The Bible and age of the earth? | John Lennox at SMU 

That depends on how you define truth.

💖💪🕊📖!👋ABBA GOD IS TRUTH!.. HE DEFINES TRUTH! JESUS IS GOD WITH US IN THE SON!.. JESUS IS THE TRUTH! REJOICE🌅! Or! Perish💔! AMEN!🕊💖👋😔🙏z!

Wise words, kind sir! 😎♥✝🇺🇸💯

@@DavidRodriguez-yy6kc Are all gods truth or just the one you believe in?

Reality brings the gospels into disrepute.

@@mcmanustony How so?

​@@mcmanustony😮

​@@fatstrategistreality brings the whole notion of the supernatural into disrepute. An omnipotent being is an especially ridiculous notion.

@@millennialpoes5674 How so? You’re presupposing materialism.

True and even though the Bible says the earth is fixed they take that to mean it doesn't move. Reason on deeper thought on the subject suggest it is fixed, fixed in it position in the Universe..........yes it rotates, yes it circles the sun but those movements are fixed in place.

In Hebrew there are two different words for make one is "bara" which means to create out of nothing, the other is "asah" is the generic word for make or do. In this verse asah is used not bara

@@deafgospelworkinamerica2645 Never forget the sun was not created till the fourth day. I find it very hard to believe the prevoius 3 days were 24 hour solar days.

Stop preaching,...and now you're cherry picking the bible, conveniently leaving out exodus 21,...endorsing slavery.

​@@stalker7892 Revelation 21:23 and Rev.22:5 suggest it's possible to have an existence of light without the sun. While that doesn't answer the 24hr day question, if God decided there was evening and morning the first 3 days without a sun and says the same for the latter 4 days, is it so unreasonable to think God could make it possible for them to be 24hr days?

Inerrancy of Scripture is worth fighting for; the clearest verses (it seems in the entire Old Testament) indicating actual 24 hour days (by the amount of contextual clues) are within Genesis chapter 1 (evening, morning, number, and day; and all of these cues occur, for every single creation day, until God rests on the 7th day).

@@1Corinthians6Verses9thru11 Yes, but to what level? Are we going to judge someone's salvation on if they hold to a young earth model or not? There are very good old earth arguments based on ANE culture, which explains a little of how Genesis was written, but we look at it with modern western eyes, which could be right, but then again, it might not be. We must keep in mind the culture of the time, what would it have meant to them first. I am open to either view, its not a salvation issue.

@@1Corinthians6Verses9thru11 Just a follow up, did you watch the video? I think Prof Lennex is spot on. God-bless

@@christvictoriouskingdomnow2473 From what I remember Dr Lennox's conclusion necessitates that death and predation ( and therefore fear and suffering and hardship ) existed on planet Earth before the fall.

@@TheHumbuckerboy Yes that may be possible from his view, there are others who see this as well arguing that the "death" scripture is concerned about is "Spiritual". There is actually some good arguments for that position from scripture, my personal view is that its "both", but I am not dogmatic. God-bless

And the talking snake I suppose!?

If I had a dime for every time someone said that .... ever heard of ventriloquists? Bible pretty consistently speaks who it was. Perhaps open Bible and read it without prejudice ... it's literally throughout the text, and in Revelation 12:9 even plainly spells it out.

@@twosheds1749 if a trillions of atoms can simply arrange themselves to form a cell and boot then talking snake is not possible ?

@@pankaja7974 Where does science make the claim that atoms just arranged themselves? AND its molecules not atoms!! LOL I suggest you get some chemistry lessons and come back!

@@twosheds1749 sweetie molecules are composed of atoms. I could even have said neutrons protons and electrons simply assembled themselves and I would still be right. That is besides the point. Science does not make any claim. Scientists do. Have I said science claims?

You can interpret it any way you like if you want to continue to think that the bible is correct. It's best just to accept that the bible is simply wrong (and not just on the creation story!)

The length of each day is given in the Genesis record. “Morning and Evening.”

@@davegaskell7680 How about you prove it wrong, rather than just tell people to accept your word for it blindly.

@@Mannwhich I am not asking anyone to accept anything blindly. Indeed, accepting things blindly is why a lot of people believe a lot of false things. In terms of proving the bible wrong, if you think it is the inerrant word of God then you just need to read the bible to see that it's wrong as there are inconsistencies within it which prove that it can't be inerrant. If you aren't a biblical literalist then it depends on your interpretation. Is it your interpretation of the bible that all the kinds of life today were created separately and uniquely over a few days?

@@davegaskell7680 If you can't read and discern it through the spirit, YOU WON'T be able to understand it! The rest must be understood through prayer, study, and personal revelation. Understand why God raises up prophets from time to time, as he always has! To ensure the truth is taught correctly. It's up to you to seek them out and test them, to see if they are divinely appointed or not.

And in the book of James, who is also the half brother of Jesus said if you’re gonna keep part of the law, keep it all.

@@donthomas4793 , thankfully, Jesus fulfilled The Law

​​@@googoo-gjoob💖💪🕊📖!👋AMEN!🕊💖👋😌🙏z!

But not spoken to contemporary Gentile Americans. Part of the Civil Law.

Very important scripture, yes, yes indeed. However, you left out a crucial bit of information that goes with all that. How one goes about receiving rest. Christ says: "Come evening of the 6th day at the 9th hour. Take yourself away from everyone. Go into your room and shut the door. Then pray and I will give you rest.

See the problem with this sentiment is the fact that if the earth is old, then there was death on the earth before the fall of man, and if that’s the case then there is no original sin which caused death. Effectively there cannot be a second adam if there was no first adam as described in scripture. So as nice as it may seem to say “I don’t care about this issue” it is a fundemental issue to the truth of our religion. If there was death in the world before sin then scripture cannot be trusted, if there was not then of course the biblical narrative makes sense. The age of the earth is perhaps as important to the truth of the bible as the empty tomb is. And it’s crazy for me to not see people realise it.

How would you even know about the "author" of your salvation if He had not authored a book? Why would you not believe His Book?

Spot on, and I like your choice of words (sentiment). Lennox sounds like a gap theory guy.

@@fred-x3s7e - He believes in some kind of millions of years and in human evolution. It's quite disheartening. He such a good speaker but his foundation is just wrong. He is truly a wolf in sheep's clothing.

⁠@@rubiks6when did he say he believed in human evolution?

Good point. I never considered that. Thank you for the insight.

So what your saying is you have to believe the earth is 6000 years old or you can't justify your hatred for gay people?

@@catross3713 I do not hate gay people? Where do you get off making judgments without facts. Do you hate Christians? How do you feel about Muslims?

@@catross3713 What does gay have to do with this theoretical discussion?

@@catross3713 Dont gay people believe in God also?

The One Eyed Farmers of today are the same as the ones from the Beginning The Authors of Confusion wrote The Holey Script-yourz .

His Story

@@tonypino5415 it's story.

it really is crazy how short our lives are compared to how long it takes ideas to change. thinking about all those people who lived and died in an even more stagnant time than our own is incredibly sad.

​@@tonypino5415The short version is that the term history has evolved from an ancient Greek verb that means “to know,” says the Oxford English Dictionary's Philip Durkin. The Greek word historia originally meant inquiry, the act of seeking knowledge, as well as the knowledge that results from inquiry. If you use a word that sounds like something else in English you're going to come to some pretty mixed up conclusions like people who teach the name Jesus derives from the word Zeus words are not created with nefarious intentions. Words are translated from older words that means specific things

I think Lennox is wrong in his understanding. 'In the beginning. God made the heavens and earth' seems to be not only an opening statement, but also a summary statement. The following verses then provide more details, focusing on the earth. Genesis 1 should not be viewed as a scientific text. All of the evidence is that the Universe and the earth are very old indeed.

A book says a thing. Is that all you've got?

⁠@@PC-vg8vn And, the Earth is a part of the Universe, now. Prior generation stars lived and died over billions of years to create the heavier elements today on Earth.

The Bible is an awkward collection of myths, often contradicting each other, and partially borrowed from other mythologies. Most important, the origin story in the Bible is simply factually false. It has zero knowledge value, and progressive Christians have understood this simple lesson. Grow up!

Of Course.... this plain analogy just occurred to me also. It is important to a Holy God that human beings are the priority being discussed here. The actual planet earth (physical three dimensional substance) possesses no soul or spirit so needless irrelevant credit of adjectival (good or evil) is necessary prior to mankind's existence.Please think on this!

The problem is that “Let there be light” happened on day 1. Six days later you have man walking around. His explanation does not work

Agree Anthony. That is the problem. Apologist cherry pick verses. You must keep reading. Few people do and follow blindly

@@anthonykanemd you are assuming "days" is a 24 hour period. Scripture uses a lot of poetry, etc to describe things - not all to be taken literally.

@@coreygardner59 When the Bible is being poetic, like Song of Songs or Psalms, then the Bible uses poetry. Here is the Bible is not being poetic and it is meant literally. And no, 'days' does not mean 24 hours.

yea, whether it's science or interpretation that is correct, we shd keep an open mind. becos scientists or bible scholors, they are all god's wisdom.

We should differentiate between objective, experimental science, and popular theories paddled by scientific establishment and the education racket.

This, right there, is the correct approach 👏👏👏

In short, when the Bible is not true in what it indicates, do you try to accommodate the interpretation so that it fits with reality and the evidence? What a way to lie to yourself !! Otherwise How do you know (with what verifiable method) that god tells you that this or another interpretation that you find about the Bible is the correct one?

@@jtapia0 You're asking yourself is, "is the Bible true?" And, you are doubting that. I'm not doubting that when the Bible seems to be not true, it means that I'm not understanding. That's not "me lying to myself." It's acknowledging that God's knowledge and His leadership is greater than I can imagine. Let me refer to you to 1 Corinthians, 2:14.

You're making a strawman argument

Jesus was not a god. There is NO invisible sky fairy who created this world.

How come he is not the Messiah for the Jews???

Do you also believe in talking snakes?

Yes logical people get serious headaches when listening to lennox mumbling about things which don't make sense at all.

Prof Lennox is from the old school of superstition and revenge by celestial bogeymen..he should stick to teaching arithmatic.

I've been an Atheist for 40 years, and have never heard Mr. Lennox say anything that gave me an even slight headache. Perhaps that's because I'm a rational thinker and realize there is no objectively verifiable evidence for the existence of any "god".

@joeturner9219 I want a lot of things to exist my friend. But wanting to and actually existing is two different things unfortunately.

he may have intellect, but how or why the old earth.....

@@philipbuckley759 - John Lennox has been swayed by the delusion, most likely for the sake of his academic reputation.

If we can give different interpretations of verses in the bible how can anyone claim it is the unerring word of a perfect all knowing god?

@@ARRAM57 - You can walk on your hands but I claim people were intended to walk on their feet. What _men do_ with the Word of God does not change the fact that it is the Word of God.

@@rubiks6 I would expect the word of a god would be unambiguous and crystal clear to all that read it......he is god after all, the creator of everything, including language.

We are moving on. Thank you though.

"don’t try to fit the Bible into science, but rather fit science into the Bible." Throw every bit of reason, integrety and dignity over board and just buy into the magical claims of some random middle eastern mythology. Obvious that you choose to do that...

I don't believe in either. Science is politicized and religion is in total disarray. Neither even begins to satisfy my curiousity.

@@8House That's one way of saying: "I don't understand how science works"

No, they're two entirely different questions -

I agree with you. I think that is a much more precise question.

Well the answer to that question is about 2 million years.

​@@kenneths.perlman1112 haw do you know ?

​@@RuiManel-i9jhe doesn't

Do you like to believe things that are true? If you really were an atheist then you were a critical thinker who needed evidence to back up claims. What led you to let go of your critical thinking faculties, join a cult and think that you have been « saved »? Saved from what?

If you don't mind sharing, did you identify as an athiest at the time? And, what were you doing before you were saved?

I would like to share the gospel of our salvation in the dispensation of God's grace. “Grace can be defined as the undeserved favor of God for people who deserve His condemnation.” God does not hold sins against us because they have already been paid for (every sin for every person.) Christ was made to be everyone's-every-sin (2 Corinthians 5:21). However, full reconciliation is not achieved until an individual "reconciles himself" to God (2 Corinthians 5:20). This happens upon belief of the gospel of our salvation. All humanity is forgiven but not all believe it. Being forgiven does not equal being saved, salvation comes by faith. Salvation is appropriated by faith, forgiveness of sins is NOT. Your sins were forgiven regardless of your belief. God did not need your faith at Calvary, He only needed His Son. SALVATION is only gained by trusting Christ - via belief in the word of truth (the gospel of our salvation.) Salvation IS by works, just not our own. It is not of ourselves, but through the gift of God's grace that we are saved. Upon HEARING the gospel, if we BELIEVE the gospel, we are sealed with the holy Spirit of promise unto the day of redemption (Ephesians 1:13-14). A lost soul can only be saved by trusting Christ to have done everything necessary for our salvation though His finished cross-work. Romans thru Philemon are the only books in the bible that explain salvation for today. In those books we find salvation is by faith alone, in Christ alone, without-any-works-of-any-kind-at-anytime. Christ died for your sins, and has risen for your justification (1 Corinthians 15:1-4) Put your faith in what He did rather than what you have done, are doing, or are going to do. Salvation is not getting-your-sins-forgiven, it's believing they already are. (2 Corinthians 5:19) Truth Time Radio, also on youtube and facebook, is here to help you better understand your bible and better articulate your faith to others.

@@BornOnThursday sorry I just ran across this ? I was an angry atheist. Thought Christians were all hypocrites. One day I was looking outside and saw the beauty around me. I said, “God if You are real, I do want to know You. … … I just said, I just can’t believe. A few days later the tv is on and the guy says “if you can’t believe in God, just tell Him.” I thought ok. He says now say this prayer… I asked the Lord into my heart… when I said amen… on the nnnn… I was on the floor. Not only did I know there was a god… I knew God was Jesus Christ. As if He’d infused a knowledge of Himself into my being. Thats over 40yrs ago. It radically changed my life, I’ve never looked back. I’m always in awe of His mercy for me an atheist. I was an enemy of God and He loved me anyway. What grace… truly I am beyond blessed and grateful.

@@andreab1144 🤣

Couldn't believe that....

Exodus 20:11 - For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

@@davegaskell7680 actually, there’s overwhelmingly evidence that we’ve been duped. There’s no curvature, the earth is flat and the sun moon and stars rotate above us, Polaris in the center (it doesn’t move). But I don’t want to get into a debate here, the truth isn’t for everyone. It’s fine that you believe what you believe. Virtually all flat earthers, including myself, believed the earth was a globe their whole life.

@@shelleyg218 Oh yes, you have persuaded me. I hadnt realised. How foolish I have been. ;-)

@@davegaskell7680 I didn’t try to persuade you. It would be impossible to put years of research into a few sentences. That’s why I said in my comment that I don’t want to debate.

@@shelleyg218 Ok.

It's possible the Earth was affected by Satan and the fallen angels sin, long before we were created, hence why some interpret the account in Genesis as God restoring the Earth. No doubt in my mind that the enemies fall would affect the creation.

Right, but the earth could of been around millions of years before God created Adam

Actually it doesn't. It's well known that the genealogies in the bible have many people missing. And they'd often exclude people while focusing on others to emphasize to theological point. In other words, They're not exhaustive. Also the word for father in Biblical Hebrew doesn't necessarily have to mean direct descendant. It CAN also mean great-grandfather or grandfather as well. There's gaps.

​@@tsfurlanBut in Mark 10:6, Jesus said "But, from the beginning of creation, God made them male and female." ("them" in reference to humans based on the context) Jesus understood that humans were created in the beginning. And according to John 1, all things were created through Him, so who better than Jesus to tell us when it happened. John Lennox' explanation sounds great but ignores Jesus' own clear understanding that "in the beginning" wasn't any distance from the rest of the creation days.

@@studiolivingroomthat verse doesn’t support a young earth either. Because even young earthers ignore that humans weren’t made in the beginning. The heavens and the earth were. So even in the literal sense, humans weren’t made in the beginning. The earth is old

@@q-petebassin2557 5 days older to be exact.

Care to elaborate?

Thank you, someone aint afraid to say it

​@@nate78824 Read Genesis 6 🙏

He certainly has a lot of get-out-of-jail-free excuses whenever his holy book is shown to be wrong.

@@TonyEnglandUK Surely if the Bible were the word of god he would intervene during the writing of it and say _"You can't put that part in my book, it's wrong and by definition, god cannot be wrong."_ That leaves just two options. Either god can be wrong and therefore he cannot be god, or god doesn't exist.

@TonyEnglandUK You will not get out of this world alive. I encourage to dig into "the book" for yourself. God bless

@@JL-xn3zy _"The Bible is primitive legend."_ *Albert Einstein*

@@TonyEnglandUK Albert wasn't God. The gospel is foolishness to those who are perishing. Instead of relying on the take of Albert, why don't you really find out for yourself?

It always says In the beginning

@@Isaac5123 That's the translation. That's not what the Hebrew says.

@@theroguetomato5362 it doesn't make sense starting with beginning. It's In the beginning. Do you read Hebrew?

@@Isaac5123 The Hebrew is רֵאשִׁית which is simply "beginning". Adding "in the" is a translation decision. They did the same thing in the Septuagint.

@@theroguetomato5362 do you speak and read Hebrew?

He explained it so incorrectly.

It's called the Gap Theory. Proposed in the 1800's. Millions of years have been forced into space between Genesis 1:2 and 1:3.

Gap theory is probably bogus why would there be millions of years gap

Might Exodus 20:11 be read as saying that God created in 6 sequential periods of time and rested afterwards (Hebrews 4 implies that the seventh “day” lasted thousands of years, so this “day” is not 24 hours)? The analogy between human work weeks and God’s creation doesn’t have to be exact. God’s week is a pattern for ours, but not identical. After all, Exodus also speaks of the “hand” of God (9:3) and “voice” of God (19:19), despite God’s not literally having physical hands or a voice box the way humans do (but in a metaphorical sense). So I don’t see why the six “days” of God’s creating have to be exactly the same length as human days are.

According to Strongs, the word for "day" is the same in Gen 1 as Exo 20. However, the word translated "made" in Exo 20 is different to the word "created" in Gen 1:1. But everything made in the 6 days Hod saw that it was good. However, verse 2 doesn't say the verse 1 creation was good, in fact it says "without form and void". Ie, not good. Either way, we can agree that God did it. I'm not prepared to tell Him what He meant

If you can't or are unable to understand it, then how do you even know it is the "authority"? Or is it "any interpretation of it will do, as long as it fits our narrative"?

It was written for human understanding, and therefore our interpretation as well.

@@alwilson3204 And how do you know this? Did god tell you?

If it is not meant to be taken literally, then what is it actually for? How do you divide between crucial dogma and poetic license? I would say that if the bible is not true it should be abandoned, unless you consider pondering it to be some sort of philosophical or spiritual enterprise, such as contemplating the sound of one hand clapping, that somehow leads to enlightenment.

Movement has no meaning unless you specify what you're measuring it against. So a 'fixed earth' is meaningless unless you specify with reference to what. Someone standing still at the equator isn't moving since he's standing still (relative to the earth). But the earth is spinning and since the circumference of the earth is about 24,000 miles and there are 24 hours in a day, that same person is moving at 1000 mph, relative to some 'fixed' point near the earth. This brings us to the next problem - what is a fixed point ...

I disagree… scientists want to know the truth based on facts…proven by empirical evidence…not « feelings » or « personal revelation » or simple blind faith.

@@petyrkowalski9887 No they don’t. Scientist are humans just like everyone else. They’re subject to the same motivations as everyone else. There are plenty of people who can stare empirical evidence in the face and blatantly ignore it. Many of those people are scientists. They’re not immune to their personal bias, nor is anyone else.

As one who believes in God I can appriciate that you dont learn anything about how stuff works by reading "God did it" (and it is not like the Bible gives any details anyway). Science must work with the observable and Christians should simply accept scientific consensus. It is really a false dilemma created by conservative churches afraid to loose members and power. But on the other hand, we dont all need to know science stuff and knowledge about the dinos will not fill any starving stomachs today.

@@petyrkowalski9887 empirical evidence is only seen by human through personal perspective...

@@petyrkowalski9887 sure, if you speak against climate change - defunded , speak against certain viruses or treatments , science has been hijacked as ,icy as anything else .

The bible says mustard seeds are the smallest seed, it isn’t. The bible says bats are birds, they aren’t. Etc etc etc

So you admit that religion follow science, and you must change your interpretation according to science. When science proved that the earth is over 4 billion years old, your religious beliefs must also follow it.

Yes, I did change my interpretation, from a literal 24 hour day and 7 day week (which neither the greek nor hebrew support btw) to "some periods of a period of time". However, I'd like to help you with something, science never proves anything. It does disprove all else that is untrue. Laymen get that wrong a lot, but scientists know the difference.

Allow me to suggest that saying God could have created the Earth etc in "gazillion" years is something God could NOT have done. If he had taken 4.5 billion years to bring the Earth to this present state of existence then it would give the atheist/materialist an excuse because he could always say Nature did it. This is the reason why God took only 6 days so that the miracle of creation can be truly see from the creation itself, that the denial of God's existence would be irrational.

@@lesliewilliam3777 Thank you for providing an example of why this is such a nothing burger argument. With your insistence (and I am not saying you are wrong) in stressing the significance of 6 days, you accomplish 2 things. You start an argument on 'what is a day?' and you suggest God required 6 days ('only 6 days'). He did not. It distracts from the fact that God and God alone is creator, and the glory He should receive for His creation, and instead has people arguing about a timeline in relation to The being who created and is outside of time. But everyone has the right to focus on what they find most important. I choose that it be the Creator, and not the process of what in all creation is, although of great importance to Him, less than a speck in size to all He has created.

He chose that time to establish a pattern for us and so we work 6 days and rest on the 7th. The first day of the week is SUNday, the first day when God established light and the last day is sabbath day or Saturday, when he rested.

Unless you can actually dispute the methods with which scientists use to determine the age of the earth such as radiometric dating, what you are saying is essentially waving in the air. It's nothing. This argument is a nothing burger? I think you denying the fact that the earth is billions of years old without a shred of proof is a nothing burger. How can you, who likely doesn't even understand how scientists reached the conclusion that the earth was billions of years old, even begin to dismantle it? We've estimated it was that old since the early 1900's.

This answer is full of scientific errors if you happen to believe so called science.

The bit with ththe talkign snake is more entertaining, though of course, just as ridiculous.

I would like to share with you the gospel of our salvation in the dispensation of God's grace. “Grace can be defined as the undeserved favor of God for people who deserve His condemnation.” God does not hold sins against us because they have already been paid for (every sin for every person.) Christ was made to be everyone's-every-sin (2 Corinthians 5:21). However, full reconciliation is not achieved until an individual "reconciles himself" to God (2 Corinthians 5:20). This happens upon belief of the gospel of our salvation. All humanity is forgiven but not all believe it. Being forgiven does not equal being saved, salvation comes by faith. Salvation is appropriated by faith, forgiveness of sins is NOT. Your sins were forgiven regardless of your belief. God did not need your faith at Calvary, He only needed His Son. SALVATION is only gained by trusting Christ - via belief in the word of truth (the gospel of our salvation.) Salvation IS by works, just not our own. It is not of ourselves, but through the gift of God's grace that we are saved. Upon HEARING the gospel, if we BELIEVE the gospel, we are sealed with the holy Spirit of promise unto the day of redemption (Ephesians 1:13-14). A lost soul can only be saved by trusting Christ to have done everything necessary for our salvation though His finished cross-work. Romans thru Philemon are the only books in the bible that explain salvation for today. In those books we find salvation is by faith alone, in Christ alone, without-any-works-of-any-kind-at-anytime. Christ died for your sins, and has risen for your justification (1 Corinthians 15:1-4) Put your faith in what He did rather than what you have done, are doing, or are going to do. Salvation is not getting-your-sins-forgiven, it's believing they already are. (2 Corinthians 5:19) Truth Time Radio, also on youtube and facebook, is here to help you better understand your bible and better articulate your faith to others.

One of a 1000 reasons not to believe in the Abrahamic God.

Sweet now look up the definition of "yom" which in hebrew is day. It has 4 literal definitions. It doesn't have to mean 24 hours. For example. There's no morning or night on the 7th day. The bible claims we're still in the 7th day. In Genesis 2 the hebrew reads. In the DAY that God created the heavens and the earth. What day was that? Day 1 or 6? Biblical Hebrew was a very small language only consisting of a few thousands words. Roughly 3k-5k words. Day in Hebrew can mean an indefinite amount of time that has a start and a finish. The meaning depends on the context. Another example is heaven. Heaven meant the sky in Hebrew, it also meant the entirety of the universe, and it also meant the place where god resides. This why in the bible they'll say i went up to the third heaven. They're letting you know which one they mean. The same can be deduced from Genesis upon close inspection. Adam watches the trees grow in Genesis 2. He names all the animals that God has made. He tends the garden. He has enough time to get lonely. Are we meant to interpret that this all happened on one day?

2 Peter 3:8 But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. Psalm 90:4 A thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night.

In the Bible, the concept of God placing the Earth on pillars appears in a few passages, particularly in poetic books of Old Testament texts that use figurative language to describe God's power and creation. For example Psalm 104:5 "Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever." One of the well-known verses mentioning the idea of pillars is found in 1 Samuel 2:8, which states: "He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill, to set them among princes, and to make them inherit the throne of glory: for the pillars of the earth are the LORD'S, and he hath set the world upon them." A similar image can also be found in Job 9:6: "Which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble." These verses are symbolic, expressing the stability and control that God has over the world, rather than making a literal statement about the physical structure of the Earth.

Yom is a literal 24 hour day

@@richardstorier6172 It depends on the context, it means a period of time.

@@richardstorier6172 No it is NOT! *Yom means an undefined period of Time.* It can be from sunrise to sunset, it can be one week, one month, one year, one age, one lifetime, or one eon.

​And in this case it means one day

@@richardstorier6172 Actually no. Has 4 definitions. Doesn't always mean 24 hours. It can mean an indefinite amount of time that has a start and a finish as well.

William Wilson's _Old Testament Word Studies_ says the following regarding the Hebrew word “yohm”: "A day; it is frequently put for time in general, or for a long time; a whole period under consideration . . . Day is also put for a particular season or time when any extraordinary event happens.”

@@jollyrancher521 Yohm always means a literal 24 hours when used with a number (day 1), or when used with "evening", "morning". You will never find sn example of yohm meaning other than 24 hours when it has a qualifier like this.

​@@ragibby6557 How can you say that with such confidence? I am no expert in Biblical Hebrew, but I quoted for you what experts in Biblical Hebrew say. Am I supposed to believe you just because you say so?

That is an interesting point considering this was also Jesus’ first miracle

Consider something else about that miracle, samsonite363. First off, John is the only Gospel writer who records this incident and he places it between John 3, the New Birth, and John 1:13 “born of God”. Think figuratively. Water into wine. Six stone jars.

Only problem that the story of the wedding at Cana never happened. It is a fictional story. (Most - or perhaps all - stories found in the gospel of John not found, and even contradicting the synoptic gospels are fiction.) The synoptics say that the relationship between Jesus and his family was strained, they even thought he had lost his mind. John says that Jesus' relationship with his mother was very close, indeed he turned water into wine only because his mother asked him to.

@pannonia. LOL. Make up your mind. Either the Gospels are a reliable source of information or they are not.

@@CSUnger They are not. The synoptics may contain traces of actual history, but the gospel of John is entirely fictional.

"John Lennox- he removes the religion from faith." - Pretty well said. I became YEC by studying first the evolution theory, then genetics, geology, biochemistry, paleontology, information science and the laws of physics. The impossibility of abiogenesis and the false theory of natural selection acting as a gene generator made me reject evolution theory. Instead, I became 100% certain of the Intelligent Design, especially because there is no 3rd alternative. Give me one observable evidence of abiogenesis. Give me one observable evidence of genetic information developing from dead matter. I say: Both life and genetic information are created by God i.e. Jesus Christ. That is proven by science itself, since abiogenesis would break the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics and there is no 3rd alternative.

@@jounisuninen How did the science lead to YEC and not OEC? It is possible to not believe in abiogenesis or evolution but not believe the world is only 6000 years old. I'm also not sure why you say there is no 3rd alternative? Surely there have been countless ideas on how life was created and if by supernatural means, which deity in particular did the creating? Abiogenesis doesn't break the 2nd law of thermodynamics, so I'm unsure where that idea comes from.

A theologian waffling on and actually saying nothing 🤔

Add about 4 billion to your 6K.

@@davidmacpherson8710 🤣👍

​@@davidmacpherson8710You have no evidence for your claim.

4.5 to be exact

@@trevorstieger6762 4.5 years? Boy, I thought I was YEC!

Excellent point! As the Most High says, his ways are not our ways. The earth was given into the hands ⏰ of the wicked, who devised times, changed places . You are right how could time be measured from creation. 🌻🌺🌸🌺🌻🌺🌸

No ambiguity in the 7 days

@@Unique_Monk What exactly is a day? How long is one? Is a ‘day’ simply an expression for a symbolic length of time ie one ‘day’ for God is a billion Earth years? Is the length of a day constant? Is it a literal day as we now understand the term? Is it literal, symbolic, allegorical, heavenly, astronomical, or any other representation? If you don’t think there is ambiguity in such a term, you don’t think!

@@SolveEtCoagula93 You haven’t read the bible have you Genesis clearly defines this And there was evening and morning To suggest it could mean a billion or any other amount of time is desperate Is the day constant - yes it is… we see morning and evening constantly This isn’t hard to grasp

@@Unique_Monk Let me remind you that the topic here is whether 7 days is ambiguous or not? So, in the above you are quoting Genesis 1.3 to 1.5 - correct? God creates 'a light' to separate the dark from the light. What light (ambiguity)? It clearly isn't the Sun since 'lights in the sky' are not created until Gen 1.14, which, togther with the added detail at Gen 1.16 pointing to the 'greater light to govern the day', ie the Sun! So, if the Sun isn't created until after He created the 'light which separated the darkness', then what type of day are we talking about in Gen 1.3 - 1.5? (Indeed, what type of light - more ambiguity?). Whatever type of day it is, it is clearly not the 24hr cycle that arises from the spinning Earth receiving light from the Sun. You then go onto say, 'Is the day constant - yes it is . . we see morning and evening constantly.' Well, firstly that's ambiguous already since unless you live on the equator the legnth of the day and night constantly change throughout the year. So, if I asked how long is day light on Earth, I would need to state when in the year I am talking about and where on the planet I am. In the extreme, the North pole experiences many months of continuous light and dark. So, on Earth presently, a day is far from being constant - hence you are factually wrong. BUT far more importantly, how do you know that what we experience NOW is what was experiened at the time that Genesis is talking about? Remember, I don't need to prove that they are different, that isn't my argument, I merely need to show that ambiguity, or uncertainty, exists. Unless we have definitive proof of the time scale in Genesis, we cannot say how long a day was - hence we have ambiguity! If you agree with my analysis, good! Thus it shown that, when considering what is meant by a 'day' at the time of Genesis, we clearly have ambiguity floating around all over the place. If you don't agree with my analysis then better still. By defintion, ambiguity arises as a result of the possiblity of different ways of interpreting something and since we have at least two different ways of interpreting Gensis we have ambiguity. (In fact we have many more than the two of us because my analysis above is a very standard.) Actually the mere fact that this chat exists shows that we have ambiguity. You can argue about about how much, or how strong such ambiguity is, which is what you have done - you used the expression, 'desperate' but that is a simply a value judgment - but, so what? The length and meaning of 'day', any 'day' at any time and in any place, contain HUGE ambuguity!

@@SolveEtCoagula93 Nope, only in your world view He makes it clear what a day is, how it is supposed to be represented etc I think you miss the whole point of the reason for the debate too, that a) man evolved b) there were dinosaurs millions of years ago Both not possible according to the bible

He is transparently void of any quality-control in the reasoning department. What nature of people suggest a prayer fantasy, when we know nothing fails like prayer in a children's hospital. Even the fictional Jesus The Nailed said faith was worthless if you can't move mountains with voice-commands.

So which cognitive dissonance do you subscribe to?

@@Stupidityindex Inane platitudes. Nothing screams pretentious more than an atheist on religious debate. I wonder how many atheists out there are seeking truth, where religion is not simply anathema to them?

dont you believe that a trillion atoms came into existence by itself and assembled into a cell by itself and booted ?

@@Stupidityindexyou think Jesus is fictional? Bro be serious 😭 there’s more recorded history about Him than there is of Pontius Pilote, who existed at the same time. Are you going to say Pontius Pilote did not exist, too?

Well that’s not one of them because that’s not in the Bible lol

Well by Gap Theory you'd have an old earth and then every other celestial body would be much younger. Given the dating of interplanetary objects give results that exceed that of the Earth it doesn't track; either their calibration and data selection is at fault or the Earth really is that old, there's not really an option of both being true.

There is nothing in scripture that advocates the Gap theory. No support from either "science or God". I do find his compromise irritating. The Atheists know that Genesis being disproved in any way undermines the reason for Christ dying on the cross.

………so are you saying you believe the Earth is 6000 years old.

@@SuperEdge67 yes I do ,if you look at some creation scientists, they will tell you the Same.

@@nicl8749 🤣😂🤣🤣 ‘Creation science’……..is an oxymoron. There is no such thing as creation science………it is religious creationism…………there is no science involved. It’s laughed at by the scientific community and deserves to be.

You are correct...if you reject that you have to reject Genesis 1:1, too (as well as the rest of the Scripture). Sad.... :-(

@timothy6007 Do you believe in the air that you breath ? Well yes I can’t live to long without it. Yet you don’t believe in the one who created it? When we understand that we need God more than air we breath it will make sense.

It IS a salvation issue. If you don't believe that Adam was a literal man who died as a consequence of sin, then you have no reason to believe Jesus died to redeem us from that sin. If dinosaurs died millions of years before man existed, then death is not a consequence of sin, and Christ cannot have saved us from death. If fossils of dinosaurs and mammals and birds were made millions of years ago, then they were made before the creation week when God said he made the land, the sun, the moon, and all the animals. NOT BELIEVING GOD'S WORD is a salvation issue.

You're correct. The Age of the Universe is not a matter of Salvation but it is a matter of Truth. I want to know the Truth in all things. Do you?

@@Peekaboo-KittyYes, and I would tend to go with the Bible as the source. After all my years working in science I have come to realize that we actually know very little. We base so much on assumptions. When you look at what we do know it does not contradict scripture.

@@cornelkittell9926 You haven't been reading your Bible properly then because Science does contradict Scripture - that is if you take Scripture literally. Of course we know Genesis is not a literal account and was never meant to be.

@@Peekaboo-Kitty Let God be true and all men liars. The Bible is the truth. Science, real science does not contradict the Bible. The Bible does contain the supernatural, which is not understood by science. But it is real.

A lot of Christians including myself don’t believe that those 6 days are literal 24 hour periods of time. We don’t know how long a day is too God since he is outside of time. I suggest checking out the RU-vid channel Inspiring philosophy. He has a whole video on this topic exact topic where he explains it perfectly.

@@nickfaulkner4808 what do you do with Exodus 20: 11 and Exodus 31: 17? There it's says specifically that God created the heaven and earth in six literal days. Is Exodus wrong also? And what about in Genesis where the talking serpent decieved Eve? Or the angels with the flaming swords? All just symbolic? At what point does Genesis begin to become literal in your opinion? I don't need others to convince me that Genesis is mythically written. I've thoroughly studied it for myself. You should do the same.

So God hates analogy?

This whole argument for the literal six days is ignorant, superficial, and increasingly tiresome. Look up the meaning of the Hebrew word ‘Yom’. Besides, since when was the bible supposed to be a scientific handbook? It isn’t one single book, it’s a collection that comprises all kinds of writing genres and styles.

Thank you , this is how I understood creation, 6 days and 7th day of rest. The Professor, (due respect to him) is trying to put the square peg in a round hole, to accommodate the scientific age of the world. I love everything else he says about God and the Christian Faith but on this point I'm unable to agree with him!

Agreed. I consider Genesis chapter one as written from a celestial perspective, Genesis chapter two as written from a terrestrial perspective, and Job chapters 38-41 as a poetical cosmogony.

Genesis cannot be literal because the earth wasn't created before the Universe (it had to be created into something) and you cannot have Plants without the Sun. Plus the order of Creation is completely wrong and half of all life forms, such as Microscopic life forms and Amphibians, are not even mentioned in Genesis!

Yes, for a work of fiction

Everything has a beginning. Nothing special here!

@@davidboyd1745 Well f*ck me then...he did a speach on RU-vid...the man MUST be telling the truth!!!

All nonsense no matter how you read it.

@@glen1482 You must be born again, you obviously are not born again so of course without the Holy Spirit you cannot understand, no offense because most of us who are now born again christains through wholehearted repentance used to think the bible was nonsense.The fact remains Jesus Christ died in agony to reconcile sinners back to the Father and thats what's happening since the resurrection of of our Lord and saviour Jesus Christ. Glory to God.

@@jamesmcallister9645nice u just admitted to being brainwashed 😂

@@SatanFollower1 Speak for yourself , and not brainwashed but deceived, do you even know the meaning of deception? Get yourself a dictionary and learn something.

Are you sure you want to use the term _"nailed"_ when discussing this issue?

Because he's heard it all before

did I get it right: some 6000 years god brought the universe, earth, all the creatures and humans into existence ? probably with an old earth history ? you are not serious

Well said

That gives a time frame for how long man has been on the earth, but it doesn't deal with how old the earth is. But the Prof is right - what does it matter? If God didn't bother to clarify it then he's telling us it doesn't matter. Does it affect your salvation in any way? No.

@@user-yb9hi3us4p It matters for the reason I explained above. If millions of years of fossils formed in sediment BEFORE the first day of creation (which is what Lennox's argument implies), that means ANIMALS and PLANTS were dying and being fossilized for MILLIONS OF YEARS before God made light, the sun, the moon, land, the plants, the animals, etc. The ONLY motivation to ADD BILLIONS of years between verse 2 and verse 3 (which is utterly absurd) is to compromise with materialistic interpretations of the universe and the earth that were designed specifically to contradict God. ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD and it was counted as righteousness. Nothing observed in science has ever contradicted a plain reading of the Bible. If we can't believe God when he says he created the earth in 6 days, then why bother believing him when he says he raised Jesus from the dead in 3?

@@SalvableRuin now you're just making things up in your head. Firstly, it doesn't take millions of years to create fossils at all. And if you do want to take the Bible literally, then it suggests the planet is older. Firstly, it says it was without form and void. That's not good, but everything God creates is good (1 Tim 4:4). Gen 1:28 God tells Adam and Eve to 'replenish' the earth. That would imply putting it back the way it was. We don't know exactly the time frame of the fall of Satan, but it may be the between Gen 1:1 and 2 as he was most likely fallen before God created man. Man seems to have been created for God to show his grace (Eph 2:7) and to show Satan the power of God. Perhaps an angelic war vastly damaged the earth leaving it formless and void, and God created man to show Satan he could never be the equal of God. The literal 6x 24hour days is also interesting. The sun and moon aren't created until the 4th day, so what exactly was the evening and morning to create the 1st day? The really interesting thing is the grass and trees grew on day 3, yet the sun wasn't created until day 4.... Also, it says the evening and morning were each day. Well, the period between evening and morning we call night, so what exactly does that mean? There's a school of thought the words translated evening means dusky, something unclear or hard to see and morning means getting illuminated or becoming clear. The idea of each stage God created something it revealed a bit more and became clearer what Creation was going to be. And so you're conflating not understanding with not believing. I don't doubt God created the universe and everything in it, and I don't doubt he could do with a snap of his fingers. But that doesn't mean I can't question the mechanics of it and try to understand exactly how it happened. 2 Peter 3 has a lot of interesting comments, and he does make the point that the earth as it was created has perished so its ignorant to assume that what we observe today is how its always been (and a major flaw of modern science). So with all that, I'm not sure how you make the leap from wondering the exact time frame of creation would mean you doubt the resurrection of Christ.

That's a pretty good definition of a god-of-the-gaps.

Agreed!!!!!!God bless you