Topics discussed before Q&a 13:07 What have been the biggest discoveries over the last 50 or 60 years that strengthens the intelligent design argument. 17:15 Discussion of materialism/Darwinism explaining the origin of life. Cambrian explosion 19:48 20:44 Why the denial of the academic institutions of the recent discoveries of intelligent design. 25:01 Academia’s assault on Christianity 32:18 Young or old Earth 41:34 Sudan discovery; nomads of Yahweh Long Break about 20 mins Q&a from audience 1:10:39. What three facts do you feel point to a creator? 1:12:00 Describe what you mean by fine tuning 1:17:25 Science has a requirement that experiments be reproducible does intelligent design… 1:23:14Does the universe have enough time for evolution to be true? 1:26:39 missing link 1:28:45 How long have humans been around 1:30:10 How many scientists believe in intelligent design 1:35:10 Can you describe the universe and solar system necessary to sustain life 1:37:03 What research or new findings have you excited as you look ahead. 1:42:31 Sugars, isotopes, amino acids probability… 1:46:19 How can scientific discussion on gods influence lead to discussions about philosophy and morality 1:48:23 Secular educators only target Christians not the other worlds faiths 1:49:50 Artificial intelligence 1:52:07 Scientist genetically modifying people not to have faith. 1:53:20 The new James Webb telescope is supposed to show us the beginning of the universe. 1:55:44 CERN and God particles; String Theory
Dr. Meyers, IMO, is one of the best ministers in the world. The brings together the material world with theology and shows us the absolute melding of the two. He could open his own church and end atheism within the scientific community.
people need to see that if there ever was a time when there was nothing then only a mind with huge power could bring something into existence. From nothing, nothing comes.
Love Dr. Meyer so much! But I pray he’ll change his mind on the extreme importance of all Christians unifying around a young earth and literal 7-day creation belief. I do understand and appreciate why Dr. Meyer chooses to focus his public scientific talks on life-origin, not time frame. I understand that gets his foot in many doors. I’m more here appealing for him to reconsider his personal beliefs as shared in the interview. Why does it matter? -at stake here from the very beginning is a literal vs a more “spiritual/allegorical” interpretation model. Not to say spiritual meaning and use of allegory are not present in Scripture-both are used but in the context of clearly discernible literary techniques, easily self-identified by a rational human mind, not much given to eisegesis vs exegesis. For example, we don’t see people holding conferences to discuss whether Jesus was really only a grape vine and the Jews a bunch of sticks-a rather extreme example, but you get my point. At stake with the age-of-earth issue and whether “the evening and morning were the 2nd” -or third, or whichever day has basic and vital theological implications that span Genesis through Revelation. Firstly, I would like to read more from the rabbi Dr Meyer quoted as saying the Hebrew meaning of this phrase allows for huge eons of time, because in my study of Hebrew experts that belief does not hold up. The phrase was put in precisely to remove room for interpretations of anything other than literal 24- hour days. At stake is the foundational conflict between uniformitarians--which evolutionists are--and catastrophists, which Christians should be if they believe in a literal global flood and all the geological upending of not only the earth’s surface, but catastrophic changes to the earth’s inner geology, atmosphere, etc. While Dr. Meyer has no problem acknowledging a belief in Darwinism as a faith belief (adherents weren’t there to witness it and macro evolution has never been observed), similar can be said for an extreme old earth belief--it’s a blind faith outside the claim of Scripture and easy to reject if you allow for two things: 1)even if objects or processes could be accurately dated as “billions of years old” (and they can’t!!) God could have and likely did create “aged” things--Was Adam created an embryo or a grown man? Did the trees in the first forest appear the size of saplings? Were the rivers a trickle? Could God not place objects in space and a distance He wanted from the start, complete with light in place. Speaking of light the light of Gen 1:3 is supernatural, attributable to no heavenly body, the literal fact that “God is light.” Obviously if you believe in a God who created everything, including light, you can believe in a God who needs no sun to generate it or no moon to reflect it. That God choose on day 4 to also create heavenly bodies that emit/reflect light for the purpose of human time-keeping is not a non-sequitur idea. 2) As I’ve mentioned already, all so-called observable science in this regard -rock formations, distance of stars, etc. Is based on a secular uniformitarian model. The quickly formed geological and botanical changes after Mt. Saint Helens is a perfect modern-day case study as to how a catastrophe can cause major changes, formerly thought to take mind-boggling spans of time, and of course the explosion of Mt St Helen is a grain of sand on a beach compared to the Genesis flood. If room is left for doubt that between Adam’s formation and the 7th day may be eons of ages, then what do we do with the genealogy and human life spans given in Genesis? Do we not take them literally as well? Dr Meyer admitted to being intrigued by the archeological and anthropological evidence for an approx 4000- 6000 year history of modern man. That doesn’t compute if Adam, as the Bible claims, only died 126 years before Noah was born! Also important is the fact the literal seven-day claim of Genesis 1 is repeated in Hebrews 4:1-11 as an important analogy with profound eschatological implications. God in several places in Scripture bounces the number seven (the number of completeness in Scripture) back and forth between days and segments of 1000 years. Too much underlying eschatological implications to go off too much on a rabbit trail here, but I’m happy to delve deeper and give Scriptural support to anyone reading this who wants to comment back and go deeper . . .For now I’ll just mention in Hebrews, the writer is specifically comparing the literal seventh day of rest to the thousand year kingdom rest he’s urging the Jews to strive to enter. Scripture only reveals the thousand year timeframe in Revelation 20, but the fact of an earthly-literal return of Christ, followed by an earthly reign of Christ had been long promised and prophesied throughout the Old Testament and continued into the 4 Gospels and the first few chapters of Acts. This theme is picked back up in the “Hebrew Epistles--Hebrews through Jude-and Revelation. The implications of the Hebrew 4 passage are intriguing to say the least. Dr Meyer won’t realize it if he’s not much into the study of eschatology, dispensation vs replacement theologies, etc. But if he got much into that at all he would understand more why Christians keep batting the earth-age theories around with such urgency and tenacity.
His books do take some consideration. You may need a dictionary to help you, but don't let that frustrate you or stop you. Once the light clicks on, you will be able to (if you can memorize concepts) discuss the ideas with anyone. I am almost through "Return..." and it is a marvelous read. It really does excuse Darwinism, Evolution, speculation, theoretical assays by others in his field. He is so gentle and thoughtful one cannot dismiss him. Even though his opponents chide and call names, his thinking really is poignant and conclusive as far as dismissing secular science. If you are an atheist or agnostic, please read the book. As a "kinder, gentler" society and world, we don't have to become polarized, we can join together if we read and scrutinize properly.
Not man decides / determines 'truth'. God's word, the Bible, is Truth (John 17, 17). The Originator and Owner of the Universe reveals HIS human creatures HIS creation in six days.
All you need to define a day is a source of light, though God doesn't require even that, which is present from the first Yom. The light bearers were created on day four in order that man could take dominion over a self-contained, fully functioning system and likely also to demonstrate that the cosmos were not eternal, but created along with, though lesser than, man and therefore not to be glorified or worshipped in, or of, themselves. Genesis provides another example in that, before man was present to care for the garden, there was no rain and the garden was watered each day by a mist that came up from the ground. But once Adam was present on literal day 6, he inherited a water cycle. Taken in context, there is nowhere in scripture where one day does not mean a literal period of 24 hours but instead an age or an era. So yes, scripture does teach 6 literal, normal days in creation week, including days 1-4. The rest are just unsupported interpretations adding to the text. Jesus affirms this by stating, God created man "from the beginning," of creation, not over or after unknowable periods of time because there was no sun. I would say that this deep time compromising is the Achilles heel of the ID movement. Though they consider it an asset.
The days are literal. The key is the obvious gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. God did not create the world in chaos and confusion. It became that way as the result of the sin of angels. The original creation was billions of years ago, as Dr. Meyer rightly points out. This gap understanding dates from even before Darwin. The Bible only deals with the age of man, which begins only a few thousand years ago.
@georgebreidenthal725 there is no gap between 1 & 2. 1 tells the creation, 2 adds emphasis and details the part God wants us to focus on. The beginning is the beginning. One can believe in billions of years, but not from the Bible or natural history.
Steve is a good scientist and philosopher but not neither strong in biblical theology nor exegesis of Scripture. All we need to validate the days of creation is to turn to the words of God summarizing the event in Exodus 20:11. I hoped he would get into the expansion of the universe from its inception and the influence that has on time itself.
Great to watch Stephen Meyer. I've enjoyed his books immensely.
Could literally listen to Dr. Meyer all day...
Steve is a treasure.. such a beast of an intellect. Thank God he is on our side 🕊💪💓
Meyer kept me a follower of Christ, and not to fall for the worldview of today's society.
What's "worldview of today's society" ? Is there just one?
Really enjoyed this! thank you, Dr. Meyer---
Topics discussed before Q&a
13:07 What have been the biggest discoveries over the last 50 or 60 years that strengthens the intelligent design argument.
17:15 Discussion of materialism/Darwinism explaining the origin of life. Cambrian explosion 19:48
20:44 Why the denial of the academic institutions of the recent discoveries of intelligent design.
25:01 Academia’s assault on Christianity
32:18 Young or old Earth
41:34 Sudan discovery; nomads of Yahweh
Long Break about 20 mins
Q&a from audience
1:10:39. What three facts do you feel point to a creator?
1:12:00 Describe what you mean by fine tuning
1:17:25 Science has a requirement that experiments be reproducible does intelligent design…
1:23:14Does the universe have enough time for evolution to be true?
1:26:39 missing link
1:28:45 How long have humans been around
1:30:10 How many scientists believe in intelligent design
1:35:10 Can you describe the universe and solar system necessary to sustain life
1:37:03 What research or new findings have you excited as you look ahead.
1:42:31 Sugars, isotopes, amino acids probability…
1:46:19 How can scientific discussion on gods influence lead to discussions about philosophy and morality
1:48:23 Secular educators only target Christians not the other worlds faiths
1:49:50 Artificial intelligence
1:52:07 Scientist genetically modifying people not to have faith.
1:53:20 The new James Webb telescope is supposed to show us the beginning of the universe.
1:55:44 CERN and God particles; String Theory
Dr. Meyers, IMO, is one of the best ministers in the world. The brings together the material world with theology and shows us the absolute melding of the two. He could open his own church and end atheism within the scientific community.
Very good!
this is 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
people need to see that if there ever was a time when there was nothing then only a mind with huge power could bring something into existence. From nothing, nothing comes.
Guest arrives at 35:33.
I’m i missing it?
@@greginfla_1 Stephen Myers begins speaking on the video at this point...
I think there may be a hurdle in "getting code to reproduce consciousness"
😅 That was a reach.
Love Dr. Meyer so much! But I pray he’ll change his mind on the extreme importance of all Christians unifying around a young earth and literal 7-day creation belief.
I do understand and appreciate why Dr. Meyer chooses to focus his public scientific talks on life-origin, not time frame. I understand that gets his foot in many doors. I’m more here appealing for him to reconsider his personal beliefs as shared in the interview.
Why does it matter?
-at stake here from the very beginning is a literal vs a more “spiritual/allegorical” interpretation model. Not to say spiritual meaning and use of allegory are not present in Scripture-both are used but in the context of clearly discernible literary techniques, easily self-identified by a rational human mind, not much given to eisegesis vs exegesis. For example, we don’t see people holding conferences to discuss whether Jesus was really only a grape vine and the Jews a bunch of sticks-a rather extreme example, but you get my point.
At stake with the age-of-earth issue and whether “the evening and morning were the 2nd” -or third, or whichever day has basic and vital theological implications that span Genesis through Revelation.
Firstly, I would like to read more from the rabbi Dr Meyer quoted as saying the Hebrew meaning of this phrase allows for huge eons of time, because in my study of Hebrew experts that belief does not hold up. The phrase was put in precisely to remove room for interpretations of anything other than literal 24- hour days.
At stake is the foundational conflict between uniformitarians--which evolutionists are--and catastrophists, which Christians should be if they believe in a literal global flood and all the geological upending of not only the earth’s surface, but catastrophic changes to the earth’s inner geology, atmosphere, etc.
While Dr. Meyer has no problem acknowledging a belief in Darwinism as a faith belief (adherents weren’t there to witness it and macro evolution has never been observed), similar can be said for an extreme old earth belief--it’s a blind faith outside the claim of Scripture and easy to reject if you allow for two things:
1)even if objects or processes could be accurately dated as “billions of years old” (and they can’t!!) God could have and likely did create “aged” things--Was Adam created an embryo or a grown man? Did the trees in the first forest appear the size of saplings? Were the rivers a trickle? Could God not place objects in space and a distance He wanted from the start, complete with light in place.
Speaking of light the light of Gen 1:3 is supernatural, attributable to no heavenly body, the literal fact that “God is light.” Obviously if you believe in a God who created everything, including light, you can believe in a God who needs no sun to generate it or no moon to reflect it. That God choose on day 4 to also create heavenly bodies that emit/reflect light for the purpose of human time-keeping is not a non-sequitur idea.
2) As I’ve mentioned already, all so-called observable science in this regard -rock formations, distance of stars, etc. Is based on a secular uniformitarian model. The quickly formed geological and botanical changes after Mt. Saint Helens is a perfect modern-day case study as to how a catastrophe can cause major changes, formerly thought to take mind-boggling spans of time, and of course the explosion of Mt St Helen is a grain of sand on a beach compared to the Genesis flood.
If room is left for doubt that between Adam’s formation and the 7th day may be eons of ages, then what do we do with the genealogy and human life spans given in Genesis? Do we not take them literally as well? Dr Meyer admitted to being intrigued by the archeological and anthropological evidence for an approx 4000- 6000 year history of modern man. That doesn’t compute if Adam, as the Bible claims, only died 126 years before Noah was born!
Also important is the fact the literal seven-day claim of Genesis 1 is repeated in Hebrews 4:1-11 as an important analogy with profound eschatological implications. God in several places in Scripture bounces the number seven (the number of completeness in Scripture) back and forth between days and segments of 1000 years. Too much underlying eschatological implications to go off too much on a rabbit trail here, but I’m happy to delve deeper and give Scriptural support to anyone reading this who wants to comment back and go deeper . . .For now I’ll just mention in Hebrews, the writer is specifically comparing the literal seventh day of rest to the thousand year kingdom rest he’s urging the Jews to strive to enter. Scripture only reveals the thousand year timeframe in Revelation 20, but the fact of an earthly-literal return of Christ, followed by an earthly reign of Christ had been long promised and prophesied throughout the Old Testament and continued into the 4 Gospels and the first few chapters of Acts. This theme is picked back up in the “Hebrew Epistles--Hebrews through Jude-and Revelation. The implications of the Hebrew 4 passage are intriguing to say the least.
Dr Meyer won’t realize it if he’s not much into the study of eschatology, dispensation vs replacement theologies, etc. But if he got much into that at all he would understand more why Christians keep batting the earth-age theories around with such urgency and tenacity.
I win
His books do take some consideration. You may need a dictionary to help you, but don't let that frustrate you or stop you. Once the light clicks on, you will be able to (if you can memorize concepts) discuss the ideas with anyone. I am almost through "Return..." and it is a marvelous read. It really does excuse Darwinism, Evolution, speculation, theoretical assays by others in his field. He is so gentle and thoughtful one cannot dismiss him. Even though his opponents chide and call names, his thinking really is poignant and conclusive as far as dismissing secular science. If you are an atheist or agnostic, please read the book. As a "kinder, gentler" society and world, we don't have to become polarized, we can join together if we read and scrutinize properly.
have you seen "Scientist Reacts to "Fossil Record Debunked" | Reacteria" on youtube
Around 1.51.07 AI is not life. Life comes from spirit. The best that AI can do is become a super computer.
Not man decides / determines 'truth'.
God's word, the Bible, is Truth (John 17, 17).
The Originator and Owner of the Universe reveals HIS human creatures HIS creation in six days.
All you need to define a day is a source of light, though God doesn't require even that, which is present from the first Yom. The light bearers were created on day four in order that man could take dominion over a self-contained, fully functioning system and likely also to demonstrate that the cosmos were not eternal, but created along with, though lesser than, man and therefore not to be glorified or worshipped in, or of, themselves. Genesis provides another example in that, before man was present to care for the garden, there was no rain and the garden was watered each day by a mist that came up from the ground. But once Adam was present on literal day 6, he inherited a water cycle.
Taken in context, there is nowhere in scripture where one day does not mean a literal period of 24 hours but instead an age or an era. So yes, scripture does teach 6 literal, normal days in creation week, including days 1-4. The rest are just unsupported interpretations adding to the text. Jesus affirms this by stating, God created man "from the beginning," of creation, not over or after unknowable periods of time because there was no sun.
I would say that this deep time compromising is the Achilles heel of the ID movement. Though they consider it an asset.
The days are literal. The key is the obvious gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. God did not create the world in chaos and confusion. It became that way as the result of the sin of angels. The original creation was billions of years ago, as Dr. Meyer rightly points out. This gap understanding dates from even before Darwin. The Bible only deals with the age of man, which begins only a few thousand years ago.
@georgebreidenthal725 there is no gap between 1 & 2. 1 tells the creation, 2 adds emphasis and details the part God wants us to focus on. The beginning is the beginning. One can believe in billions of years, but not from the Bible or natural history.
The cell is a brain cell already educated
Steve is a good scientist and philosopher but not neither strong in biblical theology nor exegesis of Scripture. All we need to validate the days of creation is to turn to the words of God summarizing the event in Exodus 20:11. I hoped he would get into the expansion of the universe from its inception and the influence that has on time itself.
Why the judeo christian god?
Dr Myer, exemplar in serving the least and the lost. What a shameful congregation of pointless males. My commiserations to their wiomen.
Being smug and offensive does not make you a "pointed"(versus pointless) man. From a female.......
Teehehehe
Why do we need a new theroy of evolution???