That brought tears to my eyes. Truly an amazing testimony. I've only found your videos recently but I'm so very glad I did. I've been greatly enjoying hearing you explain the science of things, especially recently with your explanation of what you thought the pre-Flood world could have been like. You are truly an inspiration! God bless!
You can hear the emotion in Kurt’s voice as he gives this testimonial. This man is amazing and I’m glad to have him on our side. God has worked through him to bring light and science to youth and older folks as well. God bless him and all he does.
Kurt, your story is true of so many. The Word of God + the Spirit = New Life and/or a new way to life as a Christian. Thanks for being His gift as a scientist and brother to the human race.
What a tear jerker! God bless you Dr. Wise and it’s amazing to see God using you to help others better know their Creator. Hosea 4:6 -Dallas Seminary ThM
Thank you for all the videos and all the hard work you have put in! Thank you for being strong for all that you had to put up with because of you being a Christian who has a gift for science. Praise God. Thank you for your sharing your testimony!
This is an Incredible Testimony!!! I have listened to so many of Kurt’s videos and this is one that I almost didn’t watch for what ever reason. I am so very glad that I did!! Thank you Kurt!!
Same here! I avoided this one in favor for the other videos. But I think it had a good meaning because after listening to all of his videos before, this one made a greater impact on my perception of him a a scientist. I know that what he stands for is genuine…
Wow, this guy is a disgrace to science. Read more about why he has been almost disowned by the scientific community. Creationism is complete and utter nonsense. Religion has corrupted this guys brain.
This is the best and most inspiring witness for any young person who is struggling with the secular indoctrination going on in our education system today. Thank you so much for your amazing and inspiring testimony!
Thank you Kurt, an amazing story! Sooo thankful for your Faith and your teaching! Always curious about what you've been covering. Football, Basketball, Baseball but being an athlete doesn't generate acceptance. (& Pride is a terrible disease, as is the lust of the eye and the lust of the flesh) Broken, enduring in a broken, foreign world...until He Comes or calls me Home...but thankful for your encouragement. The Gospel of Jesus is everything...so we share the Good News
I am an avowed Atheist since the late sixties And totally disagree with every thing Dr K Wise said & stand for But I must say, I admire his honesty And he didn't try to confuse people with fake facts & "logical" arguments Kudos
They have been refuted time and time again. If you genuinely wish to challenge your belief system, you would research the arguments for and against Creationism and follow the evidence.
I have no idea if anyone else will see this but I grew up in a time and a school that taught creation and am amazed that this video collection just showed up. I thoroughly enjoyed the lectures and will be sharing them with others. Professor Walter J Veith gave one of the best lectures on this subject many years ago. Good to hear about God in peoples lives in more recent times as well. Shalom
THANK YOU, KURT! I came to respect you greatly through your work in Is Genesis History? When I met you at the 2023 ICC, I literally could not speak. It felt like shaking hands with a superhero. After I got over the shock of being in your presence we had a few conversations, and I realized that you are as humble, approachable and real as you are brilliant. Your strong faith was also evident. Hearing your extraordinarily testimony on this video in 2/2024 makes me love you as a brother in Christ even more! You are such a wonderful blessing to Christ's Kingdom! I pray that God will continue to bless you and your research and your ministry for many years to come. Again, thank you.
@@grafxgrl8030 he looks at the world with the eyes that God gave him and sees only 6000 years. Recordable history is 5600 years old itself. Nothing about the Earth is young. I don't even want to start on the universe. Light in transit etc. Something has damaged him inside.. Sad in a way. I wouldn't allow my child in a University he was associated with let alone take one of his classes. If God did indeed create the world and the Universe 6000 years ago then he placed obvious deceptions in there right at the start... It seems weird to tell us to be utterly truthfull by starting out with a lies. Here is something that existed long before the earth and ceased to exist, again long before the earth,but this is light from it anyway.. The answer I get mostly to that is if God wants to do it he can.. Really ?? The God I believe in is less fickle.
God uses the weak things of the world to shame the wise. I too have my faults,and I admire this fallible human for his humble honesty and unique character. What's more his big brother hasn't finished perfecting him yet! One of the best talks,I've ever heard.
The man in this video denies the fact of evolution, which does nothing to shame the wise, who know that evolution has been observed, and is therefore a fact.
bettytigers lol honest? He’s one of the most dishonest creationists I’ve ever seen. He even admits that if all the evidence in the world went against creationism, he would admit it but still be a young earth creationist because of his man written bible. Wow! Dishonest hack!
ɧąყɖɛŋ you again? I already told you what a scientific theory is. For all intents and purposes- evolution IS a fact bud. A theory is the highest graduation point you can get to in science!! Again, gravity is a theory too! It’s a law and a theory. A law just deserves a phenomenon, a theory attempts to explain it and has to be backed up with facts to be called a theory.. try again??
bdizz77 Gravity is a law, not a theory. a theory isn’t a fact either, nor is it a law. Give me a single example of any animal transitioning into another. (Hint: micro evolution, AKA adaptation, doesn’t count)
I was 34 and a freshman student, enrolled in the BS in Agricultural Education and Agronomy at Ohio State University, in first year biology. There, it's evolution or heresy. They wanted me to imagine that there was a straight line from single cell organisms to humans. We were not allowed to ask questions, like, doesn't the idea of sexual reproduction fly in the face of that straight line ideology? One of the questions I asked my sixth grade biology students was, if evolution is true, then can we imagine that a tornado could, by rearranging the parts in a junk yard, produce a fully operational and fueled 747? That is a far less technical feat than forming a fully functional human being from two cells obtained from two different individuals. Right? Science is not science when it is forbidden to consider all the information available. Science is not science when "truth" is based on conjecture, assumptions, and only partial evidence. No, true science incorporates the evidence, is open to questions, seeks alternative opinions. Science is open ended, not closed minded. If you cannot find God in the complexity and the marvel of sight, then, you are truly blinded by fear of there being an all knowing, all seeing, all powerful God. What highly complex and sophisticated structure does not begin with a plan, a blueprint, and a purpose. You see, Darwinism and Evolutionism are cults, false religions, ones which demand that their true disciples deny the presence, the existence of a Creator, of a creation spoken into existence. That would mean that there is a final accountability. When there is no God, no ultimate truth, there is no judgement, no morality, no good or bad. They are then free to make up whatever "truth" fits their narrative. For me and my house, we choose see God in ALL of the Creation. Period. May you find peace in knowing Jesus, the Christ, and claim His grace. Amen.
"Ohio State University, in first year biology. There, it's evolution or heresy." It can seem that way. But science does not forbid your presenting a fact and logic based case for creationism. It's just that so far, there is none. Evidence is overwhelmingly stronger for evolution by natural selection. In contrast, your blind faith in a supernatural sky-daddy, absolutely rejects any contradictory evidence. " can we imagine that a tornado could, by rearranging the parts in a junk yard, produce a fully operational and fueled 747?...far less technical feat than forming a fully functional human" You're ignoring the 'natural selection" part of evolution by natural selection, and comparing wildly different time scales. The evidence is overwhelming that humans are the product of billions of years of evolution by natural selection. A tornado's force has no selection process, and takes place over maybe an hour. "Science is not science when it is forbidden to consider all the information available" You're apparently confusing 'forbidden" with "recognizing as invalid, arguments based on the supernatural." "You see, Darwinism and Evolutionism are cults, false religions, ones which demand [denial of] a Creator..." Science makes no such demand. The demand is for evidence of your supernatural Creator. Supernatural faith, is the entity making the demands: You must ignore any evidence that contradicts that blind faith. Or else. "For me and my house, we choose see God in ALL of the Creation. Period." 1 Here is the 'demand' you speak of: To 'choose' faith, without evidence 2 Reinforcing your comforting faith in the supernatural, with "Period" -- blocking further consideration. You're doing what you falsely accuse science of: Forbidding considering " all the information available."
Science is always open to new information, in fact it's required! That's why we have modern technology and that's why science can be trusted! The problem is when people present that new information that not only can't be supported by evidence, but does not adequately account for what we already know of science. And no, whichever interpretation of whichever translation of whichever version of holy book you believe in is not evidence.
Thank you so much for sharing! I am a chemist who dated bones. I could never figure out how bones could be 100,000 years old and reconcile that with my belief in the bible.
@@Gxlto exactly, I am so confused by the comment. Guy is literally living a lie if he still chooses to believe in that. If this is what well educated science driven people can say, you can't expect better from general public.
@@krishcshah plenty of videos dismantling dating processes in this channel so it isnt ironclad truth as the current paradigm likes to pretend. Example, carbon 14 dating is only for measuring short term like thousands of years, but these guys put fossils and coal (that 'science' said had millions of years) in those machines, no one had done it because everyone assumed it would give no result, and yet it yields positive result for carbon 14 meaning, that either, carbon 14 dating is a sham, or those things arent millions of years old. So, being sceptical of the current paradigm only pushes science forward. But since 'science', is not truth but what a bunch of stubborn and proud people say, paradigms take a long time to change.
@@zenuno6936 buddy if you seriously think science is not truth then you are either mentally challenged or you live in a jungle in a wooden hut and you dont know anything about the world around you.
He who seeks to save his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it, Luke 17:33! Glory be to God for Dr. Kurt Wise & his decision to let it all go for Christ! In the end Yeshua gave him life & life more abundantly showing him He could love our Creator & science, wow glory be to God! Where would Dr. Kurt be now if he chose evolution! Not with life more abundantly❤
now I understand why you teach with such passion. May the Father and Creator of all the universe bless you and make His face shine upon you, and life you on great currents of pneuma
Just wondering, what are the differences between humans and animals? Are animals creative like us? Can they be evil and hate or be jealous at another animal? Do they have real language? Do humans also have instincts, do animals have additional senses, ability to self educate? Think beyond their environment? Etc.
" As I shared with my professors years ago when I was in college, if all the evidence in the universe turns against creationism, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a creationist because that is what the Word of God seems to indicate. Here I must stand." - Kurt Wise Does nobody in the religious community have a problem with this quote?
There isn't really anything problematic about it. As long as we share the truth, we can believe what we want, and that's exactly what he says. He would be the first to admit that all evidence in the universe turned against creationism - if that was the case - but would still believe. What is the problem of still believing something for which we don't (possibly yet) have evidence for, if we're honest enough to make clear that it doesn't have any evidence to support it? The only problem would be if he decided to lie about the evidence, but the quote explicitly tells us he wouldn't, so what's the problem?
Jonathan Fryxelius No, you're not getting what he said. He said that even all the EVIDENCE in the world pointed against his own beliefs, he would still hold on to his beliefs in spite of the evidence. So okay, how would that play out in a court? Let us say all the evidence in a court case showed that without a doubt your son (or daughter) commited murder. Would you still hold on to your beliefs that your child is innocent in spite of the evidence just because you want to believe it isn't true? Or would you eventually face the truth? If you think it's a silly comparison then I have to tell you it really isn't when you're thinking about the principle of evidence. "What is the problem of still believing something for which we don't (possibly yet) have evidence for" First of all, there is plenty of evidence for the Earth being billions of years old...but that's not the point here. He is saying that even IF he saw all the evidence, he would still deny its truth. That is an educational disgrace! I feel bad for the guy, but he is not fit to be an educator. You do not deny evidence just because you didn't like the result.
I don't think you're getting what he said either. He obviously holds his belief in creation very highly, so that any and all evidence would not overcome this belief. Does that mean that his belief is blind? No, it means that he considers the evidence for the authority of the Bible so incredibly high that anything which contradicts it must be false. This could be a blind faith, but it doesn't have to be. To take your example of a murder, I assume you've seen one of the most top-voted movies of all time, Shawshank Redemption. That is a case where all evidence points to the husband murdering his wife and her lover; his gun is found with his fingerprints nearby, he had motive, he was close to the scene when it happened. He was of course judged by the court to prison, as would creation be if all evidence was against it. That doesn't mean that it is actually so. In the movie, it turns out he never committed the murder he was charged for, even if all evidence pointed towards him. Now, translated into the case of a son or daughter committing a murder. Let's say your son was on trial. You've known him all his life, and you've never ever seen him lie about anything. You see all the evidence pointing towards him, but he tells you sincerely that he didn't commit the murder. There is nothing wrong in trusting your son's word based on what you know about him, even against all the evidence to the contrary. Your relationship with your son is considered stronger than any evidence against him, even if that means all evidence. Now, you would naturally not try to convince anyone of your conviction using evidence, if there is no evidence to support it. But you would be prepared to meet people not particularly convinced of your words. Now back to the creation vs evolution debate. There are several ways to divide the debate into smaller parts. One of the most obvious is to separate the theological issue from the scientific issue. Based on theology, Dr Wise would probably still try to convince his audience that God's words are more reliable than any other model of the universe's origin. But he would probably not do so using geology as a tool. There is nothing strange about this. In the same way, many atheists would probably not stop claiming a naturalistic origins of the universe even if all evidence pointed towards a creator. Again, nothing strange. What you could hope to do is to convince them that there is no evidence for their position, hence stripping them of their credibility. It may not change their minds, but it reveals that the position is faith-based, not based on empirical evidence. That is all we can hope to do, whether we are creationists or evolutionists. Very few people are ready to abandon his/her worldview to the core, regardless of worldview.
"He obviously holds his belief in creation very highly, so that any and all evidence would not overcome this belief. Does that mean that his belief is blind?" Yes, it actually do mean that. He turns a blind eye to reality. Sure it's his right to do, but you can't do that and still claim you have a scientific mind because at that point you're not willing to accept anything you don't like. "No, it means that he considers the evidence for the authority of the Bible so incredibly high that anything which contradicts it must be false" Right. Which evidence would that be? In the case of Shawshank Redemption, there are similar cases in the world where all the evidence points to the wrong person. Either because they were framed, lazy police work or just bad luck. Either way you have to go where the evidence leads you. There are mountains of evidence for the age of the earth and none against...except an old book, but I don't count that as verifiable evidence as it was written by people who didn't know where the sun went at night. If my son was on trial for murder and the evidence was ironclad, as in multiple video evidence showing that he definatly did it, I would have no choice but to face the reality. He could still claim he was innocent, but then I would have to consider if my son had a psychosis I wasn't aware about or if he's a pathological liar? I would always love my son, but if my child did something like that I would say that he has to face his crimes and take the punishment and responsibility for what he did. There is no way I would claim his innocence if I knew he was guilty. "Now back to the creation vs evolution debate." Creation vs evolution? I thought we were talking about geology? Age of the Earth etc? Kurt Wise is a geologist, not a biologist. "In the same way, many atheists would probably not stop claiming a naturalistic origins of the universe even if all evidence pointed towards a creator" A lot of ifs in that sentence. First of all, atheist does not equal scientist. If there was mountains of evidence that pointed towards a creator, any scientists who would refuse the evidence could not truly call themselves scientists. A scientist follows the evidence whereever it leads, same as a detective. "Very few people are ready to abandon his/her worldview to the core, regardless of worldview." Well I did it myself some 8 years ago, and it was based on evidence that I saw.
"Yes, it actually do mean that. He turns a blind eye to reality." No, he would accept reality as it is, he would just assume that there is another explanation for WHY reality is as it is. Nowhere does he claim that he would disagree with any evidence, on the contrary, he says he would be the first to admit it. "Right. Which evidence would that be?" That is not relevant. IF there is significant evidence that the Bible contains authoritative and historically correct descriptions of Earth's youth, then that evidence may well weigh heavier than any empirical evidences we use to speculate about the past. The claim made by creationists is that God himself knew what he did, and told us. So when he tells us what He did, an eye-witness of an event weighs heavier than what we can trace back to that event. For example, in Shawshank Redemption, if we could get the eye-witness account of the murder, the husband would most probably not have been incarcerated, because eye witness testimonies are considered more valuable than other sources. "There are mountains of evidence for the age of the earth and none against" This claim is not only false, but also scientifically immature. Dismissing opposing views without crediting their points is even less scientifically honest than holding a belief against all evidence. If you believe the question is so simple that all the evidence is on one side, you simply don't know the topic well enough. That is usually true for any scientific field. You might not be convinced by the evidence for a young earth, but to claim that there is none is extremely close-minded and anti-scientific. "as in multiple video evidence showing that he definatly did it" Now, this is of course an example not applicable to the question of the age of the earth, except possibly as I mentioned above, to have an eye-witness account of the creation, which creationists claim we do. Empirical science can observe the present, not the past. All claims about the past based on evidence in the present are subject to interpretations, some more warranted than others. "Creation vs evolution?" The geology is a very important field in the debate between creation and evolution, and as you heard in his testimony, evolution plays a central role. There are definitely other fields than biology which are important for the verification of evolution. In fact, geology is probably even more important than biology in the controversy of common descent. "A scientist follows the evidence whereever it leads, same as a detective." This is a very naive view of scientists, as if they are of another breed than ordinary humans. All human beings have worldviews, and the worldview affects their ways of interpreting empirical data. All are hesitant of changing their views. All have die-hard pet ideas which they hope are true in order to get the funding they need to provide for their families. "Well I did it myself some 8 years ago, and it was based on evidence that I saw." So you're one of few. Congratulations, I hope you changed to a more coherent worldview than before.
I'm skeptical of the claim that removing half of the verses if evolution were true would make the Bible disintegrate. I mean, sure, the first few chapters of Genesis and the part where Jacob breeds striped sheep by making them mate in front of striped sticks is not compatible with biology, but the rest of the Bible mostly does not deal with evolution. For example, the verse in Revelations about not removing any verses from this book. He took that one out, but what does that have to do with evolution?
Really? You really can't understand why other passages in the Bible would conflict with evolution? Evolution relies on the naturalist worldview where nothing non-materialistic can exist. Everything having anything to do with miracles would have to be cut out. Anything having to do with prophecy would have to be cut out. I would suggest that this includes almost the entire book of revelation, not just the one verse you mention. Regardless, that verse, like many others, would have to be cut out, because of being a pronouncement from God, the creator. If evolution were true, there would be no creator making pronouncements. He cut out everything that the mythology of evolution contradicted. That is most of the Bible. The Bible and evolution are like oil and water.
No, evolution does not make the claim that everything is naturalistic and that God or the supernatural does not exist. It is a theory on the biodiversity of life. Miracles and prophecy are outside of its scope.
There is nothing that in the field of science that makes any of those claims because all of those ideas are untestable and unfalsifiable. One can accept theistic evolution by taking a step back and saying that God did it. One, can also be a deist and also say that God it, but He went away on business after.
I really dislike when people invent stories that are clearly made up and insult my intelligence by trying to make this whole big convoluted point based on their made up story.
antonthewall We believe in a higher intellect who is God, that designed all things. You believe that this whole world and all things in it came from nothingness, there is no logical sense in evolution.
@Enjoy and Travel The World! Well, funny that you should seek out channels like this and watch these videos. I would think you would stay as far away from them as you could. Maybe you're not quite as sure of your beliefs as you think you are? Difficult to maintain, belief in the dark side is.
Hi, Kurt. I recently watched a video by Inspiring Philosophy that gives some strong talking points on why the Bible may not claim a young Earth. The feller is not an athiest. He does seem to be a believer from watching many of his other videos. He touches upon a wide variety of theological topics. You should really give him an ear....and, if you could possibly let me know what you think, that would be most appreciative.
Samuhel, I’ve listened to the ‘Inspiring Philosophy’ video on ‘why theFlood may not have been global’ and many of his points are weak, some of them laughable. I think he is a foolish young man, wise in his own eyes.
@@johnbullard902 I agree. Am not an advocate for all his videos. That being said, I would not go so far as calling him foolish. At least he is a young man Seeking Truth in this era of the woke generation and cancel culture. He is Doing Something; which is a lot more than most.
I got my bachelor's in Anthropology. We studied fossils, stratification and of course evolution. At the time, I was unsure whether macro evolution or Creation was correct. I now have come to understand that most evidence points to Creation being the correct model, with micro-evolution and adaptation fitting snug within that framework.
Macroevolution has been observed, making evolution a fact. You have zero evidence supporting creationism, which is why you don't have a Nobel prize for disproving evolution.
It's kind of interesting how the scientific disciplines that try to debunk bible scripture have only been around for a while ( 100 + years ) and are still in their infancy stages . And as time goes on their theories will get stranger and wilder as the evidence comes in ( or doesn't ) and they furiously try to make it fit ; kinda like any story where someone makes it up as they go along, kinda like Stephen King. I don't totally refute modern science , but i think their conclusions are wrong, because they tow the party line
@@kendall_knows_best2872 if you choose to not believe, that's on you. No amount of negative words you have to say will effect us. The only one who it affects is you. You have to say things like this to continue to believe the way you do.
Patty Dooley you all need help you are brain washed also. Christianity is a joke and this version is even more laughable. Trying to make a square beg fit into a round hole. The fact this guy stated even if all the evidence pointed to a older word he would still not believe because he goes by the book of god 🙄 What a waste.
@@kendall_knows_best2872 if that's how you choose to believe, then fine. Believe it. If we choose to believe different, then fine. We do. One thing I do know, we will find out individually in the end. If your way is right, then fine, we lived a peaceful life. If our way is right.. well... just remember.. you made that choice.
Kurt, l enjoy all your videos so much. Learning of your giving up something so precious to you like your love-interest of science meant that God gave you the sweet gift of sharing the true beauty of science with His People.
Everyone has a "pre determined conclusion," even scientists. That's because facts in and of themselves do not speak for themselves. Every point of data must be put into an interpretive framework, or paradigm, to give it meaning. These paradigms act as guiderails and influence the types of observations scientists make, the kinds of questions scientists are supposed to ask about these observations, how the results of scientific investigations should be interpreted, and so on. Currently, there are two primary paradigms of history: one defined by natural processes occurring slowly over billions of years, and the other defined by recent, direct actions of God as recorded in the Bible. Each has a different view of how long the earth has been here (including the origin of rocks, animals, and stars), and each sees the same data, but interprets it according to different historical assumptions.
@@IsGenesisHistory I just assume that the natural world exists and that we can observe it. If the supernatural exists, it should be able to affect the natural world. Nothing like that have ever been observed in the history of earth. You add a god who dunit whenever you don't understand science and reality. Young earth creationists reject all data and measurements much like flat earthers do. to make it fit a children story from 2000 years ago..
I had a similar experience, while at a public school. Science teacher was an evolutionist. I compared Genesis chapters one and two to the evolution sequence and had to choose either the bible or the evolution theory. I took the bible as true, and ever since have discovered how flimsy and useless evolution theories really are.
@@stephanerivest3166 God is the Truth. The Bible is His word. Praise God for sending Jesus Christ so that the truth can be revealed to us and so we are freed from our sins and the worldly immoral ways.
You, sir, friend, brother in Christ, epitomize perfectly, what is so good and wonderful about an actual for real serious christ- following man, and what a joy it is, to listen to you speak truth and facts and the processes you went thru, which involved courage and patience and faith, and against the forces weighing against you - this WHOLE WORLD, many devils, esp.!! i LOVE your efforts, your spirit!!
In your bubble world, you cannot conceive that Christians can see the Bible otherwise than a litteral truth. Let me tell you that a great majority of Christians world wide do accept evolution and deep time earth/universe history. Still they can find in the Bible and the Gospels what make them be true Christians, reading with both critical/open mind and religious feeling , which allow them to take into account what science and history say but let them receive in their heart what science and history cannot say.
Kurt, wonderful, what can I say? You are fantastic speaker, listen to you is half the delectation. And you are a living proof of Gods work with a person who belives in Christ. Keep up the good work. God bless you and your family. Greetings from Sweden.
He has said that if all the evidence pointed to an old universe he would still be a creationist.. So whether or not he is damaged or has a broken mind is opinionable. However a scientist he is not..
Sir Issac Newton, Albert Einstein “suffered” from the same presupposition, imagine how useless their discoveries must be! We’re so lucky to have so many geniuses to clear this up
@@rachellejones1361 This is from his own writings... "try as I might, and even with the benefit of intact margins throughout the pages of Scripture, I found it impossible to pick up the Bible without it being rent in two. I had to make a decision between evolution and Scripture. Either the Scripture was true and evolution was wrong or evolution was true and I must toss out the Bible. . . . It was there that night that I accepted the Word of God and rejected all that would ever counter it, including evolution. With that, in great sorrow, I tossed into the fire all my dreams and hopes in science." And. "Although there are scientific reasons for accepting a young earth, I am a young-age creationist because that is my understanding of the Scripture. As I shared with my professors years ago when I was in college, if all the evidence in the universe turns against creationism, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a creationist because that is what the Word of God seems to indicate. Here I must stand." So...as much as I applaud his honesty his science dicipline is in conflict and he has decided regardless of everything pointing to the contrary that he will simply defer in the end to "god did it" . A wholey unscientific stance.
He was making a rhetorical point when he said that - let God be true though everyone were a liar (the Apostle Paul's basic point in Romans 3). He certainly never said to go against clear empirical evidence. That said, there is no empirical evidence which points unambiguously to a deep time earth (as evolution absolutely requires). And "evidence" always requires a worldview/basic presuppositions believed to be true for its interpretation. IOW, there is no neutral evidence, because there are no neutral people/interpreters.
Dr. Kurt Wise is an example of a TRUE Scientist BECAUSE he followed the TRUTH. As for his Darwinian adversaries who refuse to recognize the impossibility of "natural selection" originating even the simplest Life form, never mind humans, verse 29 from Psalm 109 predicts their fate: "Let mine adversaries be clothed with shame, and let them cover themselves with their own confusion, as with a mantle."
Dr. Carl Baugh from Glen Rose Texas also is now a creationist and a scientist. He has a similar testimony as well. He runs the Creation evidence museum in Glen Rose Texas.
Your reason for being a creationist is simply that ..." I am a young-age creationist because that is my understanding of the Scripture. As I shared with my professors years ago when I was in college, if all the evidence in the universe turns against creationism, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a creationist because that is what the Word of God seems to indicate. Here I must stand." That is , logic or evidence play no part in your thinking.
Amen x wow, what an incredible witness statement for our Heavenly Father Lord GOD and His beautiful begotten Son Lord Jesus, thank you so much Their faithful servant x such an interesting gentleman x I would also be interested in your views on Daniel, Revelation and the testimonies of Lord Jesus plus the Biblical Sabbath x much love and God Bless from the UK, Susi xx
For me this started going bad when he said he started collecting bird nests, eggs and birds. Such respect for "God's creation"... If you're a true scientist, believing the world view (religious or not, but especially religious) you were raised in should be impossible simply for the improbability of it being right given the multitude of choice in the world.
Look into why Isaac Newton studied science. He believed there was a designer and therefore method to science and that is what made he curious to explore more. It makes sense
When are the naturalists going to create life in the laboratory. Should be a cinch, you have a working model in hand that a warm little pond could produce... (Darwin's words) unguided, undirected.
@@VernonChitlen so.. Your argument is because something is possible we should be able to do it. It was possible in 1066 to build a tank but King Harold did not. It is possible that life exists 3000 light years away on another planet,but we are never going there because interstellar space travel a la Star Trek is fiction. Not one single scientist will say that creating life from nothing is easy. Tbh nothing in life is easy.
@@RABIDJOCK Life on earth is made of 4 basic elements. (and traces of others) If life could originate in a mindless warm little pond, scientists in a laboratory should be able to duplicate the simplest single celled example of that pond. Especially when that mindless whatever gives those scientists a perfectly good working model to work from. And the prebiotic chemistry is so difficult to duplicate, you people dont need be so fricking confident in there being no Creator. Especially spreading the bullschict that you are close or even lead the public thinking you have. Like the utter bullschict Craig Venter created the first, synthetic, self-replicating cell? He exchanged the dna in an existing cell, Mycoplasma Mycoides, with synthetic dna that they had to use yeast cells to assemble. Same with miller urey. Never in 62 years did any variations of that experiment produce all 20 of the specific, essential amino acids. 12 at most, homochiral and piddly amounts of no real value.
Your passion and dedication are commendable, but the cognitive dissonance is not. You have such a passion for nature and the patterns of life, what a shame to cut off a brilliant mind from seeking, based on words you deemed incorrect decades ago. I hope you can find your way back to the inquisitive mind you once beheld, rather than leaning on a greater mystery to solve the unsolved questions. Archaeopteryx is not the end of the story.
So as I understand it creationists take EVERYTHING in the Bible literally and are hsppy to try and use science and physics to prove it. On the first day God created light and darkness. Where did the light come from if the stars were only created on the fourth day?
Parents really don't understand the heartbreak when kids begin to lose their trust in the Word of God and their parents. Christians need to prepare their kids for the attacks from the world.
I recognize that this guy is quite sincere, and he’s likable, unlike, say, Kent Hovind. But it’s interesting that his account is entirely emotional. He didn’t look at the evidence for evolution or an old Earth and find it wanting. He started with the premise that his religion was true and the worked from there. In fact, it’s clear that he never understood that the conclusions about the Earth being old and the neo-Darwinian synthesis was based on a whole body of evidence, evidence that has repeatedly tested against reality. Science doesn’t come from Authority in books - the scientific method is about testing claims against reality.
Very powerful, Dr. Wise! You have been blessed to see some of God's fingerprints that few people get to see. Luke 19:40. God has confirmed His presence to you ..... Right now, the best any of us can do is see through a glass darkly. One day He will let us see more of the Big Picture. In the meantime, there is ZERO conflict loving Jesus and holding to the scientific method.
"you cannot believe both" indeed my friend. just like you cannot call Jesus just a "good teacher". He is God. and if you don't believe that, you have to believe He is a liar.
Some strange questions Mr. Wise. Using the geology of the Earth, primarily the Middle East, would it be possible to calculate the gradual rise of the Flood Waters over a short period of time? If the ocean currents were anything similar to today, could those currents have continued during the Flood for a period of one year, thereby, giving any indication of the possible direction the water traveled over the Middle East? The main question is, if the Ark began at a certain point and then rose with the water, what direction did it actually take drifting on the current? It didn't stay in one place. How far did it actually travel? Could a more exact location be possible? What is the distance from where it was built to the place where it supposedly landed? I hope you understand my awkward questions. Ray F. Edwards Jr.
I feel like it was a long emotional statement, where a guy admit that he is so afraid that he can't accept to change his life paradigm. While he seems very nice and honest, I can't keep myself from being disgusted. Being blind to reason and truth is... horrible.
Dr. Kurt, I love your video and the way you speak about, what a blessing.
God bless you and your family.
That brought tears to my eyes. Truly an amazing testimony. I've only found your videos recently but I'm so very glad I did. I've been greatly enjoying hearing you explain the science of things, especially recently with your explanation of what you thought the pre-Flood world could have been like. You are truly an inspiration! God bless!
You can hear the emotion in Kurt’s voice as he gives this testimonial. This man is amazing and I’m glad to have him on our side. God has worked through him to bring light and science to youth and older folks as well. God bless him and all he does.
Kurt, your story is true of so many. The Word of God + the Spirit = New Life and/or a new way to life as a Christian. Thanks for being His gift as a scientist and brother to the human race.
One of my all-time favorite “testimonies”!
What a tear jerker! God bless you Dr. Wise and it’s amazing to see God using you to help others better know their Creator. Hosea 4:6
-Dallas Seminary ThM
Thank you for all the videos and all the hard work you have put in! Thank you for being strong for all that you had to put up with because of you being a Christian who has a gift for science. Praise God.
Thank you for your sharing your testimony!
Thank-you Dr Wise! God bless!
This is an Incredible Testimony!!! I have listened to so many of Kurt’s videos and this is one that I almost didn’t watch for what ever reason. I am so very glad that I did!! Thank you Kurt!!
Same here! I avoided this one in favor for the other videos. But I think it had a good meaning because after listening to all of his videos before, this one made a greater impact on my perception of him a a scientist.
I know that what he stands for is genuine…
Wow, this guy is a disgrace to science. Read more about why he has been almost disowned by the scientific community. Creationism is complete and utter nonsense. Religion has corrupted this guys brain.
wow thank you DR. Kurt this is fantastic!
This is the best and most inspiring witness for any young person who is struggling with the secular indoctrination going on in our education system today. Thank you so much for your amazing and inspiring testimony!
Thank you Kurt, an amazing story! Sooo thankful for your Faith and your teaching! Always curious about what you've been covering. Football, Basketball, Baseball but being an athlete doesn't generate acceptance. (& Pride is a terrible disease, as is the lust of the eye and the lust of the flesh) Broken, enduring in a broken, foreign world...until He Comes or calls me Home...but thankful for your encouragement. The Gospel of Jesus is everything...so we share the Good News
Creationists are a disgrace to human mind.
I am an avowed Atheist since the late sixties
And totally disagree with every thing Dr K Wise said & stand for
But I must say, I admire his honesty
And he didn't try to confuse people with fake facts & "logical" arguments
Kudos
Well said Janna
Janna but can you refute them?
Disagreeing and disproving aren’t the same thing, you know.
They have been refuted time and time again. If you genuinely wish to challenge your belief system, you would research the arguments for and against Creationism and follow the evidence.
JoshoFPS be my guest to refute them.
@@ąყŋ-o8q None of those youtube experts can refute anything.They just know how to google search.
Kurt what a wonderful story. I will never forget your witness.
I have no idea if anyone else will see this but I grew up in a time and a school that taught creation and am amazed that this video collection just showed up.
I thoroughly enjoyed the lectures and will be sharing them with others.
Professor Walter J Veith gave one of the best lectures on this subject many years ago.
Good to hear about God in peoples lives in more recent times as well.
Shalom
What a wonderful, profound and moving testimony! Thank you Kurt for making it public. God bless you always.
Thank you so much for sharing your testimony. Listened with my family and we were edified by it.
Thank you for watching! :-)
" But he said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.’ ” Luke 16:31.
Scientists are persuaded by evidence
@@MrJmt33 there has been enough evidence given
@@ITPalGame for some looking for connections that those more objective folks dismiss outright
Love this. What a beautiful share, ty✝️🙌❤️
Well done good and faithful servant !!!!!
THANK YOU, KURT! I came to respect you greatly through your work in Is Genesis History? When I met you at the 2023 ICC, I literally could not speak. It felt like shaking hands with a superhero. After I got over the shock of being in your presence we had a few conversations, and I realized that you are as humble, approachable and real as you are brilliant. Your strong faith was also evident. Hearing your extraordinarily testimony on this video in 2/2024 makes me love you as a brother in Christ even more! You are such a wonderful blessing to Christ's Kingdom! I pray that God will continue to bless you and your research and your ministry for many years to come. Again, thank you.
What we don’t understand now we will eventually, here or in eternity. Let every man be a liar and God be true. The Word will clarify science in time.
You got it but buddy 🤗
Well the the world is trying to but space bunnies like Kurt here are not helping.. The guy is broken.
Rabid Jock broken in what way?
@@grafxgrl8030 he looks at the world with the eyes that God gave him and sees only 6000 years. Recordable history is 5600 years old itself. Nothing about the Earth is young. I don't even want to start on the universe. Light in transit etc. Something has damaged him inside.. Sad in a way. I wouldn't allow my child in a University he was associated with let alone take one of his classes. If God did indeed create the world and the Universe 6000 years ago then he placed obvious deceptions in there right at the start... It seems weird to tell us to be utterly truthfull by starting out with a lies. Here is something that existed long before the earth and ceased to exist, again long before the earth,but this is light from it anyway.. The answer I get mostly to that is if God wants to do it he can.. Really ?? The God I believe in is less fickle.
Rabid Jock Thank you for a civil response. That’s really hard to find these days, especially online.
When the end comes it'll be too late to believe
God uses the weak things of the world to shame the wise.
I too have my faults,and I admire this fallible human for his humble honesty and unique character.
What's more his big brother hasn't finished perfecting him yet!
One of the best talks,I've ever heard.
The man in this video denies the fact of evolution, which does nothing to shame the wise, who know that evolution has been observed, and is therefore a fact.
Christopher Johnson
Your logic: evolution has been observed, therefore, it’s a fact.
Try again?
bettytigers lol honest? He’s one of the most dishonest creationists I’ve ever seen. He even admits that if all the evidence in the world went against creationism, he would admit it but still be a young earth creationist because of his man written bible. Wow! Dishonest hack!
ɧąყɖɛŋ you again? I already told you what a scientific theory is. For all intents and purposes- evolution IS a fact bud. A theory is the highest graduation point you can get to in science!! Again, gravity is a theory too! It’s a law and a theory. A law just deserves a phenomenon, a theory attempts to explain it and has to be backed up with facts to be called a theory.. try again??
bdizz77 Gravity is a law, not a theory.
a theory isn’t a fact either, nor is it a law.
Give me a single example of any animal transitioning into another.
(Hint: micro evolution, AKA adaptation, doesn’t count)
Dr. Kurt, what a wonderful God inspired children's testimony.
I think that it could be made into a fabulous children's holiday movie!
That was Beautiful!! Thank you for sharing your testimony with us 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻♥️♥️
I applauded at the end of your story. Well done!
I was 34 and a freshman student, enrolled in the BS in Agricultural Education and Agronomy at Ohio State University, in first year biology. There, it's evolution or heresy. They wanted me to imagine that there was a straight line from single cell organisms to humans. We were not allowed to ask questions, like, doesn't the idea of sexual reproduction fly in the face of that straight line ideology?
One of the questions I asked my sixth grade biology students was, if evolution is true, then can we imagine that a tornado could, by rearranging the parts in a junk yard, produce a fully operational and fueled 747? That is a far less technical feat than forming a fully functional human being from two cells obtained from two different individuals. Right?
Science is not science when it is forbidden to consider all the information available. Science is not science when "truth" is based on conjecture, assumptions, and only partial evidence.
No, true science incorporates the evidence, is open to questions, seeks alternative opinions. Science is open ended, not closed minded.
If you cannot find God in the complexity and the marvel of sight, then, you are truly blinded by fear of there being an all knowing, all seeing, all powerful God. What highly complex and sophisticated structure does not begin with a plan, a blueprint, and a purpose.
You see, Darwinism and Evolutionism are cults, false religions, ones which demand that their true disciples deny the presence, the existence of a Creator, of a creation spoken into existence. That would mean that there is a final accountability. When there is no God, no ultimate truth, there is no judgement, no morality, no good or bad. They are then free to make up whatever "truth" fits their narrative.
For me and my house, we choose see God in ALL of the Creation. Period. May you find peace in knowing Jesus, the Christ, and claim His grace. Amen.
"Ohio State University, in first year biology. There, it's evolution or heresy."
It can seem that way.
But science does not forbid your presenting a fact and logic based case for creationism. It's just that so far, there is none. Evidence is overwhelmingly stronger for evolution by natural selection.
In contrast, your blind faith in a supernatural sky-daddy, absolutely rejects any contradictory evidence.
" can we imagine that a tornado could, by rearranging the parts in a junk yard, produce a fully operational and fueled 747?...far less technical feat than forming a fully functional human"
You're ignoring the 'natural selection" part of evolution by natural selection, and comparing wildly different time scales.
The evidence is overwhelming that humans are the product of billions of years of evolution by natural selection.
A tornado's force has no selection process, and takes place over maybe an hour.
"Science is not science when it is forbidden to consider all the information available"
You're apparently confusing 'forbidden" with "recognizing as invalid, arguments based on the supernatural."
"You see, Darwinism and Evolutionism are cults, false religions, ones which demand [denial of] a Creator..."
Science makes no such demand. The demand is for evidence of your supernatural Creator.
Supernatural faith, is the entity making the demands: You must ignore any evidence that contradicts that blind faith. Or else.
"For me and my house, we choose see God in ALL of the Creation. Period."
1 Here is the 'demand' you speak of: To 'choose' faith, without evidence
2 Reinforcing your comforting faith in the supernatural, with "Period" -- blocking further consideration.
You're doing what you falsely accuse science of: Forbidding considering " all the information available."
@@antera77 thank you for you clear and thorough reply.
Science is always open to new information, in fact it's required! That's why we have modern technology and that's why science can be trusted!
The problem is when people present that new information that not only can't be supported by evidence, but does not adequately account for what we already know of science.
And no, whichever interpretation of whichever translation of whichever version of holy book you believe in is not evidence.
Beautiful. Glory to Jesus.
Wonderful testimony! Love your videos Dr. Wise.
Thank you so much for sharing! I am a chemist who dated bones. I could never figure out how bones could be 100,000 years old and reconcile that with my belief in the bible.
Fun fact: You don't have to reconcile that with your Bible. Demonstrable truth stays, anything that contradicts it goes.
@@Gxlto exactly, I am so confused by the comment. Guy is literally living a lie if he still chooses to believe in that. If this is what well educated science driven people can say, you can't expect better from general public.
@@krishcshah plenty of videos dismantling dating processes in this channel so it isnt ironclad truth as the current paradigm likes to pretend. Example, carbon 14 dating is only for measuring short term like thousands of years, but these guys put fossils and coal (that 'science' said had millions of years) in those machines, no one had done it because everyone assumed it would give no result, and yet it yields positive result for carbon 14 meaning, that either, carbon 14 dating is a sham, or those things arent millions of years old. So, being sceptical of the current paradigm only pushes science forward. But since 'science', is not truth but what a bunch of stubborn and proud people say, paradigms take a long time to change.
@@zenuno6936 buddy if you seriously think science is not truth then you are either mentally challenged or you live in a jungle in a wooden hut and you dont know anything about the world around you.
Bones are organic and decay. How on Earth can a bone be 100,000 years old? It would have rotted away long ago.
Our Fathers timing is miraculously impeccable. Good witness. Thanks. May He bless you more.
What an amazing testimony ! I am awed. Have also been watching his series "is Genesis History." It's amazing
He who seeks to save his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it, Luke 17:33! Glory be to God for Dr. Kurt Wise & his decision to let it all go for Christ! In the end Yeshua gave him life & life more abundantly showing him He could love our Creator & science, wow glory be to God! Where would Dr. Kurt be now if he chose evolution! Not with life more abundantly❤
I also believed in Santa and the Thooth fairy
As a child as some point we all grow up!
That's an equivocation fallacy. Santa and the Tooth fairy are NOT the creators of All of reality.
@@JosiahFickinger neither is some sort of god
@@Gush27 That's false.
@@JosiahFickinger lol
You make the assumption that just because you can't see Santa and the Tooth fairy somehow also disproves God. You must believe the universe is God.
now I understand why you teach with such passion. May the Father and Creator of all the universe bless you and make His face shine upon you, and life you on great currents of pneuma
Just wondering, what are the differences between humans and animals?
Are animals creative like us?
Can they be evil and hate or be jealous at another animal? Do they have real language? Do humans also have instincts, do animals have additional senses, ability to self educate? Think beyond their environment? Etc.
What a wonderful man.
He's ok .. He should have stopped the sermon at I've given up science though..
@@RABIDJOCK Science proves the Bible is true. The evidence that prove the Bible is true can be tested and repeated it again.
" As I shared with my professors years ago when I was in college, if all the evidence in the universe turns against creationism, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a creationist because that is what the Word of God seems to indicate. Here I must stand."
- Kurt Wise
Does nobody in the religious community have a problem with this quote?
There isn't really anything problematic about it. As long as we share the truth, we can believe what we want, and that's exactly what he says. He would be the first to admit that all evidence in the universe turned against creationism - if that was the case - but would still believe. What is the problem of still believing something for which we don't (possibly yet) have evidence for, if we're honest enough to make clear that it doesn't have any evidence to support it?
The only problem would be if he decided to lie about the evidence, but the quote explicitly tells us he wouldn't, so what's the problem?
Jonathan Fryxelius
No, you're not getting what he said. He said that even all the EVIDENCE in the world pointed against his own beliefs, he would still hold on to his beliefs in spite of the evidence. So okay, how would that play out in a court?
Let us say all the evidence in a court case showed that without a doubt your son (or daughter) commited murder. Would you still hold on to your beliefs that your child is innocent in spite of the evidence just because you want to believe it isn't true? Or would you eventually face the truth?
If you think it's a silly comparison then I have to tell you it really isn't when you're thinking about the principle of evidence.
"What is the problem of still believing something for which we don't (possibly yet) have evidence for"
First of all, there is plenty of evidence for the Earth being billions of years old...but that's not the point here. He is saying that even IF he saw all the evidence, he would still deny its truth. That is an educational disgrace! I feel bad for the guy, but he is not fit to be an educator. You do not deny evidence just because you didn't like the result.
I don't think you're getting what he said either. He obviously holds his belief in creation very highly, so that any and all evidence would not overcome this belief. Does that mean that his belief is blind? No, it means that he considers the evidence for the authority of the Bible so incredibly high that anything which contradicts it must be false. This could be a blind faith, but it doesn't have to be. To take your example of a murder, I assume you've seen one of the most top-voted movies of all time, Shawshank Redemption. That is a case where all evidence points to the husband murdering his wife and her lover; his gun is found with his fingerprints nearby, he had motive, he was close to the scene when it happened. He was of course judged by the court to prison, as would creation be if all evidence was against it. That doesn't mean that it is actually so. In the movie, it turns out he never committed the murder he was charged for, even if all evidence pointed towards him.
Now, translated into the case of a son or daughter committing a murder. Let's say your son was on trial. You've known him all his life, and you've never ever seen him lie about anything. You see all the evidence pointing towards him, but he tells you sincerely that he didn't commit the murder. There is nothing wrong in trusting your son's word based on what you know about him, even against all the evidence to the contrary. Your relationship with your son is considered stronger than any evidence against him, even if that means all evidence.
Now, you would naturally not try to convince anyone of your conviction using evidence, if there is no evidence to support it. But you would be prepared to meet people not particularly convinced of your words. Now back to the creation vs evolution debate. There are several ways to divide the debate into smaller parts. One of the most obvious is to separate the theological issue from the scientific issue. Based on theology, Dr Wise would probably still try to convince his audience that God's words are more reliable than any other model of the universe's origin. But he would probably not do so using geology as a tool. There is nothing strange about this. In the same way, many atheists would probably not stop claiming a naturalistic origins of the universe even if all evidence pointed towards a creator. Again, nothing strange.
What you could hope to do is to convince them that there is no evidence for their position, hence stripping them of their credibility. It may not change their minds, but it reveals that the position is faith-based, not based on empirical evidence. That is all we can hope to do, whether we are creationists or evolutionists. Very few people are ready to abandon his/her worldview to the core, regardless of worldview.
"He obviously holds his belief in creation very highly, so that any and all evidence would not overcome this belief. Does that mean that his belief is blind?"
Yes, it actually do mean that. He turns a blind eye to reality. Sure it's his right to do, but you can't do that and still claim you have a scientific mind because at that point you're not willing to accept anything you don't like.
"No, it means that he considers the evidence for the authority of the Bible so incredibly high that anything which contradicts it must be false"
Right. Which evidence would that be?
In the case of Shawshank Redemption, there are similar cases in the world where all the evidence points to the wrong person. Either because they were framed, lazy police work or just bad luck. Either way you have to go where the evidence leads you. There are mountains of evidence for the age of the earth and none against...except an old book, but I don't count that as verifiable evidence as it was written by people who didn't know where the sun went at night.
If my son was on trial for murder and the evidence was ironclad, as in multiple video evidence showing that he definatly did it, I would have no choice but to face the reality. He could still claim he was innocent, but then I would have to consider if my son had a psychosis I wasn't aware about or if he's a pathological liar? I would always love my son, but if my child did something like that I would say that he has to face his crimes and take the punishment and responsibility for what he did. There is no way I would claim his innocence if I knew he was guilty.
"Now back to the creation vs evolution debate."
Creation vs evolution? I thought we were talking about geology? Age of the Earth etc? Kurt Wise is a geologist, not a biologist.
"In the same way, many atheists would probably not stop claiming a naturalistic origins of the universe even if all evidence pointed towards a creator"
A lot of ifs in that sentence. First of all, atheist does not equal scientist. If there was mountains of evidence that pointed towards a creator, any scientists who would refuse the evidence could not truly call themselves scientists. A scientist follows the evidence whereever it leads, same as a detective.
"Very few people are ready to abandon his/her worldview to the core, regardless of worldview."
Well I did it myself some 8 years ago, and it was based on evidence that I saw.
"Yes, it actually do mean that. He turns a blind eye to reality." No, he would accept reality as it is, he would just assume that there is another explanation for WHY reality is as it is. Nowhere does he claim that he would disagree with any evidence, on the contrary, he says he would be the first to admit it.
"Right. Which evidence would that be?" That is not relevant. IF there is significant evidence that the Bible contains authoritative and historically correct descriptions of Earth's youth, then that evidence may well weigh heavier than any empirical evidences we use to speculate about the past. The claim made by creationists is that God himself knew what he did, and told us. So when he tells us what He did, an eye-witness of an event weighs heavier than what we can trace back to that event. For example, in Shawshank Redemption, if we could get the eye-witness account of the murder, the husband would most probably not have been incarcerated, because eye witness testimonies are considered more valuable than other sources.
"There are mountains of evidence for the age of the earth and none against" This claim is not only false, but also scientifically immature. Dismissing opposing views without crediting their points is even less scientifically honest than holding a belief against all evidence. If you believe the question is so simple that all the evidence is on one side, you simply don't know the topic well enough. That is usually true for any scientific field. You might not be convinced by the evidence for a young earth, but to claim that there is none is extremely close-minded and anti-scientific.
"as in multiple video evidence showing that he definatly did it" Now, this is of course an example not applicable to the question of the age of the earth, except possibly as I mentioned above, to have an eye-witness account of the creation, which creationists claim we do. Empirical science can observe the present, not the past. All claims about the past based on evidence in the present are subject to interpretations, some more warranted than others.
"Creation vs evolution?" The geology is a very important field in the debate between creation and evolution, and as you heard in his testimony, evolution plays a central role. There are definitely other fields than biology which are important for the verification of evolution. In fact, geology is probably even more important than biology in the controversy of common descent.
"A scientist follows the evidence whereever it leads, same as a detective." This is a very naive view of scientists, as if they are of another breed than ordinary humans. All human beings have worldviews, and the worldview affects their ways of interpreting empirical data. All are hesitant of changing their views. All have die-hard pet ideas which they hope are true in order to get the funding they need to provide for their families.
"Well I did it myself some 8 years ago, and it was based on evidence that I saw." So you're one of few. Congratulations, I hope you changed to a more coherent worldview than before.
Excellent speaker.. inspiring
I'm skeptical of the claim that removing half of the verses if evolution were true would make the Bible disintegrate. I mean, sure, the first few chapters of Genesis and the part where Jacob breeds striped sheep by making them mate in front of striped sticks is not compatible with biology, but the rest of the Bible mostly does not deal with evolution. For example, the verse in Revelations about not removing any verses from this book. He took that one out, but what does that have to do with evolution?
Really? You really can't understand why other passages in the Bible would conflict with evolution? Evolution relies on the naturalist worldview where nothing non-materialistic can exist. Everything having anything to do with miracles would have to be cut out. Anything having to do with prophecy would have to be cut out. I would suggest that this includes almost the entire book of revelation, not just the one verse you mention. Regardless, that verse, like many others, would have to be cut out, because of being a pronouncement from God, the creator. If evolution were true, there would be no creator making pronouncements. He cut out everything that the mythology of evolution contradicted. That is most of the Bible. The Bible and evolution are like oil and water.
No, evolution does not make the claim that everything is naturalistic and that God or the supernatural does not exist. It is a theory on the biodiversity of life. Miracles and prophecy are outside of its scope.
@@haggismcbaggis9485 It most certainly does. Put more due diligence into learning about a topic before speaking about it.
There is nothing that in the field of science that makes any of those claims because all of those ideas are untestable and unfalsifiable. One can accept theistic evolution by taking a step back and saying that God did it. One, can also be a deist and also say that God it, but He went away on business after.
I don't mind if someone speaks without doing due diligence beforehand. We are all here to learn new things and talk about them.
That is the most wonderful interesting tesimony I have ever heard.
I really dislike when people invent stories that are clearly made up and insult my intelligence by trying to make this whole big convoluted point based on their made up story.
I don’t know what’s so unbelievable about a nerd kid who loves science trying to figure stuff out
Very sad how a brilliant mind was destroyed by religion. What a slap into the faces of your highly intelligent and respected professors.
Great testimony from a great man. Kurt chose wisely.
I would disagree with that. Not a great man - a severely deluded and brainwashed individual, who should not be allowed to teach children.
THIS STORY IS WONDERFUL!!!
Powerful.
I now understand what Richard Dawkins meant when he said "You cannot argue with a mind like that". It is just sad, very very sad.
@Enjoy and Travel The World! you mean the myths and fairytales like life came from nothing? Right, can you test that for me? I'll wait.
Its hard to argue with people who wont even admit they believe they evolved from a wet rock, you are right
antonthewall We believe in a higher intellect who is God, that designed all things. You believe that this whole world and all things in it came from nothingness, there is no logical sense in evolution.
@Enjoy and Travel The World! Much anger I sense in you, young one. Leads to the dark side, anger does. Yes, yes.
@Enjoy and Travel The World! Well, funny that you should seek out channels like this and watch these videos. I would think you would stay as far away from them as you could. Maybe you're not quite as sure of your beliefs as you think you are? Difficult to maintain, belief in the dark side is.
Hi, Kurt. I recently watched a video by Inspiring Philosophy that gives some strong talking points on why the Bible may not claim a young Earth. The feller is not an athiest. He does seem to be a believer from watching many of his other videos. He touches upon a wide variety of theological topics. You should really give him an ear....and, if you could possibly let me know what you think, that would be most appreciative.
Samuhel,
I’ve listened to the ‘Inspiring Philosophy’ video on ‘why theFlood may not have been global’ and many of his points are weak, some of them laughable. I think he is a foolish young man, wise in his own eyes.
@@johnbullard902 I agree. Am not an advocate for all his videos. That being said, I would not go so far as calling him foolish. At least he is a young man Seeking Truth in this era of the woke generation and cancel culture. He is Doing Something; which is a lot more than most.
I love inspiring philosophy but I don't agree with all of his videos
I got my bachelor's in Anthropology. We studied fossils, stratification and of course evolution. At the time, I was unsure whether macro evolution or Creation was correct. I now have come to understand that most evidence points to Creation being the correct model, with micro-evolution and adaptation fitting snug within that framework.
Macroevolution has been observed, making evolution a fact. You have zero evidence supporting creationism, which is why you don't have a Nobel prize for disproving evolution.
I take it that you skipped a lot of lectures and tutorials then?
Christopher Johnson you’ve never proved evolution in the first place.
Doesn’t something have to be proved before it’s disproved?
Christopher Johnson
one instance macro-evolution has been observed?
I,ve got a PHD in commonsensatology and I agree with mr.Wise (also have a fake british accent to make me seem smarter)
Amazing testimony! Speechless - Kurt is always so good and explains everything so well that even an engineer understands. Amen!
It's kind of interesting how the scientific disciplines that try to debunk bible scripture have only been around for a while ( 100 + years ) and are still in their infancy stages .
And as time goes on their theories will get stranger and wilder as the evidence comes in ( or doesn't ) and they furiously try to make it fit ; kinda like any story where someone makes it up as they go along, kinda like Stephen King.
I don't totally refute modern science , but i think their conclusions are wrong, because they tow the party line
Oh my! What a Powerful testimony!
Patty Dooley brain washed you mean
@@kendall_knows_best2872 if you choose to not believe, that's on you. No amount of negative words you have to say will effect us. The only one who it affects is you. You have to say things like this to continue to believe the way you do.
Patty Dooley you all need help you are brain washed also. Christianity is a joke and this version is even more laughable. Trying to make a square beg fit into a round hole.
The fact this guy stated even if all the evidence pointed to a older word he would still not believe because he goes by the book of god 🙄
What a waste.
@@kendall_knows_best2872 if that's how you choose to believe, then fine. Believe it. If we choose to believe different, then fine. We do. One thing I do know, we will find out individually in the end. If your way is right, then fine, we lived a peaceful life. If our way is right.. well... just remember.. you made that choice.
Have a look at monument Valley.. If you are telling me this erosion occurred in a couple of 1000 years you have lost the plot.
Jesus is Lord!
A beautiful testimonial very similar to my own Kurt
This is incredible. Thank you Dr Wise.
Kurt, l enjoy all your videos so much. Learning of your giving up something so precious to you like your love-interest of science meant that God gave you the sweet gift of sharing the true beauty of science with His People.
How wrong you end up when you start with pre determined "conclusions".
Everyone has a "pre determined conclusion," even scientists. That's because facts in and of themselves do not speak for themselves. Every point of data must be put into an interpretive framework, or paradigm, to give it meaning. These paradigms act as guiderails and influence the types of observations scientists make, the kinds of questions scientists are supposed to ask about these observations, how the results of scientific investigations should be interpreted, and so on. Currently, there are two primary paradigms of history: one defined by natural processes occurring slowly over billions of years, and the other defined by recent, direct actions of God as recorded in the Bible. Each has a different view of how long the earth has been here (including the origin of rocks, animals, and stars), and each sees the same data, but interprets it according to different historical assumptions.
@@IsGenesisHistory I just assume that the natural world exists and that we can observe it. If the supernatural exists, it should be able to affect the natural world. Nothing like that have ever been observed in the history of earth. You add a god who dunit whenever you don't understand science and reality. Young earth creationists reject all data and measurements much like flat earthers do. to make it fit a children story from 2000 years ago..
This guy seriously needs to talk to a psychologist ASAP !!!
I had a similar experience, while at a public school. Science teacher was an evolutionist. I compared Genesis chapters one and two to the evolution sequence and had to choose either the bible or the evolution theory. I took the bible as true, and ever since have discovered how flimsy and useless evolution theories really are.
No you havent, you are absolutely lying, this comment is ridiculous, confirmation bias is a wonderful thing
The bible has been debunked over and over, do a smidge of research
@@stephanerivest3166
God is the Truth. The Bible is His word. Praise God for sending Jesus Christ so that the truth can be revealed to us and so we are freed from our sins and the worldly immoral ways.
@@des711 nope, prove it
You, sir, friend, brother in Christ, epitomize perfectly, what is so good and wonderful about an actual for real serious christ- following man, and what a joy it is, to listen to you speak truth and facts and the processes you went thru, which involved courage and patience and faith, and against the forces weighing against you - this WHOLE WORLD, many devils, esp.!! i LOVE your efforts, your spirit!!
Powerful
In your bubble world, you cannot conceive that Christians can see the Bible otherwise than a litteral truth. Let me tell you that a great majority of Christians world wide do accept evolution and deep time earth/universe history. Still they can find in the Bible and the Gospels what make them be true Christians, reading with both critical/open mind and religious feeling , which allow them to take into account what science and history say but let them receive in their heart what science and history cannot say.
question for the believers: why aren't most scientists with advanced degrees creationists? not just in america, but worldwide.
No money in it.
Kurt, wonderful, what can I say? You are fantastic speaker, listen to you is half the delectation. And you are a living proof of Gods work with a person who belives in Christ. Keep up the good work. God bless you and your family.
Greetings from Sweden.
He has said that if all the evidence pointed to an old universe he would still be a creationist.. So whether or not he is damaged or has a broken mind is opinionable. However a scientist he is not..
Sir Issac Newton, Albert Einstein “suffered” from the same presupposition, imagine how useless their discoveries must be! We’re so lucky to have so many geniuses to clear this up
@@rachellejones1361 This is from his own writings... "try as I might, and even with the benefit of intact margins throughout the pages of Scripture, I found it impossible to pick up the Bible without it being rent in two. I had to make a decision between evolution and Scripture. Either the Scripture was true and evolution was wrong or evolution was true and I must toss out the Bible. . . . It was there that night that I accepted the Word of God and rejected all that would ever counter it, including evolution. With that, in great sorrow, I tossed into the fire all my dreams and hopes in science."
And. "Although there are scientific reasons for accepting a young earth, I am a young-age creationist because that is my understanding of the Scripture. As I shared with my professors years ago when I was in college, if all the evidence in the universe turns against creationism, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a creationist because that is what the Word of God seems to indicate. Here I must stand."
So...as much as I applaud his honesty his science dicipline is in conflict and he has decided regardless of everything pointing to the contrary that he will simply defer in the end to "god did it" . A wholey unscientific stance.
He was making a rhetorical point when he said that - let God be true though everyone were a liar (the Apostle Paul's basic point in Romans 3). He certainly never said to go against clear empirical evidence. That said, there is no empirical evidence which points unambiguously to a deep time earth (as evolution absolutely requires). And "evidence" always requires a worldview/basic presuppositions believed to be true for its interpretation. IOW, there is no neutral evidence, because there are no neutral people/interpreters.
Dr. Kurt Wise is an example of a TRUE Scientist BECAUSE he followed the TRUTH.
As for his Darwinian adversaries who refuse to recognize the impossibility of "natural selection" originating even the simplest Life form, never mind humans, verse 29 from Psalm 109 predicts their fate:
"Let mine adversaries be clothed with shame, and let them cover themselves with their own confusion, as with a mantle."
Dr. Carl Baugh from Glen Rose Texas also is now a creationist and a scientist. He has a similar testimony as well. He runs the Creation evidence museum in Glen Rose Texas.
The power of indoctrination from a young age is hard to sway
It's still 4.5 billion years old bro
Your reason for being a creationist is simply that ..." I am a young-age creationist because that is my understanding of the Scripture. As I shared with my professors years ago when I was in college, if all the evidence in the universe turns against creationism, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a creationist because that is what the Word of God seems to indicate. Here I must stand." That is , logic or evidence play no part in your thinking.
Amen x wow, what an incredible witness statement for our Heavenly Father Lord GOD and His beautiful begotten Son Lord Jesus, thank you so much Their faithful servant x such an interesting gentleman x I would also be interested in your views on Daniel, Revelation and the testimonies of Lord Jesus plus the Biblical Sabbath x much love and God Bless from the UK, Susi xx
I feel sorry for him, he knows the truth but chooses to believe the lies of his religion. What a shame 😔
It’s too bad he doesn’t recognize the role of pond scum, in history
If it’s in the Bible it is absolutely true I know it because the Bible says it is true !!!
Shalom,
Fantastic, passionate, honest, rational and very inspirational!!
I loved the other lectures you gave just as much, thank you sir!!
Yah bless
For me this started going bad when he said he started collecting bird nests, eggs and birds. Such respect for "God's creation"... If you're a true scientist, believing the world view (religious or not, but especially religious) you were raised in should be impossible simply for the improbability of it being right given the multitude of choice in the world.
Look into why Isaac Newton studied science. He believed there was a designer and therefore method to science and that is what made he curious to explore more. It makes sense
When are the naturalists going to create life in the laboratory. Should be a cinch, you have a working model in hand that a warm little pond could produce... (Darwin's words) unguided, undirected.
@@VernonChitlen so.. Your argument is because something is possible we should be able to do it. It was possible in 1066 to build a tank but King Harold did not. It is possible that life exists 3000 light years away on another planet,but we are never going there because interstellar space travel a la Star Trek is fiction. Not one single scientist will say that creating life from nothing is easy. Tbh nothing in life is easy.
@@RABIDJOCK Life on earth is made of 4 basic elements. (and traces of others) If life could originate in a mindless warm little pond, scientists in a laboratory should be able to duplicate the simplest single celled example of that pond. Especially when that mindless whatever gives those scientists a perfectly good working model to work from. And the prebiotic chemistry is so difficult to duplicate, you people dont need be so fricking confident in there being no Creator. Especially spreading the bullschict that you are close or even lead the public thinking you have. Like the utter bullschict Craig Venter created the first, synthetic, self-replicating cell? He exchanged the dna in an existing cell, Mycoplasma Mycoides, with synthetic dna that they had to use yeast cells to assemble. Same with miller urey. Never in 62 years did any variations of that experiment produce all 20 of the specific, essential amino acids. 12 at most, homochiral and piddly amounts of no real value.
@@RABIDJOCK King Harold didn't have a tank to copy..
Your passion and dedication are commendable, but the cognitive dissonance is not.
You have such a passion for nature and the patterns of life, what a shame to cut off a brilliant mind from seeking, based on words you deemed incorrect decades ago.
I hope you can find your way back to the inquisitive mind you once beheld, rather than leaning on a greater mystery to solve the unsolved questions. Archaeopteryx is not the end of the story.
Good job sir
Wow that was good 👍
So as I understand it creationists take EVERYTHING in the Bible literally and are hsppy to try and use science and physics to prove it. On the first day God created light and darkness. Where did the light come from if the stars were only created on the fourth day?
What a waste of a perfectly good mind.
Amen Brother!!!
A better title for this video would be “Why am I a geologist?”.
Which church did you attend that taught YEC's ?
SDAs do
Parents really don't understand the heartbreak when kids begin to lose their trust in the Word of God and their parents. Christians need to prepare their kids for the attacks from the world.
amen!
And if God showed you that evolution was correct and that the Bible was not meant to be a science book, would you still refuse to be objective?
I love you and God loves you sooo much ♥️
Love your heart for the lord brother thank you so much for what you do and who you pursue can't wait to see you on the other side of forever!
Read Galileo was wrong the church was right by Robert Sungenis
Robert Sugensis was wrong then?
I recognize that this guy is quite sincere, and he’s likable, unlike, say, Kent Hovind. But it’s interesting that his account is entirely emotional. He didn’t look at the evidence for evolution or an old Earth and find it wanting. He started with the premise that his religion was true and the worked from there. In fact, it’s clear that he never understood that the conclusions about the Earth being old and the neo-Darwinian synthesis was based on a whole body of evidence, evidence that has repeatedly tested against reality. Science doesn’t come from Authority in books - the scientific method is about testing claims against reality.
Very powerful, Dr. Wise! You have been blessed to see some of God's fingerprints that few people get to see. Luke 19:40. God has confirmed His presence to you ..... Right now, the best any of us can do is see through a glass darkly. One day He will let us see more of the Big Picture. In the meantime, there is ZERO conflict loving Jesus and holding to the scientific method.
"you cannot believe both" indeed my friend. just like you cannot call Jesus just a "good teacher". He is God. and if you don't believe that, you have to believe He is a liar.
Yes, he is a liar.
IF WE ARE HONEST AND WANT THE TRUTH...we star with THAT closet where weblock whatever bothers us...UNTIL WE KNOW THE TRUTH..😀
Great story.
Some strange questions Mr. Wise. Using the geology of the Earth, primarily the Middle East, would it be possible to calculate the gradual rise of the Flood Waters over a short period of time? If the ocean currents were anything similar to today, could those currents have continued during the Flood for a period of one year, thereby, giving any indication of the possible direction the water traveled over the Middle East?
The main question is, if the Ark began at a certain point and then rose with the water, what direction did it actually take drifting on the current? It didn't stay in one place. How far did it actually travel? Could a more exact location be possible? What is the distance from where it was built to the place where it supposedly landed?
I hope you understand my awkward questions.
Ray F. Edwards Jr.
I feel like it was a long emotional statement, where a guy admit that he is so afraid that he can't accept to change his life paradigm.
While he seems very nice and honest, I can't keep myself from being disgusted. Being blind to reason and truth is... horrible.
He isnt blind to reason and truth as you can see in his other videos. Be disgusted at your lack of intellectual curiosity.
Please do publish your theories so they can be tested and proven like all the thousands of natural evolution have been proven / disproven.
Thank you for your testimony. I used to be a theistic evolutionist.
May God bless you, yours and your ministry.