Thank you for adding actual captions for the Deaf, this makes it so much clearer and easier to understand and follow.

For it is written, “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart.” 1 Corinthians 1:19

Listened for one hour to learn that the earth looks old because: 1. The Fall of man 2. God wanted to make us whole 3. God understands why and that should be good enough for us. I also gathered from the talk that when science and theology collide we must side on the inerrancy of the Bible, otherwise Theology will suffer.

As I was reading the Scriptures and contemplating the passage about how Jesus cursed the Fig Tree, and how quickly it withered, I realized that this curse increased the corruption process. It withered and shriveled immediately. The rate of decay increased exponentially. Matthew 21:19-20 And when he saw a fig tree in the way, he came to it, and found nothing thereon, but leaves only, and said unto it, Let no fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever. And presently the fig tree withered away. And when the disciples saw it, they marvelled, saying, HOW SOON is the fig tree withered away! The great curse aged our universe without regard to time just like the fig tree aged!

When I heard a little bit about quantum theory, I realized human beings don’t have a clue about much of anything. Trust the Word of God, and obey Jesus.

The same physics that explains the “24 hour day” also explains the 13 billion year old universe. The Scripture proclaims the glory of God but so do the heavens

Thank you for this message. I have had my mind changed by it. Helpful. Praise God.

...i'm a biology student... and i was thinking through all the different scenarios on how to reconcile the appearing age of the earth to my faith in the God of the scriptures... and what amazes me in this very monent is that brother mohler came to the exact same conclusions as i did... praise be to Christ, who will also defeat the enemies of his adressed in that sermon!

I used to be a 'Day Ager' but after spending 20+ years looking at the scientific evidence, I am amazed the amount of evidence there is for a young earth world view. We must be careful to not let this divide us as Christians. We must also not let this be a hindrance when we evangelizing nonbelievers.

I love this guy. He's so easy to listen to...to understand...to get everything he's saying without drifting or losing one's attention. Keep them coming!

This is the most sufficient explanation of what is, why it is and Who made it. The purpose remains forever unchanged : For God's Glory. Amen.

From what I've seen of God I don't even question his Word. I mean, who am I to analyze God's power? His Word is what he wants us to know and that's fine with me!

I would definitely fall under the "day age" group. "Yom" is used in Genesis to describe both the days of creation and creation in its entirety. It is regularly used to describe different lengths of time. I believe the Earth is old without believing in evolution and I think it's silly to say you shouldn't believe in old Earth because evolution also believes in old Earth. I always try to humblely consider what is the truth. To date my convictions remain unchanged. All I can pray for is, if I'm wrong that the Lord may change my understanding. God created time when he created the universe. He is not constrained by it.

1:02:17 so beautifully said. This was very well communicated

Ive listened to RC on the radio he is gifted a calm in the mist of a storm, proberly the most beautiful speaker and i dont think he even trys to be , it just comes out.

“By faith we understand that the world has been created by the word of God so that what is seen has not been made out of things that are visible.” ‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭11:3‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

The most compelling reason for believing the Genesis account (besides the injunction that we ARE commanded to obey Scripture) is that God is not wasteful! When Jesus created food for the masses, NONE of it was wasted. Time is God's creature, and He does not waste it. We are here in the theater of redemption for the purpose of redemption, and that does NOT require a billions of years old earth!

“We shall live to remember the galaxies as an old tale” - C.S. Lewis

Very good summary of the dilemma that the philosophers of Science and Spiritual Interpretation Philosopher’s of Theology face & debate…. Good job, Dr Robert!

Bravo, my arms are wide open to a truth I had not fully put in written form

I don't understand how an "evangelical" Christian, who accepts the virgin birth, the death and resurrection of Christ, the world wide flood, burning bush, Jonah and the fish, the redemption of sins through the grace and mercy of God, and yet cannot believe in a young earth. Lord, please help these people to understand that your word is the absolute TRUTH in each and every word, jot, and tittle! Amen!! Glory be to Jesus, creator of the universe and redeemer of souls.

So thankful to God for these faithful men and their wisdom through the scriptures! We are blessed! Thank you!

Every christian should watch this!

Commenting for algorithm

I would have rather seen him address John Lennoxs' points in Seven Days That Divide the World. Scientists get things wrong all the time and their historical record isn't great on their infallibility. The Word of God gets everything right especially regarding human nature and that is a key component of the Bible.

I think it's funny that it's always God vs. science. Science and scientists still disagree on big bang. None of us was there when " In the beginning".

Before I listen to this, I have to wonder if he is going to speak about the first recorded miracle when Jesus turned the water to wine. [ The wine that Jesus created, appeared to have been sewn from seeds, grown until harvest, gathered and crushed, then fermented and aged for many years. However, the wine was only a few minutes old ... [ A scientist would be able to analyze it with the best instruments and every observation would confirm that it is impossible for the wine to be less than 10 years old ... [ The simple answer is: God created the world in a condition that it appeared to take billions of years for it to get that way, but it only took 6 days. [ If you dare to believe the first verse of the bible, you should not have any trouble believing that God made the world in six days and He governs everything that has happened since then and everything that will ever happen from now to the end of the age . [

I like how he tied everything together in a polite concise manner. what many here are asking now is, "God capable of being God?" I say if God is capable of everything that The Bible tells us He is, He is surely capable of creating a mature universe. The how He did it is what science should explore not the telling of how He should have done it.

I just take the words as true and trust God word regardless what men say this is faith to trust it’s not the past that is on my mind but the future where will I spend eternity the bible tells me by faith in Jesus I am saved forever. If I question one part I must question all

I had come to the same conclusion. God created an adult earth just as he created an adult man showing real signs of age.

What seems to be presented is that espousing this perspective is better as it is simply easier to hold than try to make sense of our world and the evidence it presents. So, let's close our eyes and minds and call a day a day. Not for me, but let's agree that this is not a hill to die on.

The end is near my friends. Time to get ready, be sober minded and deliver the Gospel before the door is shut. No worries about this age old deception, because Jesus already addressed this as God weeds the garden. If it were possible, even the elect would be deceived but praise be to God, it’s not possible because He holds us in His own POWER!!! Blessed be the name of the Lord- In closing- well done Al- always a pleasure to hear you teach

Thank you for being so dismissive of the actual question presented to you by throwing your “evidence” at the end of your conclusion and then waving your hand over it to just say we cannot know and “ only God knows why.” I waited an hour to be able to have a good answer to the question and instead only heard attacks on other explanations. How can this be used with a unbeliever?

This is the Albert Mohler that the SBC desperately needs right now!

If you’re looking for his actual answer to the question, skip to 1:02:00. The first hour reviews the logic of Christian opposition to evolution.

Thank you Dr. Mohler. What a blessing you are to the body of Christ!

Dr Mohler gave a very good Theological Argument for the age of the earth, which is plausible. I was hoping that he was going to talk about (As it states in the Title) the age of the Universe. He made only one comment about the age of the universe @ 13.5 Billion years old, but other than that There was no mention of the actual age of the universe, only discussions about the age of earth. Hopefully he will address in other lectures. For me personally the Hubble Deep Field Project and the images it returned make it very hard to believe that the Universe as a whole is only 6000 years old. May God Grant us all wisdom and understanding.

I agree with the conclusion, but is it just me, or is the question in the title never answered in this talk? It looks old because of the fall? Is that what I'm to understand?

The question is only addressed after one hour of explaining why we shouldn’t believe it is old.

Here’s the TL;DW synopsis: - Post-18th Century discoveries pose hard questions *one hour later* - “Here’s my point. I will not elaborate.”

God made the plants, sea life, animals, and man. When He made these things, He made it all of full age and fully grown, ready and able to reproduce. He made the trees and plants fully formed and giving nuts and fruit necessary to be received for food to the full grown animals that needed that for sustanance. He made Adam and Eve as a fully grown human. He didn't make anything as a baby. Babies need to be cared for by their parents. Since this is undoubtedly true, since God knew all of the things that mankind would need to live, why couldn't He create an earth that had stores of things such as oil, iron, copper, etc that man would use to make things for tools. People who disbelieve God can make the assumption that the earth is old since these natural elements are here and they think it takes a super long time to form. God could have (and I believe) made the earth with those things in the earth for man to use. Also, when God was making the things on the earth, He made plant life on day three, then the sun on day four and finally land dwelling mammals on day six. Since plants need the sun to make their food, that is a problem for old earth believers. If the day is really a long long span of time, then the plants would all die out, for they couldn't make any food to keep on living. Also, the plants need oxygen, and give off carbon dioxide. If the days that transpired from the third to the sixth day was a very very very long period of time, then the plants would undoubtedly use up all of the carbon dioxide and give off so much oxygen that they would also die out. Science would tell them that this could not be. We need to just take God at His word. We need to believe the Word of God and turn our lives to Christ. Repent and live. Revel and die.

I have never been a good student and probably never will be, I’ve been the kind you show me how to tear something apart and put it back together I’d be able to do it. I’ve always have trusted what the Bible says and believe it to be 100% correct, for me to think of how old the Earth is just blows this old country boy away, but listening to this message has really made the scriptures more clear. Thank you

All great stories involve great conflict, including “His”tory. By God’s Grace, the Scripture cannot be broken. His sovereignty is True and Holy in Being. His Word says what He is, and His Word does not return void. Knowledge of the Holy IS understanding. Thank you, Father, for Your redemption is marvelous; written in heaven and made available to men through Jesus Christ and the in dwelling of Your Holy Spirit.

Albert Mohler, speaks of the great truths of Christian faith. But what are the great truths of Christian faith when we must realise that faith is not a truth, but rather the acceptance of a belief?

This speaker has just reminded me why I rejected the evangelical fundamentalist Christianity I was brought up in 50 years ago!

He took an hour to say, "it's the chicken, not the egg," and "it's not the years, it's the mileage." 😄 They guy actually is very easy to listen to largely because his style and voice are so great. But he does take a long time to make a point. My whole problem is not that the world doesn't look old. Kinda funny that Dawkins had a speech about why does the universe look like it was designed. I mean, it only looks old if you buy into their presuppositions.

He argues that 24hr understanding of day was always the standard view of the church until the enlightenment but then he later argues that Scripture should be understood in the way it has been since the reformation. This was not how the church understood scripture for most of its existence. The Church choose which books make up scripture and therefore held authority to how to interpret Scripture. Mohler then wants to interpret Scripture as he chooses and as Evangelicals want to interpret it - He proves himself to be a break from the early church

Thanks for your Coolbeans and truths that are genuine memories of Bible!

Excellent analysis and conclusion. The very title does, though, beg a more basic question, on what grounds does anyone reach the conclusion that the universe 'looks old', and the answer is that atheistic, secular scientists have foisted on us the very criteria that they say determines an ancient age, without considering that their criteria may have a more obvious explanation that does NOT indicate age. Dr. Mohler touched on these en passant: uniformitarianism and the fossil record, versus the Flood. IF all the igneous, metamorphic and especially sedimentary rocks [in which we find fossils] have always only formed at the rate they are CURRENTLY forming, and if tectonic plate movement has ALWAYS been as slow as it is today, then we must allow for a long passage of aeons; However the worldwide flood detailed in Genesis provides ALL the explanation required for the VERY rapid development of the rock layers of our modern crust, AND for the presence of 'billions of dead things buried in rock layers laid down by water, all over the earth' [Ken Ham, as I'm sure you know!] As a medic I recognise signs of ageing that others might not see - the white hair and wrinkles are obvious, but there are other more subtle changes that very few film makers recognise, and the real age of the actor is always given away on close-ups! But I have a friend who suddenly went totally white at eighteen. Then there is the genetic condition progeria which makes a young child look like a shrunken and wizzened old person. And of course our multi-millionaire starlets of the screen can maintain a youthful look by means of botox and plastic surgery! So it is important to find out what reasons a person has for thinking then universe 'looks old', and challenge those assumptions as well.

I grew up being taught young earth but since becoming an adult and STUDYING the Bible for myself, with the Holy Spirits guidance, I have been shown that our universe is extremely old!!!!! Get outside of your comfort zone and listen to some equally brilliant followers of Jesus who believe in an old earth!

There is no question. God never wanted relegion! Only loving eachother

Excellent presentation. Totally agree. 🇧🇻

This has also been my (theory) for some time and the first time I heard someone else express it. As a history teacher I spent seven of my 43 years teaching in a private Christian school, resulting in a desire to study theology one day as a lay person. This came about 1993 (long distance study) and in 1997, when I transferred to a Presbyterian seminary and earned a Master of Arts in theological studies - a good route to go for laity who want a seminary education but avoid the divinity route necessary for ordination. I have struggled with this question for some time. It is true that there is debate even in conservative seminaries about the age of the earth. Professors held both to the literal six-day 24 hour and to the age old position, as it is understood that the Hebrew word for day "yom," could refer to both. Everything is interrelated in God's creation- The Fall affected everything, even creation - it does appear old and, as Paul alludes to the fact that even creation groans awaiting renewal. I still question the dating methods, I know there are measures of error, but I do not understand them enough to say that they are all wrong, but there are scientists who question the dating methods. I have not completely reconciled my understanding of the age with science and the Genesis account, but Mohler's explanation is compelling.

30:55 "I am arguing for the necessity of holding to 24-hour creation days." Yes, including the first 3 days, that took place without a sun 🤦

I asked this question early after trusting Jesus for the forgiveness of my sins. My pastor explained it very similarly. He said God created with the appearance of age. The answer hasn’t changed. Makes total sense to me.

Reason is a gift from God. With that gift, Man refined thought and developed the tools of thought collectively known as formal logic. Using those tools, Man has questioned and investigated and discovered.

Dr. Chuck Missler has some amazing information about Creation in his Genesis audio commentary and also his book “Learn the Bible in 24 Hours.” Great stuff!!!!

Darwin, himself, didn't fully believe in the theory that has become to be called evolution, which today carries his name. He laughed at those who took it so seriously, claiming the absurdity that they had made a religion out of it. “I was a young man with unformed ideas. I threw out queries, suggestions, wondering all the time over everything; and to my astonishment the ideas took like wildfire. People made a religion out of them.” Charles Darwin wrote: To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selections, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory. For I am well aware that scarcely a single point is discussed in this volume on which the facts cannot be adduced, often apparently leading to conclusions directly opposite to those which I have arrived. There is a grandeur in this view of life, with several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms, or into one. - Origin of Species by way of Natural Selection When Darwin was an old man he was asked of his favorite book. Hebrews, still Hebrews. "The Royal Book" I call it. Christ Jesus and His salvation. Is not that the best theory? - Article entitled “Darwin on His Deathbed” - Christian Reader's Digest, December 1941 "The impossibility of conceiving that this grand and wondrous universe, with our conscious selves, arose through chance, seems to me the chief argument for the existence of God." - Charles Darwin (1809-1882)

I think Dr Randy White’s MANTRA to “Question our Assumptions” is demonstrated by Dr M. in this presentation. I like the phrase “It could be possible…..”

Strange as somebody trained as an ingineer and mathematician I can't remember hearing about the assured results of modern science, at least not in the words Mohler uses. I tend to follow Popper: "The Falsification Principle, proposed by Karl Popper, is a way of demarcating science from non-science. It suggests that for a theory to be considered scientific it must be able to be tested and conceivably proven false. For example, the hypothesis that "all swans are white," can be falsified by observing a black swan."

Excellent presentation. I especially liked the emphasis on the theological problems we have with an evolutionary old earth. By one man sin entered the world and death by sin! The hominid argument is theologically bankrupt.

He speaks very well, he speaks with great authority in his voice. I guess I am just disappointed in his answer. He isn't disputing that the universe and the earth look old, for it just is too hard of a mountain to overcome. For why do we have trees that appear to be 10,000+ years old (because they have that many rings)? Why can we see stars that are much farther than 6,000 light years away (and determining their distance is a very trivial calculation)? It seems to me, that if the answer is, "Because God made it mature...", that that will cause many people to never accept the Gospel. A simple objection would be, "Why does the universe look old if you say it is so young? Is this God deceiving me?" A point of clarification, I do believe that the literal interpretation of Genesis is a more popular in the 18th and 19th centuries than previous. Again, this answer just felt so disappointing and almost feels like "blind faith". Just ignoring plain thoughts on the subject and not trying in the least to reconcile what you see to scripture at all.

Phenomenological is my new favorite word

You will find great Traditional Catholic info on a young earth searching for the Kolbe Institute. God bless!

This presentation makes a good job of covering the scope of interpretations on the issue raised. However, the conclusions presented are lazy and do not address the reality of the "book of nature". This presentation reaffirms the position of the audience and saves them from challenging thinking. He could not get away with giving this same presentation to an audience of scientists, be they Christian, agnostic or atheistic. It does not present a credible position for successful evangelism at all. Searching the wonders of nature is a privilege of man and we should never fear discovery of truth in nature or of in the bible. Sharing a sense of wonder of nature and being willing to admit we don't know some things will get you much further sharing the good news about Christ to agnostics than a dogmatic presentation of a particular interpretation of Genesis.

If the universe were as old as some claim, why are there still spiral galaxies? Why are there still blue white stars? And just how does one look at the universe and give an accurate age? The Genesis account makes sense, just as he said.

Well done!

I'm going with #1. It looks old because it is old!

The title: "Why does the universe look so old?" Answer (in the last 5 min of the video): #1 "Because God simply made it complete" and #2 "Doing so is the best way to reveal his majesty in his creation". Answer #1 Is an interesting point once he mentions how Adam and plants were made fully-formed. Not a slam dunk, but it's worth considering. Answer #2 can be just as easily used to support an old-earth Christian viewpoint. What bothers me is how Moehler goes out of his way to erase distinctions between OE Christians and hardened, God-hating Dawkins-brand atheists. That's really crummy. Slimy and heartless, really. There are hard-working, long-suffering OE Christians serving in all kinds of ministries. Not *once* does he admit they are brothers in Christ, changed by grace and serving God's kingdom, but add they're simply wrong. Finally, *nowhere* does he refute a specific scientific evidence with contrary explanation that's biblically sound. You know -- like actually answer the question that's the title of this video!? What's the closest he gets to doing that? He says, "Science gets stuff wrong sometimes." Wow. Super impressive. Moehler is super articulate. But he's also misleading and fantastically talented at weaving narrative that makes it sound like the OE Christian is a fake and not saved.

I want that hour and 5 minutes of my life back....an hour of explaining why all of the arguments he reads in support of the bible come up short, a minute of explaining why there has to be an explanation and then a few minutes of assuring people there is a simple on....and I still have no idea what he is trying to claim other than God did it...it's amazing people think their is some reasonable argument there

I have yet to hear a YEC explain our ecosystem if animal death only occurred after "the fall".

Still watching.

@30:44 "I am arguing for the exegetical and theological necessity of affirming 24-hour calendar days." Refreshing!

one of the most fascinating discoveries (more study needed ) is the finding by some archeologists of intact soft tissue on dinosaur bones. Hard to believe that would of remained for millions of years. For me, I’m very content in the belief that God knows what he’s doing , is merciful, saved a wretch like me. I think most science is good but don’t idolize or worship it. As much as I want to know everything, I’m ok not taking another bite of the apple.

Heartening

I used to believe in the gap theory, but as I've gotten older I believe it is foolishness to take God's word out of context, to take away or to add to it to fit our own foolish illusions when if God really wanted us to put a date on the earth he would have given us a start date.

This presentation was technically skilled and well-delivered. However, after listening, I'm left with the feeling that I know not much more about the age of creation than I did before. This seems largely to be theological dancing on nuance and intellectual nods. The concern appears to be more about saving face for the Christian church and avoiding entanglements than it is about any substantive defense of a young earth.

This is painful. So many bad arguments that don't even come close to addressing the actual issues at hand.

Praise the lord 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

Thank you sooo much

He keep saying the theological cost of believing old earth is high. He is afraid of the consequences of his proof and "push" his belief. This is not how thought process works. Only check whether the proof of old earth is true. Not considering what the Bible says. Not considering the consequences of the fact. Not considering even whether the fact is affecting our beliefs and agenda. That is if he is claiming he tries to cling to the truth. Our God loves the truth. This preacher is afraid of the fact. He is far away from the truth.

The easiest problem (of many) for evolutionary theory is the distance of the moon from earth, in as far as it is moving away from the earth at a rate of 1 inch per year. There is an obvious limit to how close the moon could have been to the earth without causing real problems for their orbital stability. This therefore also sets a limit to the age of the earth and/or the moon to much less than 4.5 billion years. QED.

I like this speaker. I do have a bit of an issue with his joining of "the heavens" and "the universe" for Genesis1:1. I think that causes problems with the theological belief in a timeless God who has always been. If God created the universe 6k years ago with the earth, what was he doing for countless millenia prior to this time? Perhaps he could put forward the idea that a solution to this dilemma lies in a multiple universe reality that is not visible past, present or future in this sinful existence that is our reality? If indeed this were true, then of course Dr Mohler's statement for Gen 1:1 would be adequate.

thanks for the video

As someone who tries to explain and defend Christianity to skeptics and outsiders, I can say that we've made the mistake of trying to use the Bible as a scientific text. The Bible is written in pre-scientific language and trying to construe it otherwise leads to confusion and aid to those who oppose our message. For example, Psalm 84:11 refers to the rising of the sun and of course the sun does not rise at all. An early scientist and Christian, Galileo, made the statement "The Bible shows the way to go to heaven, not the way the heavens go." Genesis establishes that God is the Creator and that's the point we should take from it and not try to use it as a literal description of the process of creation.

As a person with many questions; I find this argument to be completely without evidence. It is based entirely on the "cost" of the infallibility of the text to believers. Faith is required to ignore or discount all other evidence. I was hoping there was some piece of evidence besides the same old boilerplate. He does a great job presenting the problem, then completely fails to present a case that might sway a non-believer. He doubles down on the "because the Bible says so" argument and that just isn't an argument unless a person already accepts the Bible . It is circular reasoning.

Thanks Albert.

Some scientists suggest to the public that they are nearing a complete understanding of nature--"a theory of everything". If you ask some of the actual practitioners, they indicate that as we learn more, the distance left to answering the big questions of Cosmology (i.e. Origin of the Universe) and Evolution (i.e. Origin of Life) are getting FURTHER AWAY (harder to even imagine). If Science was say 85% of the way to understanding the principles of reality, we could have some sympathy with their optimism. But if the are 0.85% of the way there, OR if the truth is that the distance to go to understand the creation of the infinite God is actually Infinite, they will be forever stuck at 0% (maybe in eternity Christian scientists will get there). Answering these questions likely will requires inventing techniques to allow the EMERGENCE of entirely New sciences--even sciences that start to overlap what we know call "SPIRITUAL" reality. And just as Science Paradigms change every few generations and Scientist have to throw out some of the old and adopt a new Paradigm, it is possible that future discoveries may completely invalidate key premises of current Cosmology & Evolution and prove the timeline Scientists love for the ORIGIN of the universe to be entirely wrong, AND SHORTER. (After all, IF there is a Creator who created everything by Speaking, why would we doubt that he could create everything in the 7 days of Genesis. Given the premise, even atheistic scientists could not give a credible reason why not.) The premises of gradualism are so deep in scientific thinking that Scientists would be laughed out of the profession to consider (even if just to exclude the possibility) things that COULD have happened to create everything we see in 7 days of time in our Universe. For example, 1) God could freeze or speed up time around local areas to "cure" his creation--or he could have done it on other worlds, or in other "dimensional" realms, or in His MULTIVERSE Workshop. (We see such things in SCI FI STORIES regularly--why not in actuality by God?). The timeline in Genesis apparently is based on the length of the earth day, Einstein showed us that time can and does flow differently in different locations. 2) A slightly fancier concept: God could have done creation of dinosaur worlds, Ice-age worlds, bug worlds, plant worlds, or worlds of what we know as parasites living and minding their own business in a vast ocean of gore, etc. -- all of this done and over in the first days of creation using accelerated time in other places in our universe (or in other Space and Time systems unconnected to our universe)) for God's own purposes and not covered in the Bible (which is only OUR STORY, the Story of Human Beings on Earth). And when those projects were over, He ended them and recycled the material into our universe to bulk up the earth maybe as part of the cosmic expansion pauses or accelerations [this could have been done as part of the curse after the fall of Eden and even during the Flood upheaval. [Eden could have been a small world literally with no evolution and no death. God could slide his recycled material in as fossil layers from other places under the Eden surface layer (giving us fossil discontinuity layers in geology). God could have even imported more surface area, more ecosystems, and more species from other worlds and placed them on a larger earth, outside of Eden. After that, all the new species would move to find their own place on the earth--including those horrible parasites, that could only live by burrowing into another creatures," etc.). All of this is fantasy (invented without evidence, except that it could conceivably result in the world we see, strictly in agreement with the 7 day creation in Genesis and the rest of the Bible--WHICH IS MY POINT.] If something like this is conceivable by me, God surely could have made the earth in harmony with His Word, and resulting in the reality we see in the the universe. My point is that with God, literally ANYTHING is possible, from fiat creation with fake ages just to test our faith, to actual age per some amazing method. TO EXCLUDE every possible explanation for how God could accomplish this is impossible. So, YOU CANNOT PROVE A NEGATIVE that can pin down God in a lie. Atheists will object this would be God cheating, but in reality God has not limited himself except in what he says in Scripture. Consider this, we scientific laymen cannot be expected to EXPLAIN the paradoxes that unbelieving Scientific theories create relative to the Genesis Account--it is not our Job. Indeed, all we need say is God has not revealed anything more than he has revealed and we have no logical reason to doubt that 7 day creating of a big universe it is PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE given God's power and knowledge. WHAT IS UNFAIR AND UNJUSTIFIED is for Scientists to libel God and the Scriptures. They are the ones that need evidence to PROVE that the Bible is wrong--AND NOT JUST A HYPOTHESIS whose premises exclude God and Genesis. What they need is to spend however long it takes to understand the Spiritual reality and God's reality that is beyond what science knows now COULD NOT EXIST, that is, THERE IS NO WAY THAT EVEN AN OMNIPOTENT, OMNIPRESENT, OMNISCIENT GOD, who existed (somewhere) before our universe COULD HAVE CREATED EVERYTHING IN HARMONY WITH GENESIS. I do not see that ever happening. SO, I personally am content to say that whatever scientistic hypotheses claim and whatever they observe in the universe now, is no threat to my faith or to God's revelation in Scripture. AND THEY ARE LOGICALLY OVERREACHING REALITY to claim THEY HAVE DISPROVED SCRIPTURE. WHATEVER the truth is, I am confident that that we will all see it is in complete harmony with Scriptures, without trickery--that the HHHUUUGGGEEE miracles that God did creating all universes will explain the apparent paradoxes just fine.

Well done, a nice rationalization of projected fear.

Classic straw man fallacy. You lay out only three possible options, you then use your own explanation of what those three positions must mean, instead of using the explanations used by the proponents of those positions, and you then eliminate the positions you hold. It's a fallacious argument that would crumble before anyone who holds one of the two positions you disagree with. You treat those holding those positions as idiots who simply refuse to consider your position as obviously the only one that makes sense. This is disingenuous.

Excellent thank you

The tarnishment of sin has exponentially added age to God's creation.

Forgive me for commenting before listening, which I fully intend to do as time permits, I simply could not resist giving my short answer to the question posed in the title to this video, "Why does the earth look so old?" Some questions, especially for people of faith in God's word, require little scientific inquiry. Here's my answer. According to the bible, when God created Adam and Eve He did not create them as babies to grow up: they were made as fully mature adults. Further, they immediately had food available to them--things that normally take some degree of time to sprout, grow, bud and bring forth fruit or vegetables. The earth, along with Adam and Eve came pre-aged. Within a literal six 24 hour period, God made the animals and their environment including all they would need to survive. That means fully developed trees and plants. God is outside of time, which He also created. There's no reason for me to doubt that God could have created the earth itself in a pre-aged condition. Whether a few months a few years or millions of years, this is no problem for an omnipotent Creator. I believe God preaged the earth for reasons we do not yet understand. Blessings.

can God create things in their mature state and some things that appears to be billions of years old?

Never connected the dots of Darwinism and intellectual elites with those who REJECT the literal interpretation of Scripture, like Dr M does in this lecture…. Thank you for this incredible presentation.

"Because God" can answer any question. Which of course means it answers no question. It has no explanatory power at all.

The literal interpretation of scripture is ... to my armature's understanding of chuch history... a modern protestant tradition, and introduces all sorts of issues. This type of literalism was largely a reaction to science's challenges. All the scary hypotheticals and implications he raises have been well answered and are consistent with Catholic orthodoxy

Vegetarian T Rex? This is comic gold. There’s a recent 180 million year old fossil find of an ancient squid eating a crustacean while being eaten by an ancient shark.

I've always wondered if the time between Eves creation and the fall wasn't a really long time. Imo this only matters to a carnal mind because being fully lead by the spirit, we know that ultimately God is sovereign and we know nothing.

Good point about the fall. Without the law we don’t know what sin is. When did the law emerge?