Isn't dating a young earth by man's standards foolishness to God?

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 7 лют 2025
  • Rodney from Tennessee calls Hank Hanegraaff, the host of the 𝘉𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘈𝘯𝘴𝘸𝘦𝘳 𝘔𝘢𝘯 broadcast and the 𝘏𝘢𝘯𝘬 𝘜𝘯𝘱𝘭𝘶𝘨𝘨𝘦𝘥 podcast, to discuss how to date the age of the earth.
    🔴 Subscribe to our channel: www.youtube.co...
    --------------------------------------------------
    Connect with the Christian Research Institute (CRI):
    🔴 Subscribe to the Bible Answer Man on Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple...
    ✔️ Subscribe to “Hank Unplugged” on Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple...
    ✔️ Subscribe to our magazine the Cʜʀɪsᴛɪᴀɴ Rᴇsᴇᴀʀᴄʜ Jᴏᴜʀɴᴀʟ's weekly podcast www.spreaker.c...
    ✔️ Subscribe to "𝘾𝙝𝙧𝙞𝙨𝙩𝙞𝙖𝙣 𝙍𝙚𝙨𝙚𝙖𝙧𝙘𝙝 𝙅𝙤𝙪𝙧𝙣𝙖𝙡 𝙍𝙚𝙖𝙙𝙨" the new audio articles podcast from the Cʜʀɪsᴛɪᴀɴ Rᴇsᴇᴀʀᴄʜ Jᴏᴜʀɴᴀʟ. open.spotify.c...
    📒 Visit CRI’s website: www.equip.org/
    ✅ Listen to the Bible Answer Man broadcast live streaming Monday through Friday from 6-6:30 PM ET online at www.equip.org/
    #bibleanswerman #creation #youngearth

КОМЕНТАРІ • 29

  • @Machi74005
    @Machi74005 Місяць тому +3

    One old earth creationist I am familiar with in rescent years noted that many young earth creationists demand a 6,000 year old earth not necessarily because scientific evidence points to it but rather the eschatology that many of them ascribe to demands a young earth for itself to manifest. That is not only bad science but may not be very good theology either.

    • @theMolluskMan
      @theMolluskMan Місяць тому

      Can you say more about this? Which eschatology hinges on a young earth, and how so?

    • @BibleAnswerMan
      @BibleAnswerMan  Місяць тому +1

      @Machi74005 Input appreciated.

  • @robharrell-xd2pi
    @robharrell-xd2pi Місяць тому

    Thank you for that

  • @deanfloyd8931
    @deanfloyd8931 Місяць тому +1

    "Unless a kernel of wheat fall to the ground and dieth it remaineth alone, but if it dieth it bringeth forth much life"
    May I suggest, death and renewal was established on the third day of creation.

  • @theMolluskMan
    @theMolluskMan Місяць тому +1

    Can you elaborate how Hosea 6:2 does not refer to literal solar days? Seems to me it is a very obvious reference to the three literal days Christ lay in the tomb.

    • @BibleAnswerMan
      @BibleAnswerMan  Місяць тому

      @theMolluskMan Genesis 1:1-13 are difficult to take as literal solar days, if not the sun was not in existence. That is the point of discussion. See www.equip.org/bible_answers/genesis-creation-days-literal-long-literary/ and www.equip.org/articles/the-framework-interpretation-of-the-days-of-creation/
      Hosea 6 refers to the resurrection.

  • @michaelwascom62
    @michaelwascom62 Місяць тому

    In the OT book of Joshua (10:12-13) it states that Joshua (after petitioning the LORD) commanded the sun to stand still, to add more hours to the day, so that the Israelites could complete the destruction of its enemies.
    This presumes the ancient geo-centric cosmology that the earth was the center of the universe and the sun revolved around it --- rising in the morning, moving across the sky, and setting in the evening.
    Hence, one day (followed by night).
    We now know (thanks to scientific inquiry) that the sun is the center of the solar system, the earth (along with the other planets) orbits the sun once every 365.25 days; and the 24-hour earth-day is due to earth rotating on its axis once every 24 hours.
    The same scripture passage in Joshua says the moon also stood still. The moon does orbit the earth ( its phases prove such); but over a period of just a few hours it would appear to be stationary.
    Now, how could the sun stand still when it is already in (pretty much) a stationary position?
    If it moves through the cosmos, the planets move in direct concert with it.
    Biblical literalists tend to dig their own rhetorical grave!
    Personally, the Genesis accounts of creation (there are several divergent voices in the first few chapters of Genesis) are to me a functional creation myth --- and an exciting one at that!
    But the substantive fact distilled from the Genesis creation script --- which I firmly believe --- is "God created the heavens and the earth" --- i.e., the universe and everything within it.
    It was purposeful and personal, and NOT random throw of the dice.

  • @Grabatire
    @Grabatire 19 днів тому

    On the first day, however long that was, God created light. The Bible doesn't say God created sunlight. He didn't need the sun to create light. We measure a solar day in 24 increments, or 24 hours. However, in the beginning there was no solar until a few days later when God created the sun, but even then, the earth may not have completed a rotation in the time we consider to be 24 hours. Because God existed an eternity prior to creation, I'd like to think that He used a bit of that time to plan his creation, and then did so, in a time frame that was appropriate to Him keeping in mind that He is not subject to time.

    • @BibleAnswerMan
      @BibleAnswerMan  16 днів тому

      @Grabatire Thanks for sharing. There may be another way at looking at the Creation week in Genesis 1 & 2. See www.equip.org/bible_answers/genesis-creation-days-literal-long-literary/ www.equip.org/articles/the-framework-interpretation-of-the-days-of-creation/

  • @theMolluskMan
    @theMolluskMan Місяць тому +1

    Hang on… Hank rightly identifies "there was evening and morning" in Genesis 1 as a reference to a 24-hour solar day, but then goes on to say that the universe was not created in those six solar days? Did I miss a step?

    • @BibleAnswerMan
      @BibleAnswerMan  Місяць тому

      @theMolluskMan Hank's point is that there is then a literary structure in Genesis 1:1-2:3 that cannot be ignored. See www.equip.org/bible_answers/genesis-creation-days-literal-long-literary/ and www.equip.org/articles/the-framework-interpretation-of-the-days-of-creation/

  • @theMolluskMan
    @theMolluskMan Місяць тому +1

    Dr. Russ Humphries explains how gravity and time dilation reconciles a young universe with the perception of billion-year-old starlight. He would be a good one to ask about this issue.

    • @BibleAnswerMan
      @BibleAnswerMan  Місяць тому +1

      @theMolluskMan Input appreciated. William Dembski offers a strong critique of Humphries in the End of Christianity.

    • @theMolluskMan
      @theMolluskMan Місяць тому +1

      @@BibleAnswerMan Good to know. I'll investigate Dembski's rebuttal.

  • @Welcome_To_Life
    @Welcome_To_Life Місяць тому +1

    Academia may be wrong about space just like they’re wrong about marriage, gender and God.

    • @BibleAnswerMan
      @BibleAnswerMan  Місяць тому

      @Welcome_To_Life Not certain if being wrong about the latter is conclusive reason to presume the error of the former.

    • @randallpickering9944
      @randallpickering9944 Місяць тому

      We should run our modern society based on Bronze-Age legends?

  • @elbertrandconner867
    @elbertrandconner867 Місяць тому

    God created Adam already fully formed and aged., and God not being subject within time created the universe instantly already aged .

    • @BibleAnswerMan
      @BibleAnswerMan  Місяць тому +1

      @elbertrandconner867 Respectfully disagree. See www.equip.org/bible_answers/god-create-handiwork-appearance-age/

  • @georg7120
    @georg7120 Місяць тому

    The bible doesn't tell when the earth was created!

  • @steventhury8366
    @steventhury8366 Місяць тому +2

    Hank needs to stop believing in evolutionary lies.

    • @BibleAnswerMan
      @BibleAnswerMan  Місяць тому +2

      @steventhury8366 Hank rejects evolution. Your comment is dead wrong.

    • @steventhury8366
      @steventhury8366 Місяць тому

      @@BibleAnswerMan You deceive yourself.