theory has problems
As someone who is a devout Christian knowledgable in science but not a YEC, I always can spot the odd inconsistencies. For example, he points out Supernova 1987A among the beautiful astronmonical sites and states that it is the remant of a star exploding. But it is 168,000 light years from earth! If the universe is less than 6000 years old, then we have a major logical problem.
If you are truly a devout Christian then you of all people should know that God "Stretched out the Heavens" God made a ready to go Universe. This is exactly the problem with Big Bang / Gap Theory. You a confessed Christian are limiting God to the theory of man that everything started in one place and expanded. The Bible says that God stretched out the Heavens, so from that stand point Stars that we see were meant to be seen from the beginning You either have faith in that or you dont.
Please dont misread my intentions. I'm not trying to argue with you or put you down , etc... Im simply stating that You can either look at creation from the worlds point of view ( which lets be honest is unknown, no-one was around to witness ) or you can have faith in the Word and let the word be the witness. God method of creation does not have to be logical in mans eyes. God told us how he did it, He told us how long ( evening and the morning were the first day ) a day was. A Mature Universe
Let's supposed the heavens were strectched out a few days short of 6,000 years ago. The it went boom some time between then and now. It would take the light from the explosion a lot longer than that to get here. If you are assuming the light was created ready to go, then we saw a star explode that never existed since the light from the creation moment is still on its way.
You're still looking at it from a Big Bang point of view. You're going to always be haunted by this or that because you think that because stars are that far away the light had to travel here from a starting point. If you have faith in the word then you know God made the Universe as a mature Universe. The Light is that far away but he stretched it to be here from the beginning. Its not hard to understand if you throw out mans notion that it HAD to start from there and travel here
You're also saying that God only stretched the Heavens for 6000 years worth. I dont know where that came from I never said that. The 6000 year estimate comes from the lineage record and timeline of the Bible not by the stars. God could ( and did in my opinion ) stretch the Universe to where it is now. Take a Golf course for instance would you consider that it must have taken years for all that sod to grow and create the course over time or is it conceivable someone created it maturely ?
Thank you for your constructive criticism in regards to my grammer skills. For some reason I assumed that I was among friends. At the time I wrote that statement I was in a hurry and quite lax in my language skills. I do not claim to have any background in Astro-physics. I am history/anthropology major and bones are my cup of tea. My comment was not meant to be taken as an addition to the conversation but rather a general comment. I about something I had seen concerning Jason.
I guess the beauty of youtube is the freedom of a difference of opinion. In the public sphere, not everyone is your friend. I do understand being lax with language and do accept that as a reasonable explanation.
First of all, I do not have a problem with you calling my grammer skills into question. Sincerly, I offer my thanks. I will be sharper in the time ahead. I understand that Jason can be wrong in his ideas as well. I have a problem with the manner in which you made an assessment about my intelligence based on a single finding. That is not scientific. I have a problem with the fact that you continued to drag out over three posts. I think we are on the same team. Give me a chance.
Youre right, it wasnt scientific, nor was I touting it as a scientific conclusion (note my use of the words suggests and indicator in my post). Speaks to your credibility was meant simply to imply that it is an anecdotal observation. Scientific conclusions arent reached by these types of observations, but hypotheses are.
Whats my point? YouTube is a public sphere. Some folks do tout the straw man that creationists are hillbillies as you suggested, and articulacy and grammar help refute that claim. The opposite, however, only promotes the stereotype. For the record, I do not believe you are a hillbilly.
Thank you. I do not think you are a hack either. Look you have a degree and I can appreciate that. You seem like a smart guy. I understand your point and I stand corrected for being a monkey. Even someone who is not an astro-physicist knows that you made a hypothesis. I am willing to call a truce about this.
Jason Lisle seems like real smart guy. I seen a debate which places between him and astronomer Hugh Ross. He totally smoked Ross. It was pretty awesome.
No, his comment wasnt grammar-related, but it exhibited poor grammar. You might want to re-read yours as well, and see if it makes sense. Although I sense your errors are just typos due to a lack of proofreading, which I understand.
My point is this- Jason Lisle is a smart guy, probably a lot smarter than you or I. Now we have two choices, a) we can simply be blown away by his knowledge, or b) we can take what we do have in our toolkit to critically approach his work. Our language skills give us an ability to deconstruct what someone is saying. While we may still have to research terms and phrases, language deconstruction will go a long way toward forming an opinion, and, hopefully learning a bit more.
Since missiontalk doesnt have any doctoral-level astrophysics credentials (based on his profile) then Im left to look at his grammar as an indicator as to how well he might do at deconstructing someones words. His use of seen rather than saw suggests he would not fare well. So the anecdotal, I like the way the smart man talks type of statements dont help anyone else to regard Jason Lisle any higher.
Allow me to respond to this ridiculous,and unfounded comment. First of all, who do you think you are? Do you have a college degree or are you an "armchair philosopher?" Furthermore, does one need a "doctorate level" degree to casually enjoy the works of another man? I am a junior in college who has enjoyed a very fruitful academic career, even making "Who's Who among American Junior Colleges" last year.
I am certain not going to have a self-proclamed hack sit here and try to pawn me off as some kool-aid drinking hillbilly with the sense God gave a mule. Get over yourself friend.
I do, in fact, have a masters degree, but that is not the point. I am not suggesting you can't enjoy it without a doctoral degree, but I would question how you could say someone was owned if you dont know enough about the subject matter. If Jason is a better debater it still doesnt make what he says true. Can you think of anyone in history who was able to convince people of a lie?
"I would question how you could say someone was owned if you dont know enough about the subject matter."
Whether or not Jason is telling truth has nothing to do with the fact that he "owned" Hugh Ross. Jason might be full of baloney for all I know. However, Ross could not keep things together and continued to stumble over everything Jason was laying out. When Jason called him into question, he could not provide good answers. I think anybody can appreciate that.
So a judge should take into an account which attorney was the better orator when considering a case? To be fair, it sounds like we have different definitions of what it means to own or smoke something or someone. I will admit I can be swayed by the better speaker... I am easily wooed.
That is true and I will take that into account. However, my point is that if a person who is being debated cannot answer the questions that are being asked him than I consider him to be losing. Now, it does not mean that Hugh was right or wrong. All I am saying is that he did not have feasible answers to compete with Jason. That is bad debating in any field... At least I think so.
Also, I want to note that I respect Hugh Ross and his standing in the world of science. He is actually better speaker than Jason. Jason gave concise answers to questions, and Hugh danced around it hoping to avoid it. When Jason asked for an answer from Hugh he basically dodged it. By the way, have you read any of Russell Humphrey's works? He has stirred up a lot of debate but his ideas are very unique and interesting to say the least.
sry, I meant to say rotates. Venus spins on it's axis in the opposite direction of all the other planets. MadScience you are right about Uranus and Pluto too. Great video, I made it a favorite, first in my list.
I enjoyed the video MS. Also I agree with your censoring and declining of rates and posts. If a person is not searching for Truth they look to spread the lie. We all serve one of two masters, eh? God Bless.
What it accomplishes id I dont have to put up with a 17 year old that knows nothing rating my video with 1 star, simply because they dont like the content.
"Empirical Evidence" Wow , are you arrogant or what ? You cant Prove the universe is 14 nillion years old no more than I can prove its only 6000. To call us in Error, when you yourself cant absolutely prove your theory. One of your main arguments will be the speed of light. You consider that evidence, yet have you looked at the Horizon problem ? The horizon problem negates any argument you may have using the speed of light.
1.Like I said, I believe in God, just not the christian one.
2. This evidence probably isn't anywhere near as convincing as the evidence for BB (CBR, expanding universe).
3. Is this only one piece(s) of evidence? Has it/they been dated yet? Just b/c they found "shapes" of wheels doesn't mean it really rocks the boat.
4. Even if this was solid evidence, I would be required to ignore the TONS of evidence that contradicts the Bible (which is the problem with "creation science").
Oh come on, you look at the universe already assuming God is not real and evolution is true.
Also, creationists have no problem with real science. However, science that deals with origins cannot be empirically proven (obviously). You as an evolutionist have to have faith in your theory. Evolution is a religion, not true science.
Exactly what is that? and what has that got to do with the Expansion of the Universe?
"creationists have no problem with real science." well, a quick look through this vid alone tells someone with even a post high school education otherwise.
As for faith in "my" theory (way to be sectarian there) I have no more 'Faith' in it than I have faith that 2+2 = 4, or Faith in the invisible electrons in my PC.
If creationists have a problem with science then could you explain why so many creationists have degrees in biology, geology, astronomy, physics, etc. from secular colleges? You don't know what you are talking about, obviously!
So what is science ? Saying that 4.5 billion years ago nothing exploded into everything we have today ? Sounds like a myth to me. You're Myth is nor more Science than my Myth, when will you people admit that it takes faith to believe in the Big Bang. Dont try to provide any so called evidence for it either , cause there is none, it's all speculation and conjecture. Funny, you people say we believe in a fairy tale. Its a little more of a stretch to believe in the BB. Hows that for Irony ?
B. A MORE complex being that came from nothing created a complex system.
Why not just save yourself the extra step in complexity? (There is a Sagan quote that address this, I'll try to find it).
Besides, I (a science lovin' guy), admits that science CANNOT explain everything today (and may never be able to).
The bigbang theory IS PREPOSTEROUS! But, its the best we've got because its supported by EVIDENCE (the CMB, expanding universe, etc). cont. (If iget "flood" post. I'll post rest later).
CS says "GOD DID IT" to whatever seems unanswerable, mysterious, or too personal to be scientific or "accidental" (EX: Most people ,including myself, CANNOT believe that their love for someone is just a bunch of chemicals and electricity in the brain).
The reason BB is NOT faith (as you put it) is because it is supported by observable evidence (although some of the details of the actual event are hard to believe). Yet for me (when ignoring the fallac logic above), God still created the universe.
As I said previously, I am a theist. I believe that a higher power had a hand in our creation (through his/her tool: Nature and/or Natural processes) and I believe that he/she aids us in our everyday lives. I have no scientific evidence (imo, it is fraudulent to use bad science to prove my BELIEF and/or to shove it down peoples' throat). But, I do have faith.
Just wondering ? Did you realize there is coral on the bottom of the Red Sea in the shapes of Chariot Wheels, Axles, right Angles etc... Also where all this stuff is found is in a smooth floor area of the Red Sea. Now that suggests to me that could be evidence of the Exodus. All of that was found by Scientist that set put to prove the Exodus wasn't true. There is Evidence for God here, but people like you ignore that evidence and believe a stretch on the Big Bang. Amazing !!!
1.Like I said, I believe in God, just not the christian one.
2. This evidence probably isn't anywhere near as convincing as the evidence for BB (CBR, expanding universe).
3. Is this only one piece(s) of evidence? Has it/they been dated yet? Just b/c they found "shapes" of wheels doesn't mean it really rocks the boat.
4. Even if this was solid evidence, I would be required to ignore the TONS of evidence that contradicts the Bible (which is the problem with "creation science").
"Obviously, some of these authors didn't like homosexuals"
You sell God short, though he does condemn homosexuality:
Romans 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; ...
God then condemned Gay-Bashing:
Romans 2:1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.
But, contradiction? In one moment there is stoning of gays, then all the sudden we're all happy again.
Romans 2:1, sounds like its saying don't bash gays b/c you're are also gay. Doesn't really apply directly to them. I was expecting specific scripture on gays.
"Romans 2:1, ... Doesn't really apply directly to them. I was expecting specific scripture on gays."
Go back to Romans 1:27, and as you read remember, the whole chapter/verse was inserted later, It is just one continuous letter from Paul to the Rome. It's easy to want to disassociate it when you see:
I see (just curious, you say that it was inserted later, when was this? is it documented? Or has it always been since the books were put together?). So if this is true, then why do so many "judge" them today? Are they not violating this biblical suggestion?
(ps. It is very delightful to have a discourse with a Christian who actually reads and truly knows his Bible. So, I thank you.)
Verse divisions within these parashoth came in during the Mishnaic period (c. A.D. 200) when it was necessary to intersperse the Hebrew reading with an Aramaic translation so the hearers could understand. The amount of Hebrew that was read before the translation was given in Aramaic became the verse divisions in the the Old Testament, and around A.D. 500 these were signified by the soph pasuq ( : ) that still appear in the Hebrew text.2
I did a quick google search on the chariot wheels.Apparently, the supposed evidence isn't available :O. And also, Wyatt (the man that discovered this) himself said that corals can look like artifacts to the untrained eye.
Essentially, this evidence is inconclusive (but not ruled out). It is not solid at all and is representative of the problems with "creation science."
Like I said before, why isn't faith enough? Why must CS use bad science to prove this "infallible" book?
So some may ask me "what religion do you believe," and I tell them "none." This God could be a Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Johova's witness, some random african/american tribe, Budist, OR, it could be the God of the inhabitants of Alpha Centuri (our closest star). You just don't know for a fact, you can only believe (hae faith). Modern sciences is posing more and more contradictions to creationists.I hope you can find an acceptable balance between the two.thx
Well seeing that Muslims deny that Jesus was God, I would say that Allah is not God. Zeus or Jupiter and RA were all polytheistic I would say he doesnt care for those either. You obviously know nothing about the subject matter, come back when you learn soemthing.
Your missing the point. What I'm saying is that you ASSUME that your God and religion is the real and true one. But you don't know for sure. There are thousands of other religions and none of them can ultimately be proven wrong (can't prove a negative) until we all die. What if Buddhism is correct? What if the religion of the inhabitants of Alpha Centuri (see above) are correct? Like I said, I do believe in a higher power, but to commit to one out of thousands is nonsense to me.
"to commit to one out of thousands is nonsense to me."
Jesus was either a liar, a lunatic, or who he said he was, the Son of God.
If you believe he is the Son of God, then you treat Him as such.
So many religions....hmmmm... In America you have freedom of religion, and Christianity is the dominant religion. I wonder if Saudi Arabia allowed Gospel Preaching if there would be a change there?
Open your eyes, Christianity is KEPT out, not chosen over in majority.
So? Your point is? Did I say it was being forced upon me??? That doesn't in any way change the fact that there are thousands to choose from (Maybe... flying spaghetti monster. Oo, oo, oo I know... Xenu, scientology, and thetans...). So, I will state once more, "to commit to one out of thousands is nonsense to me." Like it says, its just my opinion (which I am free to right?).
Because not everywhere has the freedom to choose between the Thousands that you allude too. His point is that some countries are persecuting Christians. Sudan, and China come to mind right off the bat. Yet those people choose to follow Christ knowing full well that they are putting their lives on the line. Where you cant seem to see why anyone would choose Christianity over anything else, then maybe the fact these people put it before their well being might tell you a little something.
I, myself have not suffered persecution like those people, but I can tell you this. When it comes down to it here in America I too will gladly give my life for the Lord Jesus Christ. Even if it my being tortured or whatnot. I pray that doesnt happen but Im no more special than those dear brothers and sisters of mine that live in those countries and are being tortured they know the truth and because torturers also know that Jesus is Lord.
Why is it that the name of Jesus is hated by the entire world other than his followers ? No-one says Buddha as a curse word, No-one says Mohammad as a curse word. The name of Jesus is hated because deep down in everyones psyche they know that Jesus Christ is Lord. He is hated by people that love the World, and the Flesh. It's just like people that like to steal, kill, etc... Hate Law Enforcement. Saxoman you will get on your knees and declare Christ as Lord, regardless if you want too or not.
Everything you just said sounded like the usual rhetoric of "spreaders of the gospel" (except for a few very awkward things). I can get that (or something like it) from every other religion.
So many of those others say the same thing. Hell, even different SECTS of Christianity say the same thing TO EACH OTHER! Its preposterous!
C'mon. Jesus isn't hated anymore than Allah.
And more blood has been irrevocably spilled in the name of Christ than most other people.
So, should I listen to your religion (tells me I'll burn in hell)? Or Islam (same thing)? Or some other random one?
Or, instead of bending to the fear tactics used by so many religions to get conventions and/or bend people to their will (and to control people), why don't I just free myself of this fear (as anyone of them could be the right one)? Why don't I free myself of this book, which tells be stone homosexuals and unfaithful women (but not men)?
I'd like to say that I don't think all religions are bad. There is good that can (and indeed has) been done. But the harm that ones like Christianity have caused is grotesque imo.
In fact, I contend that we didn't get our morals from religion, but that religion got them from us (whenever we created them). From the rules that we made in order to make functioning society.
Obviously, some of these authors didn't like homosexuals (perhaps denying of their own homosexual impulses) or female agency (can't have women calling the shots now!), but there were some good points that they got in there (thou shalt not steal, kill, or be unfaithful). Wow, this discourse sure has come a long way from "deceitful God" lol.
Anyway, my point remains: "to commit to one out of thousands is nonsense to me."
I Timothy 2:11-15: "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence."
There are so many passages like this. Certainly, women aren't meant to be equals.
"I Timothy 2:11-15: "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence."
You have raised a good point because Paul also wrote:
Galations 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, [there is neither male nor female]: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
That is a good question I don't have an answer for, I will look into that.
Why don't I free myself of this book, which tells be stone homosexuals and unfaithful women (but not men)?
Lev 20:10 And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, [the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.]
Deuteronomy 22:13-21 "If any man take a wife, and go in unto her . . . and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid . . . and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die . . ."
But, I don't remember any scripture specifying that men have to be virgins too. Double standard.
Deu 17:15 Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose:...
Deu 17:17 Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away:...
It was never ok for a king to "multiply wives". Solomon did wrong.
It does go on and on, and it does take some research, the Solomon one I knew off hand. I will look into the other two, something about the virgins kept, but the women who were not were killed because they had been "corrupting" Israel.
Deuteronomy 24:1, which says that only a man can divorce a woman and only under one circumstance (cheating wife).
Deuteronomy 22:23-24, which basically says an engaged women who didn't yell loud enough if she was raped in the city will be stoned to death along with the rapist (because he hath "humbled" his neighbors wife (commodity).
Deuteronomy 22:28-29, which says that if the woman was not engaged and was raped, she must marry her rapist!
But it doesn't exactly specify (considering it came a couple lines after that first quote). It seems a bit ambiguous. I guess its all up to interpretation.
Feminine passive participle of an unused root meaning to separate; a virgin (from her privacy); sometimes (by continuation) a bride; also (figuratively) a city or state: - maid, virgin.
Virgin was a feminine word, a male who never had sex was not called a "virgin".
The commandment to not commit adultery was for both men and women.
nâ'aph
naw-af'
A primitive root; to commit adultery; figuratively to apostatize: - adulterer (-ess), commit (-ing) adultery
Hmm. I see. So, are you saying that virgin didn't actually mean what it does today? If so, then there must be a ton of translational/interpretation errors in the bible (as what happens sometimes when things are translated).
Is that what you're trying to tell me (that it meant something else)?
And even so, females are still commodified and used as currency.
So, because some people put their well being on the line, that makes it valid? I mean, what with thousands of missionaries going to these countries and preaching their opinion, culture, and religion as truth (and above the listener's own), maybe that can account for some converts huh? Or maybe the fact that Christianity is based in the richest countries in the world (so it has more resources to do missions)?
There's no significance here.Repeat something enough times and it might stick.
So when GOd created the universe, he set the light in motion in such a way that we will be tricked into thinking that the earth can't possibly be 6000 years old. All just to trick us...
You looking at it as if God created the Universe Like the Big Bang from one single starting point. God created a mature universe, Just like when you go buy a newly built home, it's already complete. Just like an already complete Interstate that stretches for many miles, God built the Universe just like it is,The problem is that people think that God had to start from a single point. If you take a second to get the big bang out of your way of thinking you see just how awesome God is.
HAHAHAHA I'm in tears, never laughed so much.
Was this commissioned by Monty Piton or Kids in the Hall.
You have to be a genius to make such good comedy.
nemo4evr 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Believing in a recent creation is a good thing but without salvation you will still go to hell so please if you haven't repented of your sins yet and if you haven't believed on the Lord Jesus Christ as your personal Saviour yet consider doing that today ... don't delay this because no one is promised tomorrow. So please get saved today.
krisv001 1 year ago
evolutionist: Angry wicked violent murder hater of truth pure-hatred lawless
implacable unmerciful wicked inverters of evil haters of GOD .....
CreationPhotography 1 year ago
wow, this guy is a genius.
crabsyman 1 year ago
I don't understand the nasty responses to this video. I guess if one has an opposite view to the theory of evolution one must keep quiet. Why? ... Creationists do not attack evolutionists with improper speech. I think anger is a last resort before defeat.
rgneufeld 1 year ago
That was a very awesome video, I've learned a lot. Thank you so much for the share. God is really if full control, He knows that I need to know this facts on your video. God bless you mightily
ThePrayerHotline 2 years ago
Google Search, the SAME RANGE of amounts of Carbon-14 have been found in ALL of the Fossil-Bearing Strata, from the TOP LAYERS Even down to the BOTTOM LAYERS of the Cambiums, in which we are told are almost 600 Million years old!
It is common knowledge Carbon 14 would decay away in less than 70,000 years?
The Carbon 14 dating method PROVES that they formed in the last few 1000 years and those layers were LAID DOWN in the SAME EVENT! Selah
Nothing but a Global Flood can explain this?;-)
AstronomicalEvidence 2 years ago
Awesome Detailed Study! Thank you!
JudgmentDay1sComing 2 years ago
Sweet vid. Enjoyed!
V1RU5ex3 2 years ago
One would think that Job's statement that 'He... Hangeth the earth upon nothing" would be more than enough to convince atheists. After all,unless Job had a Space Shuttle how could he have known this?
Of course its because God revealed it to him.
Tell that to an atheist and they will tell you that obviously the Bible has been tampered with.
Amazing.
I guess that star that couldn't take the pressure and blew itself apart is an analogy of an atheist...
Hehe
:p
silmalila 2 years ago
bible+science=facepalm
mrose59 2 years ago
Comment removed
AstronomicalEvidence 2 years ago
you do realize that this in only one form of radiometric dating. and it is not the one commonly used in the dating method.
fail argument. you need to look it up
mrose59 2 years ago
carbon 14 dating is best used to tell how long ago an organism had died, it is not used for geological studies. there are better methods
mrose59 2 years ago
Uranium-lead dating method, Samarium-neodymium dating method, Potassium-argon dating method, Rubidium-strontium dating method, Uranium-thorium dating method,
Radiocarbon dating method, Fission track dating method, Chlorine-36 dating method, Optically stimulated luminescence dating method, Isochron dating, Isotope geochemistry, Isotopic signature, Radioactivity,
Radiohalo, Sensitive High Resolution Ion Microprobe (SHRIMP)
mrose59 2 years ago
What a load of shit. Christians belong on the short bus.
GoatSkinner666 2 years ago
Copies of this Analysis have been sent to over 500 Centers for Agnostic and Atheistic beliefs including Universities or Centers of Learning conducted by Non-Christian Organizations.
The Challenge was Issued: "Disprove the Report and its data OR produce any other text written by men as the scribes,that will contain any of the same phenomena?"
No one has ever taken up that challenge, and they are still waiting after three years~
Check my Channel for more Details!
Google Rangeguide/Panin
AstronomicalEvidence 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
RobertBaral365 2 years ago
You shall be writhing in agony for having blasphemed and rejected the Messiah.
You are one of those for whom blackest darkness has been reserved by God.
May God have mercy on your soul.
silmalila 2 years ago
silmalila, Jesus' example was to love people who don't follow God, not to insult them.
bmw528i00 2 years ago
Sorry bmw, sometimes I get frustrated.
Peace.
silmalila 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Gods word IS TRUTH!!
Letsmakeasamich 2 years ago
amen, only god could have created the exact distrance of the sun. less than an inch further we would burn and an less than an inch bak we would freaze god is truly amazing
werewolfgirl132 2 years ago
Our orbit around the sun varies by 6 million km, fool.
sharpyt1 2 years ago
0.o u replied on a 4 month old comment. good for you!! BTW thanks for signing your comment. ^_^ blessing fool
werewolfgirl132 2 years ago
does the time of the comment change the fact that you're wrong? No. I was a bit pissed off by your ignorance so I had to comment.
sharpyt1 2 years ago
ratings disabled normally means the video is a load of "Kent Hovind"----this one is a fine example of this. SAD SAD SAD .
hunga224 3 years ago
I'll tell you whats SAD SAD SAD. It's little presumptuous idiots like you that take the time to write these moronic comments and dont take the time to look at the description where you would see that this video is a seminar by Dr. Jason Lisle. You see you cant use the " Hovind " Arguments against Dr. Lisle. People like you are exactly why ratings are disabled, because you rate falsely based on your presumptions. Moron !!!!!!!
MadScience 3 years ago
ha ha No surprise he didn't right back
Good On you
AussieBoyX 2 years ago
Read Hitler much?
GoatSkinner666 2 years ago
No, GoatSkinner666, but i would be surprised if you haven't read Hitler, since he was a satanist much like you.
silmalila 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MadScience you are of your father the devil
CreationPhotography 1 year ago
@hunga
Continues:
All Other Writings Alleged to be"Additional" Scriptures,FAILED ON EVERY POSSIBLE PHENOMENA when Evaluated by the same criteria as the Tanakh and New Testament.
Such as the Quran, Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price, Doctrine, Covenants and Commandments of the Mormon Church, Jehovah's Witnesses and MANY, MANY,Others!
By adding the Apocryphal Books Not One of these Books contains even One of the Proofs of the Phenomena found in the Bible!
Google Rangeguide/Panin
AstronomicalEvidence 2 years ago
Here's answering the light/heat "problem" for Creation: In Genesis 1:3 God created light. Light = heat and energy. In Genesis 1:14, God created stars.
Light existed before stars, and was created uniformly throught the cosmos, except where he had created darkness.
Neraph 3 years ago
Effectively, he solidified the already-there light into stars.
Neraph 3 years ago
Ok so now you wan to use Mathematical arguments ? Ok answer this why is it that you believe in a Mathematically Impossible Accident ? Odd that have been calculated ( very conservatively mind you) by SCIENTIST show that all the elements needed for life to simultaneously come together and actually create life are mathematically and statistically impossible. You people go on and on about what evidence you have and what we lack yet you ignore the problems with your belief. CONT
MadScience 3 years ago
PART 2 : Science must be scrutinized by Science as well. Notice how you people totally ignore that you believe in a mathematically impossible accident. Before you say that Cosmology or Big Bang has nothing to do with Evolution or Abiogensis etc... You cant have evolution with an Origin now can you ? and since you cant have it without origins then You are believing on faith just like me. You cant prove Origin no more than I can you're only speculating and that my friend is faith.
MadScience 3 years ago
You can talk aboiut "Real " Scientific conferences etc.. all you want. What you really mean is conferences that dont allow for any theories or evidence that goes against what you believe. You think what you believe is real science when the truest form of science "Math" shows your belief to be just as full of shit as you think ours is. Thats the bottom line and no amount of you trying to talk your way out of it will change it. You my friend believe in a philosophy and thats all there is to it.
MadScience 3 years ago
Ok for this one you claim it's a violation of certain laws. I shouldn't have to tell you this but If God created the Universe then he can violate any laws he likes. Secondly man himself has violated these laws in controlled experiments as well. One example comes to mind is the episode that occurred couple years ago when light was slowed and sped up in a laboratory.
MadScience 3 years ago
And just suppose that God was responsible for dark matter and dark energy, how does this help astronomers figure out what they are and what their properties are, etc.?
If the earth is the ONLY planet in the entire universe (of more than 100 billion galaxies) that hosts (supposedly) intelligent life?! What a waste.
The more astronomers investigate the universe the less it looks 'created' or 'looks' old? or is a "ready-to-go universe."
crocaduck 3 years ago
I intend to leave your comments because they are well thought out and frankly you make your points without all the drama and insults that come from most people that disagree. You did make a point that Astronomers are investigating and appearances to them discount Biblical teachings on the Universe. To that I say you are still on the inside looking out. God is outside of the Universe and even though man sees what he wants he's still only seeing a very small piece of the pie. CONT next part
MadScience 3 years ago
For example lets take a parade. A person walks onto the sidewalk to watch a parade yet he came too late to see the beginning, he can only speculate how it started. Where as a person hovering over in a helicopter ( outside of the timeline of the parade ) can actually make predictions ( prophecies ) of the parade. He can tell the onlooker exactly how the parade started, he can write a note to the guy and tell him. Since they dont know each other he can either CONT Next Part
MadScience 3 years ago
have faith in the man in the helicopter told him the truth or he can just say I dont believe it because other people here are telling me different. What if the other people are wrong ? The point is No-one was around to witness creation, However God says he was and he even explained a few things about it. Either way you slice it, you are still looking at it from a Big Bang point of view. Mans point of view, which I dont have to point out Man wasnt there.
MadScience 3 years ago
As Far as Earth being the only planet with life, I dont see anywhere in the Bible that alludes to the fact that there's no possibility of that. The Bible was written for the inhabitants of earth. It was here that Sin was unleashed, if there are other planets that house life they may live as God intended for us to live. They may not have given into sin as we did. The Bible relates to People on Earth thats who it's for period.
MadScience 3 years ago
If I remember, Dr. Lisle was the one who had misgivings about intelligent life being out there. Doesn't look like he's on the SETI team or did work on the upcoming soon to launch Kepler orbital telescope. Mind you, some people think they're already here... or crashed near Roswell. Dr. Lisle's supposed 'evolutionary' astronomical problems wouldn't last 2 minutes at an astronomical conference as no real scientist or astronomer would take him seriously.
crocaduck 3 years ago
@croca
The Bible Proved INSPIRED? Through the Computer Analysis of Every Letter in the Original Hebrew TaNaKh and Greek NT! And Through 24 Separate Evaluations of sets of WORDS and LETTERS Which Are All DIVISIBLE Evenly By SEVEN?
On the List are the Number of All Words, Letters in the Vocabulary, Names of Men, Women, Words that begin with a Consonant , Vowel, the Number of Nouns and Non Nouns, All will Divide Evenly by SEVEN and 16 Other Proofs of the Evaluation!
Google Rangeguide/Panin
AstronomicalEvidence 2 years ago
... God "Stretched out the heavens". I doubt if 'stretched' means the big bang. Trying to fit biblical passages to scientific discoveries thereby showing how prescient the bible is seems misguided to me. But these vague passages still don't tell us anything about the universe. Observing with telescopes do tell us about the universe. I can see someone mining the bible for passages that mention dark matter or dark energy.
crocaduck 3 years ago
One image showed the Antennae galaxies, which their collision started happening over 900 million years ago. And all images of colliding galaxies for that matter, show collisions that took way longer than 6000 years. (See also Youtube; Galaxy Collision Disproves Young Earth Creationism by Impaler1815.)
crocaduck 3 years ago
Every galaxy pic shown is millions of light years away.
Supernova 1987a is in the Large Magellanic Cloud--about 160,000 light years away.
The galaxy cluster Abell 2218 is about 2 billion light years from earth. It has a mass of about 10,000 galaxies. And one of the lensed galaxies is the oldest known at about 13.4 billion light years.
His big bang horizon problem is solved by inflation - Alan Guth
crocaduck 3 years ago
Inflation is a theory in itself. Unproven at that. You see the Howrizon problem is a very real problem for Evolutionist, so what do they do they create another theory to cover the flaw in the other theory. Inflation is not a solution to the horizon problem it's a theory that you use to lie to yourself and convince yourself that this theory covers the problem. Creationist are bound by honesty, Evolutionist are not. Would be nice if they had integrity enough to admit their theory has problems
MadScience 3 years ago
As someone who is a devout Christian knowledgable in science but not a YEC, I always can spot the odd inconsistencies. For example, he points out Supernova 1987A among the beautiful astronmonical sites and states that it is the remant of a star exploding. But it is 168,000 light years from earth! If the universe is less than 6000 years old, then we have a major logical problem.
labarum312 3 years ago
If you are truly a devout Christian then you of all people should know that God "Stretched out the Heavens" God made a ready to go Universe. This is exactly the problem with Big Bang / Gap Theory. You a confessed Christian are limiting God to the theory of man that everything started in one place and expanded. The Bible says that God stretched out the Heavens, so from that stand point Stars that we see were meant to be seen from the beginning You either have faith in that or you dont.
MadScience 3 years ago
Please dont misread my intentions. I'm not trying to argue with you or put you down , etc... Im simply stating that You can either look at creation from the worlds point of view ( which lets be honest is unknown, no-one was around to witness ) or you can have faith in the Word and let the word be the witness. God method of creation does not have to be logical in mans eyes. God told us how he did it, He told us how long ( evening and the morning were the first day ) a day was. A Mature Universe
MadScience 3 years ago
Let's supposed the heavens were strectched out a few days short of 6,000 years ago. The it went boom some time between then and now. It would take the light from the explosion a lot longer than that to get here. If you are assuming the light was created ready to go, then we saw a star explode that never existed since the light from the creation moment is still on its way.
labarum312 3 years ago
You're still looking at it from a Big Bang point of view. You're going to always be haunted by this or that because you think that because stars are that far away the light had to travel here from a starting point. If you have faith in the word then you know God made the Universe as a mature Universe. The Light is that far away but he stretched it to be here from the beginning. Its not hard to understand if you throw out mans notion that it HAD to start from there and travel here
MadScience 3 years ago
You're also saying that God only stretched the Heavens for 6000 years worth. I dont know where that came from I never said that. The 6000 year estimate comes from the lineage record and timeline of the Bible not by the stars. God could ( and did in my opinion ) stretch the Universe to where it is now. Take a Golf course for instance would you consider that it must have taken years for all that sod to grow and create the course over time or is it conceivable someone created it maturely ?
MadScience 3 years ago
Pi equals 3
(1 Kings 7:23)
I rest my case.
RationalEmotive 3 years ago
Agreed. I do enjoy a good debate, so thank you.
timjhnsn 3 years ago
Tim,
Thank you for your constructive criticism in regards to my grammer skills. For some reason I assumed that I was among friends. At the time I wrote that statement I was in a hurry and quite lax in my language skills. I do not claim to have any background in Astro-physics. I am history/anthropology major and bones are my cup of tea. My comment was not meant to be taken as an addition to the conversation but rather a general comment. I about something I had seen concerning Jason.
missiontalk 3 years ago
"I about something I had seen concerning Jason. " Please consider the following as a correction.
My comment was not meant to be taken as an addition to the conversation but rather a general comment about something I had seen concerning Jason.
missiontalk 3 years ago
I guess the beauty of youtube is the freedom of a difference of opinion. In the public sphere, not everyone is your friend. I do understand being lax with language and do accept that as a reasonable explanation.
timjhnsn 3 years ago
First of all, I do not have a problem with you calling my grammer skills into question. Sincerly, I offer my thanks. I will be sharper in the time ahead. I understand that Jason can be wrong in his ideas as well. I have a problem with the manner in which you made an assessment about my intelligence based on a single finding. That is not scientific. I have a problem with the fact that you continued to drag out over three posts. I think we are on the same team. Give me a chance.
missiontalk 3 years ago
Youre right, it wasnt scientific, nor was I touting it as a scientific conclusion (note my use of the words suggests and indicator in my post). Speaks to your credibility was meant simply to imply that it is an anecdotal observation. Scientific conclusions arent reached by these types of observations, but hypotheses are.
timjhnsn 3 years ago
Whats my point? YouTube is a public sphere. Some folks do tout the straw man that creationists are hillbillies as you suggested, and articulacy and grammar help refute that claim. The opposite, however, only promotes the stereotype. For the record, I do not believe you are a hillbilly.
timjhnsn 3 years ago
Thank you. I do not think you are a hack either. Look you have a degree and I can appreciate that. You seem like a smart guy. I understand your point and I stand corrected for being a monkey. Even someone who is not an astro-physicist knows that you made a hypothesis. I am willing to call a truce about this.
missiontalk 3 years ago
Jason Lisle seems like real smart guy. I seen a debate which places between him and astronomer Hugh Ross. He totally smoked Ross. It was pretty awesome.
missiontalk 3 years ago
"I seen a debate..." Your grammar skills speak well of your credibility.
timjhnsn 3 years ago
"Your grammar skills speak well of your credibility. "
What has his comment has to do anything with is grammar
kut77less 3 years ago
No, his comment wasnt grammar-related, but it exhibited poor grammar. You might want to re-read yours as well, and see if it makes sense. Although I sense your errors are just typos due to a lack of proofreading, which I understand.
timjhnsn 3 years ago
My point is this- Jason Lisle is a smart guy, probably a lot smarter than you or I. Now we have two choices, a) we can simply be blown away by his knowledge, or b) we can take what we do have in our toolkit to critically approach his work. Our language skills give us an ability to deconstruct what someone is saying. While we may still have to research terms and phrases, language deconstruction will go a long way toward forming an opinion, and, hopefully learning a bit more.
timjhnsn 3 years ago
Since missiontalk doesnt have any doctoral-level astrophysics credentials (based on his profile) then Im left to look at his grammar as an indicator as to how well he might do at deconstructing someones words. His use of seen rather than saw suggests he would not fare well. So the anecdotal, I like the way the smart man talks type of statements dont help anyone else to regard Jason Lisle any higher.
I could be wrong
timjhnsn 3 years ago
Allow me to respond to this ridiculous,and unfounded comment. First of all, who do you think you are? Do you have a college degree or are you an "armchair philosopher?" Furthermore, does one need a "doctorate level" degree to casually enjoy the works of another man? I am a junior in college who has enjoyed a very fruitful academic career, even making "Who's Who among American Junior Colleges" last year.
missiontalk 3 years ago
I am certain not going to have a self-proclamed hack sit here and try to pawn me off as some kool-aid drinking hillbilly with the sense God gave a mule. Get over yourself friend.
missiontalk 3 years ago
"self-proclaimed hack" would mean that I called myself a hack.
timjhnsn 3 years ago
And I would hope God gave you the sense of a mule... and then some.
timjhnsn 3 years ago
sorry I knew it was wrong when I wrote it. To tell you the truth I was little pieved.
missiontalk 3 years ago
I do, in fact, have a masters degree, but that is not the point. I am not suggesting you can't enjoy it without a doctoral degree, but I would question how you could say someone was owned if you dont know enough about the subject matter. If Jason is a better debater it still doesnt make what he says true. Can you think of anyone in history who was able to convince people of a lie?
timjhnsn 3 years ago
"I would question how you could say someone was owned if you dont know enough about the subject matter."
Whether or not Jason is telling truth has nothing to do with the fact that he "owned" Hugh Ross. Jason might be full of baloney for all I know. However, Ross could not keep things together and continued to stumble over everything Jason was laying out. When Jason called him into question, he could not provide good answers. I think anybody can appreciate that.
missiontalk 3 years ago
So a judge should take into an account which attorney was the better orator when considering a case? To be fair, it sounds like we have different definitions of what it means to own or smoke something or someone. I will admit I can be swayed by the better speaker... I am easily wooed.
timjhnsn 3 years ago
That is true and I will take that into account. However, my point is that if a person who is being debated cannot answer the questions that are being asked him than I consider him to be losing. Now, it does not mean that Hugh was right or wrong. All I am saying is that he did not have feasible answers to compete with Jason. That is bad debating in any field... At least I think so.
missiontalk 3 years ago
Also, I want to note that I respect Hugh Ross and his standing in the world of science. He is actually better speaker than Jason. Jason gave concise answers to questions, and Hugh danced around it hoping to avoid it. When Jason asked for an answer from Hugh he basically dodged it. By the way, have you read any of Russell Humphrey's works? He has stirred up a lot of debate but his ideas are very unique and interesting to say the least.
missiontalk 3 years ago
Only Venus revolves in the opposite direction.
bignewgame 3 years ago
Uranus ( although Spinning on it's side ) does rotate clockwise. Pluto as well, but thats no longer a planet.
MadScience 3 years ago
sry, I meant to say rotates. Venus spins on it's axis in the opposite direction of all the other planets. MadScience you are right about Uranus and Pluto too. Great video, I made it a favorite, first in my list.
bignewgame 3 years ago
I enjoyed the video MS. Also I agree with your censoring and declining of rates and posts. If a person is not searching for Truth they look to spread the lie. We all serve one of two masters, eh? God Bless.
stevendrake01 3 years ago
good to see that you don't.
so why do you censor ratings?
what does that accomplish?
RaustBD 3 years ago
What it accomplishes id I dont have to put up with a 17 year old that knows nothing rating my video with 1 star, simply because they dont like the content.
MadScience 3 years ago
test to see if you filter comments
RaustBD 3 years ago
Yes I do !
MadScience 3 years ago
Science says the earth is around 4 to 6 billion years old and the universe is around 14 billion years old backed up by empirical evidence.
Creation says that the earth AND the universe is only around 6000 years old backed up only by what is written in the bible during the bronze age.
This means that creationists are out by a factor of between over 600,000 to over 2,000,000.
That is quite an error.
Zed1967 3 years ago
"Empirical Evidence" Wow , are you arrogant or what ? You cant Prove the universe is 14 nillion years old no more than I can prove its only 6000. To call us in Error, when you yourself cant absolutely prove your theory. One of your main arguments will be the speed of light. You consider that evidence, yet have you looked at the Horizon problem ? The horizon problem negates any argument you may have using the speed of light.
MadScience 3 years ago
"when you yourself cant absolutely prove your theory"
Nothing can be proven 100% but evolution does have the preponderance of evidence.
sweatytoothmadman 3 years ago
What evidence?
stevendrake01 3 years ago
The fossil and genetic evidence.
sweatytoothmadman 3 years ago
Fossil evidence of trees standing through "millions" of years of sediment? Hmmm
Evolution evidence like *reducible* complexity... correct? The mouse trap was ridiculous and idiotic, at best. :)
stevendrake01 3 years ago
Lab produced speciation.
Retrovirus analysis.
Nested hierarchy of genome which overlaps with nested hierarchy of physical form.
Produced useful paradigms for computer science.
It's basics can be used to solve complex engineering problems.
It's basics can be demonstrated with computer simulations.
No magic involved.
Why evolution? Genesis is old testament, there are two accounts anyways. Christianity has opposed other science, and were always wrong.
willowtreephoto 3 years ago
Im pretty sure what you are refering to is genetics
collegeboy477 3 years ago
Science says no such things.
Evolutionary scientist say this but no science
kut77less 3 years ago
1.Like I said, I believe in God, just not the christian one.
2. This evidence probably isn't anywhere near as convincing as the evidence for BB (CBR, expanding universe).
3. Is this only one piece(s) of evidence? Has it/they been dated yet? Just b/c they found "shapes" of wheels doesn't mean it really rocks the boat.
4. Even if this was solid evidence, I would be required to ignore the TONS of evidence that contradicts the Bible (which is the problem with "creation science").
saxdude20 3 years ago
"Creation Astronomy: Viewing the Universe through biblical glasses"
You've got to admire the titles objectivity.
(Creationists' please learn what Science is...and while you're at it, check out 'Irony' as well)
bshieldsbb01 3 years ago
Oh come on, you look at the universe already assuming God is not real and evolution is true.
Also, creationists have no problem with real science. However, science that deals with origins cannot be empirically proven (obviously). You as an evolutionist have to have faith in your theory. Evolution is a religion, not true science.
KJVTruth 3 years ago
First off,I'm an "Evolusionist"???(really??)
Exactly what is that? and what has that got to do with the Expansion of the Universe?
"creationists have no problem with real science." well, a quick look through this vid alone tells someone with even a post high school education otherwise.
As for faith in "my" theory (way to be sectarian there) I have no more 'Faith' in it than I have faith that 2+2 = 4, or Faith in the invisible electrons in my PC.
bshieldsbb01 3 years ago
If creationists have a problem with science then could you explain why so many creationists have degrees in biology, geology, astronomy, physics, etc. from secular colleges? You don't know what you are talking about, obviously!
KJVTruth 3 years ago
So what is science ? Saying that 4.5 billion years ago nothing exploded into everything we have today ? Sounds like a myth to me. You're Myth is nor more Science than my Myth, when will you people admit that it takes faith to believe in the Big Bang. Dont try to provide any so called evidence for it either , cause there is none, it's all speculation and conjecture. Funny, you people say we believe in a fairy tale. Its a little more of a stretch to believe in the BB. Hows that for Irony ?
MadScience 3 years ago
Lets attempt to be civil now lol.
Ok. First of all its more like 14 billion years. 4.5 billion is the age of our solar system.
And if you want to use logic then fine. Let me join.
You say that it is not logical that something so complex could come out of nothing.
OK :)
BUT, to replace that logic, you say that an infinitely more complex being that has always existed created the complex universe.
PROBLEM!
Which is more "foolish" (based off this logic):
A. A complex system came from nothing
cont.
saxdude20 3 years ago 2
OR
B. A MORE complex being that came from nothing created a complex system.
Why not just save yourself the extra step in complexity? (There is a Sagan quote that address this, I'll try to find it).
Besides, I (a science lovin' guy), admits that science CANNOT explain everything today (and may never be able to).
The bigbang theory IS PREPOSTEROUS! But, its the best we've got because its supported by EVIDENCE (the CMB, expanding universe, etc). cont. (If iget "flood" post. I'll post rest later).
saxdude20 3 years ago 2
CS says "GOD DID IT" to whatever seems unanswerable, mysterious, or too personal to be scientific or "accidental" (EX: Most people ,including myself, CANNOT believe that their love for someone is just a bunch of chemicals and electricity in the brain).
The reason BB is NOT faith (as you put it) is because it is supported by observable evidence (although some of the details of the actual event are hard to believe). Yet for me (when ignoring the fallac logic above), God still created the universe.
saxdude20 3 years ago 2
I meant CBR in my showing of evidence for BB NOT CMB (dunno what the heck that is xD. Google along with BB).
saxdude20 3 years ago 2
As I said previously, I am a theist. I believe that a higher power had a hand in our creation (through his/her tool: Nature and/or Natural processes) and I believe that he/she aids us in our everyday lives. I have no scientific evidence (imo, it is fraudulent to use bad science to prove my BELIEF and/or to shove it down peoples' throat). But, I do have faith.
saxdude20 3 years ago 2
Just wondering ? Did you realize there is coral on the bottom of the Red Sea in the shapes of Chariot Wheels, Axles, right Angles etc... Also where all this stuff is found is in a smooth floor area of the Red Sea. Now that suggests to me that could be evidence of the Exodus. All of that was found by Scientist that set put to prove the Exodus wasn't true. There is Evidence for God here, but people like you ignore that evidence and believe a stretch on the Big Bang. Amazing !!!
MadScience 3 years ago
1.Like I said, I believe in God, just not the christian one.
2. This evidence probably isn't anywhere near as convincing as the evidence for BB (CBR, expanding universe).
3. Is this only one piece(s) of evidence? Has it/they been dated yet? Just b/c they found "shapes" of wheels doesn't mean it really rocks the boat.
4. Even if this was solid evidence, I would be required to ignore the TONS of evidence that contradicts the Bible (which is the problem with "creation science").
saxdude20 3 years ago
"Obviously, some of these authors didn't like homosexuals"
You sell God short, though he does condemn homosexuality:
Romans 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; ...
God then condemned Gay-Bashing:
Romans 2:1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.
jazzyhap 3 years ago
But, contradiction? In one moment there is stoning of gays, then all the sudden we're all happy again.
Romans 2:1, sounds like its saying don't bash gays b/c you're are also gay. Doesn't really apply directly to them. I was expecting specific scripture on gays.
saxdude20 3 years ago
"Romans 2:1, ... Doesn't really apply directly to them. I was expecting specific scripture on gays."
Go back to Romans 1:27, and as you read remember, the whole chapter/verse was inserted later, It is just one continuous letter from Paul to the Rome. It's easy to want to disassociate it when you see:
CHAPTER 2
but that is just a marker, ignore.
jazzyhap 3 years ago
I see (just curious, you say that it was inserted later, when was this? is it documented? Or has it always been since the books were put together?). So if this is true, then why do so many "judge" them today? Are they not violating this biblical suggestion?
(ps. It is very delightful to have a discourse with a Christian who actually reads and truly knows his Bible. So, I thank you.)
saxdude20 3 years ago
The present chapter divisions in our Bibles were invented in 1205 by Stephen Langton, a professor in Paris (he later became Archbishop of Canterbury)
"So if this is true, then why do so many "judge" them today? Are they not violating this biblical suggestion?"
Sad isn't it. Easy to pick on homosexuality, and ignore:
Matthew 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
I thank you for the compliment.
jazzyhap 3 years ago
Indeed it is. And don't mind the compliment. You know your Bible.
How was it organized before the division?
saxdude20 3 years ago
"How was it organized before the division?"
Verse divisions within these parashoth came in during the Mishnaic period (c. A.D. 200) when it was necessary to intersperse the Hebrew reading with an Aramaic translation so the hearers could understand. The amount of Hebrew that was read before the translation was given in Aramaic became the verse divisions in the the Old Testament, and around A.D. 500 these were signified by the soph pasuq ( : ) that still appear in the Hebrew text.2
jazzyhap 3 years ago
Interesting stuff indeed. Hearing this, it is a mystery to me why gay-bashing appears to be a past time to conservative Christians...
Did you study the Bible in-depth (history, etymology, construction) at a school or do you just know a bunch about it (or both)?
saxdude20 3 years ago
I had classes in becoming a minister, but really I just read my bible and did my best to piece it all together.
I did take a study in estatology, but all I did there was watch people take simple things and make them confusing.
jazzyhap 3 years ago
I wanted to address when I said there is an end. There is one common denominator I have recently had a revelation on.
Forgiveness
God forgives us, even though we have sinned against God.
Christians are COMMANDED to forgive BECAUSE God forgave us. It is to be a Christian characteristic or "calling card". (Mat 18:21-35)
And on the other side of the coin, unforgiveness is the calling card of the devil. No mercy, a strict and merciless judge.
(Rev 12:10)
jazzyhap 3 years ago
Had Lucifer forgiven God for casting him out, and instead of murdering Jesus, let him live, then:
There would be no salvation.
All scripture of prophecy would have been broken.
As you pointed out, MANY love to be unforgiving towards homosexuality, but MORE than happy to forgive a "adulterer".
The fruit/calling card/characteristic of a Christian is willing to forgive all.
...that is not easy. I can assure you people have hurt me that I would LOVE revenge, but... If God can let it go, so I.
jazzyhap 3 years ago
(sry for double post)
I did a quick google search on the chariot wheels.Apparently, the supposed evidence isn't available :O. And also, Wyatt (the man that discovered this) himself said that corals can look like artifacts to the untrained eye.
Essentially, this evidence is inconclusive (but not ruled out). It is not solid at all and is representative of the problems with "creation science."
Like I said before, why isn't faith enough? Why must CS use bad science to prove this "infallible" book?
saxdude20 3 years ago
(I promise, this is the last one lol)
So some may ask me "what religion do you believe," and I tell them "none." This God could be a Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Johova's witness, some random african/american tribe, Budist, OR, it could be the God of the inhabitants of Alpha Centuri (our closest star). You just don't know for a fact, you can only believe (hae faith). Modern sciences is posing more and more contradictions to creationists.I hope you can find an acceptable balance between the two.thx
saxoman1 3 years ago
religion isnt the issue.... jesus is.
goldgoku3264 3 years ago
I wonder if God really cares whether he's called Jesus, Allah, Ra, Zeus, or Jupiter...
UNFFwildcard 3 years ago
@ UNFFwildcard
me too ^^.
@ goldgoku3264 ???. Anyway, that post was meant for a response somewhere else in these sea of posts (thats why it blatantly sticks out) xD.
saxoman1 3 years ago
Well seeing that Muslims deny that Jesus was God, I would say that Allah is not God. Zeus or Jupiter and RA were all polytheistic I would say he doesnt care for those either. You obviously know nothing about the subject matter, come back when you learn soemthing.
MadScience 3 years ago
Your missing the point. What I'm saying is that you ASSUME that your God and religion is the real and true one. But you don't know for sure. There are thousands of other religions and none of them can ultimately be proven wrong (can't prove a negative) until we all die. What if Buddhism is correct? What if the religion of the inhabitants of Alpha Centuri (see above) are correct? Like I said, I do believe in a higher power, but to commit to one out of thousands is nonsense to me.
saxoman1 3 years ago
"to commit to one out of thousands is nonsense to me."
Jesus was either a liar, a lunatic, or who he said he was, the Son of God.
If you believe he is the Son of God, then you treat Him as such.
So many religions....hmmmm... In America you have freedom of religion, and Christianity is the dominant religion. I wonder if Saudi Arabia allowed Gospel Preaching if there would be a change there?
Open your eyes, Christianity is KEPT out, not chosen over in majority.
jazzyhap 3 years ago
So? Your point is? Did I say it was being forced upon me??? That doesn't in any way change the fact that there are thousands to choose from (Maybe... flying spaghetti monster. Oo, oo, oo I know... Xenu, scientology, and thetans...). So, I will state once more, "to commit to one out of thousands is nonsense to me." Like it says, its just my opinion (which I am free to right?).
saxoman1 3 years ago
"That doesn't in any way change the fact that there are thousands to choose from"
Open up the doors and see what happens.
Let us preach in Saudi Arabia. Watch what will happen.
jazzyhap 3 years ago
What's your point? Why are you talking about Saudi Arabia and "freedom of religion"? Please explain.
saxoman1 3 years ago
Because not everywhere has the freedom to choose between the Thousands that you allude too. His point is that some countries are persecuting Christians. Sudan, and China come to mind right off the bat. Yet those people choose to follow Christ knowing full well that they are putting their lives on the line. Where you cant seem to see why anyone would choose Christianity over anything else, then maybe the fact these people put it before their well being might tell you a little something.
MadScience 3 years ago
I, myself have not suffered persecution like those people, but I can tell you this. When it comes down to it here in America I too will gladly give my life for the Lord Jesus Christ. Even if it my being tortured or whatnot. I pray that doesnt happen but Im no more special than those dear brothers and sisters of mine that live in those countries and are being tortured they know the truth and because torturers also know that Jesus is Lord.
MadScience 3 years ago
Why is it that the name of Jesus is hated by the entire world other than his followers ? No-one says Buddha as a curse word, No-one says Mohammad as a curse word. The name of Jesus is hated because deep down in everyones psyche they know that Jesus Christ is Lord. He is hated by people that love the World, and the Flesh. It's just like people that like to steal, kill, etc... Hate Law Enforcement. Saxoman you will get on your knees and declare Christ as Lord, regardless if you want too or not.
MadScience 3 years ago
*sigh*
Everything you just said sounded like the usual rhetoric of "spreaders of the gospel" (except for a few very awkward things). I can get that (or something like it) from every other religion.
So many of those others say the same thing. Hell, even different SECTS of Christianity say the same thing TO EACH OTHER! Its preposterous!
C'mon. Jesus isn't hated anymore than Allah.
And more blood has been irrevocably spilled in the name of Christ than most other people.
saxoman1 3 years ago
So, should I listen to your religion (tells me I'll burn in hell)? Or Islam (same thing)? Or some other random one?
Or, instead of bending to the fear tactics used by so many religions to get conventions and/or bend people to their will (and to control people), why don't I just free myself of this fear (as anyone of them could be the right one)? Why don't I free myself of this book, which tells be stone homosexuals and unfaithful women (but not men)?
saxoman1 3 years ago
I'd like to say that I don't think all religions are bad. There is good that can (and indeed has) been done. But the harm that ones like Christianity have caused is grotesque imo.
In fact, I contend that we didn't get our morals from religion, but that religion got them from us (whenever we created them). From the rules that we made in order to make functioning society.
saxoman1 3 years ago
Obviously, some of these authors didn't like homosexuals (perhaps denying of their own homosexual impulses) or female agency (can't have women calling the shots now!), but there were some good points that they got in there (thou shalt not steal, kill, or be unfaithful). Wow, this discourse sure has come a long way from "deceitful God" lol.
Anyway, my point remains: "to commit to one out of thousands is nonsense to me."
saxoman1 3 years ago
"or female agency (can't have women calling the shots now!)"
Judges 4:4 And Deborah, [a prophetess], the wife of Lapidoth, [she judged Israel] at that time.
God had no problem with making a woman the judge (like Moses and Joshua) over Israel. She was THE leader os Israel.
jazzyhap 3 years ago
I Timothy 2:11-15: "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence."
There are so many passages like this. Certainly, women aren't meant to be equals.
saxoman1 3 years ago
"I Timothy 2:11-15: "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence."
You have raised a good point because Paul also wrote:
Galations 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, [there is neither male nor female]: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
That is a good question I don't have an answer for, I will look into that.
jazzyhap 3 years ago
Why don't I free myself of this book, which tells be stone homosexuals and unfaithful women (but not men)?
Lev 20:10 And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, [the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.]
Men are not exempt.
jazzyhap 3 years ago
But, you also have:
Deuteronomy 22:13-21 "If any man take a wife, and go in unto her . . . and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid . . . and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die . . ."
But, I don't remember any scripture specifying that men have to be virgins too. Double standard.
saxoman1 3 years ago
Not to mention the use of women as commodities to purchase and reward other men.
Numbers 31:32-41 (32,000 virgins)
Luke 11:31 (Solomon had thousands of female sexual partners)
Leviticus 27:1-7 (woman only worth half a man in shekels)
It goes on and on. Is there any specific scripture that denounces these things (I'm honestly curious, this is interesting)?
saxoman1 3 years ago
Deu 17:15 Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose:...
Deu 17:17 Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away:...
It was never ok for a king to "multiply wives". Solomon did wrong.
It does go on and on, and it does take some research, the Solomon one I knew off hand. I will look into the other two, something about the virgins kept, but the women who were not were killed because they had been "corrupting" Israel.
jazzyhap 3 years ago
Okay,thanks.
What about these:
Deuteronomy 24:1, which says that only a man can divorce a woman and only under one circumstance (cheating wife).
Deuteronomy 22:23-24, which basically says an engaged women who didn't yell loud enough if she was raped in the city will be stoned to death along with the rapist (because he hath "humbled" his neighbors wife (commodity).
Deuteronomy 22:28-29, which says that if the woman was not engaged and was raped, she must marry her rapist!
Are these condemned?
saxdude20 3 years ago
I never noticed about the woman not divorcing, but leaving or separating was ok.
1Co 7:10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:
1Co 7:11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.
jazzyhap 3 years ago
"Deuteronomy 22:23-24"
If you were being raped, wouldn't you cry out for help?
Anyways, if she is innocent, Deu 22:26 But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death:
jazzyhap 3 years ago
Of coarse I would. But what if I was gagged or had laryngitis (or no one was around)? There wouldn't be much I could do.
saxdude20 3 years ago
"Deuteronomy 22:28-29, which says that if the woman was not engaged and was raped, she must marry her rapist!"
That is not saying "forced" like 22:25. I do not believe it is meaning rape.
jazzyhap 3 years ago
But it doesn't exactly specify (considering it came a couple lines after that first quote). It seems a bit ambiguous. I guess its all up to interpretation.
saxdude20 3 years ago
"Deuteronomy 24:1, which says that only a man can divorce a woman and only under one circumstance (cheating wife)."
Jesus used the word fornication in Mat 5:32, being:
G4202
πορνεία
porneia
por-ni'-ah
From G4203; harlotry (including adultery and incest); figuratively idolatry: - fornication.
Reason I believe Jesus so directly addressed divorce is in Jer 3:8 God got divorced.
There are marriage "ethics" (Eph 5:33 for example). This is a deep subject among deep subjects, but there is an end.
jazzyhap 3 years ago
H1330
בּתוּלה
bethûlâh
beth-oo-law'
Feminine passive participle of an unused root meaning to separate; a virgin (from her privacy); sometimes (by continuation) a bride; also (figuratively) a city or state: - maid, virgin.
Virgin was a feminine word, a male who never had sex was not called a "virgin".
The commandment to not commit adultery was for both men and women.
nâ'aph
naw-af'
A primitive root; to commit adultery; figuratively to apostatize: - adulterer (-ess), commit (-ing) adultery
jazzyhap 3 years ago
Hmm. I see. So, are you saying that virgin didn't actually mean what it does today? If so, then there must be a ton of translational/interpretation errors in the bible (as what happens sometimes when things are translated).
Is that what you're trying to tell me (that it meant something else)?
And even so, females are still commodified and used as currency.
saxoman1 3 years ago
Revelation 14:1-4
The word "virgin" is used in this passage and refers to "boys undefiled by women."
Here is the specific quote:
"These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins"
saxoman1 3 years ago
Revelation 14:1-4
The word "virgin" is used in this passage and refers to "boys undefiled by women."
Well first I thought it was a different word, being the hebrew/greek difference, but this is what I found:
G3933
παρθένος
parthenos
par-then'-os
Of unknown origin; a maiden; by implication an unmarried daughter: - virgin.
Still saying it is a word that relates to women. BUT the KJV translators called the word virgins, but did you notice how John spelled out what he saw?
jazzyhap 3 years ago
"If so, then there must be a ton of translational/interpretation errors in the bible"
I don't think the KJV translation bible is trying to deceive, just the wording originated in 1611.
For example, "corn" is in 94 KJV bible verses, but it is no the corn that we would think, like corn on the cobb, but:
H1715
דּגן
dâgân
daw-gawn'
From H1711; properly increase, that is, grain: - corn ([floor]), wheat.
wheat.
jazzyhap 3 years ago
Okay..
So, because some people put their well being on the line, that makes it valid? I mean, what with thousands of missionaries going to these countries and preaching their opinion, culture, and religion as truth (and above the listener's own), maybe that can account for some converts huh? Or maybe the fact that Christianity is based in the richest countries in the world (so it has more resources to do missions)?
There's no significance here.Repeat something enough times and it might stick.
saxoman1 3 years ago
Allah and the other false "gods" you mentioned are NOT the same as the Biblical Jesus Christ.
KJVTruth 3 years ago
So when GOd created the universe, he set the light in motion in such a way that we will be tricked into thinking that the earth can't possibly be 6000 years old. All just to trick us...
saxoman1 3 years ago 2
You looking at it as if God created the Universe Like the Big Bang from one single starting point. God created a mature universe, Just like when you go buy a newly built home, it's already complete. Just like an already complete Interstate that stretches for many miles, God built the Universe just like it is,The problem is that people think that God had to start from a single point. If you take a second to get the big bang out of your way of thinking you see just how awesome God is.
MadScience 3 years ago
Thx for the response.
OK. But this would now mean