3 Astronomical Evidences from Deep Space that Counter the Big Bang Theory

When we look into the depths of space, objects are easily found that seem to nullify the Big Bang theory that so many people cling to! Do these astronomical evidences really disprove the Big Bang? Is there another option?
Host Lauren and Dr. Jake Hebert discuss this important topic on episode 60 of The Creation Podcast!
To become a member on KZbin: / @icrscience
To become a patron: / instituteforcreationre...
-
Do you have questions about science or Scripture? Post them in the comments and we might answer them in future episodes.
Tune in every other Tuesday here on KZbin for new episodes. You can also find the audio version on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, and Google Podcasts.
Don't forget to subscribe to our channel to get notified about all of our upcoming episodes!
Hope to see you next time on The Creation Podcast!
-
Learn more about the Institute for Creation Research: www.icr.org/
Shop our store: www.icr.org/store
Support our ministry: www.icr.org/donate
Plan your visit to our Dallas creation museum and planetarium: discoverycenter.icr.org/

[@Valor.]

First😂. Thank you for providing educational answers and support to these topics that are rarely addressed. I will continue supporting you guys as you have always been an inspiration to me as a young boy. And now you are an inspiration to my children.

[@icrscience]

We appreciate you! Thank you for the kind words and support!

[@chozen1956]

Beautiful info

[@nathancook2852]

Please, listen to an actual scientists, not these people who twist the facts and often just lie.

[@johnpulawski35]

feel sorry for your kids buddy

[@Valor.]

@@johnpulawski35 don't, they are sorry for you

[@dadto6176]

I deeply appreciate Dr. Hebert's manner of handling all these issues. Very even handed, fair, prepared to be contradicted by new evidence, never engaging in ad hominem arguments - and not at all dogmatic. Very refreshing and very educational.

[@4eveRFab]

I love that you are making this available. I can’t wait for my 10year old to get out of school so I can share this with him. He loves ICR and Genesis apologetics content. We made a point to visit the center in Dallas on our summer break. Thank you!

[@jt2097]

Something to think about. Our galaxy is 100,000 light years across. Without time dilation it would take light 100,000 years to cross it. But we do have time dilation, the faster we travel the slower time passes also the lower the gravity field the greater the time dilation. IF we could travel at the speed of light theoretically it would take no time at all to cross our galaxy or even the universe. If we could travel faster than the speed of light theoretically we would arrive at our destination before we departed, time would travel backwards. Now, don't forget that light travels at the speed of light. It is quite possible that if light did not have to pass through any gravity fields that it would take no time at all to reach us from the outermost parts of space. I agree that from our point of view, in our gravity, light appears to be traveling at 186, 000 miles per second but light does what light does and doesn't care at all about our perspective. I envy you having a son who is interested in talking to you about it.

[@jt2097]

​@@mirandahotspring4019You are unkind, rude and ignorant. Atheists must be ashamed of you.

[@Alec_Cox]

​@@mirandahotspring4019Keep up the fallacy that creation was a stupid idea. You exist, so what do you do that makes your claim so valid? BTW, your comment was an infantile, if not a stupid claim that followers of Jesus Christ (creationists) don't have intelligence far above yours. John Lennox for example..among thousands of others🤔 He is a follower of Jesus Christ, also a creationist and decimated Richard Dawkins in many debates. Without creationists you wouldn't have astronomy.. Read the book of Daniel, a creationist, who was made head of all the Magi in Babylon.. 🤔

[@Alec_Cox]

​@@jt2097The fact that the speed of light is not a constant. Evolutionists don't like that.

[@jt2097]

@@Alec_Cox Evolution is imagination about the past. Assumptions and wishful thinking by atheists and evolutionists who mistakenly believe it is an alternative to a creator. Many people believe evolution to be true because all life has the ability to adapt to changing environments by natural selection of beneficial characteristics from the existing gene pool. This is adaptation, not evolution. Adaptation can only select from whatever already exists, if it hasn't already been created it can't be selected. Evolution is the imaginary creating of new, more varied and more complex genetic code by mutation, the errors in copying existing code, which has never been observed. We have observed beneficial selections from the gene pool, we have never observed evolution. Generally speaking evolutionists are too dumb to know the difference.

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

Dr. Hebert is such a good teacher

[@CreationvsEvolution]

ICR please always keep speaking the truth of God's word! Your ministry is very important.

[@chozen1956]

I love the manner with which this scientists presents his case.

[@MichaelNorwood-bk5vy]

Great stuff! Dr. Hebert is the man.

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

Ooooh can't wait to see this one, guys! Thank you so much 🙂🙏🙏🙏

[@williamhoward2731]

I wish to thank you for sharing this informational Podcast with me . Amen

[@williamhoward2731]

I wish to thank you for sharing this informational Podcast video with me .

[@srice6231]

Another fascinating podcast!

[@RodericGurrola]

Love this good work.

[@Gadfly247]

I would love to explore the theory of relativity where time runs differently in deep space vs. here. Do you have resources on that?

[@rubiks6]

We just haven't traveled very far from Earth. Space is really big. Satellites have been put into orbit with very precise clocks demonstrating that clocks run at different rates.

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

It's nothing to do with space as such - time runs slower in strong gravitational fields and also slower relative to slow moving and fast moving objects.

[@rubiks6]

@@StudentDad-mc3pu - Have you heard of "space/time"? It's a thing.

[@l.m.892]

@@StudentDad-mc3pu The hypothesis of time dilation in based on a flawed thought experiment. If it were true that space-time warped, then in Earth gravity, we would exceed the speed of light ever year or so (via equivalence principle). Einstein knew this, but shrugged it off. Space-time curvature is an outward projection of a mental artifact. People believe it, so scientists have something they can obtain funding for. We should be more responsible and productive with our resource allocations.

[@h077ings3ad]

It’s a theory! No one can prove nor disprove the statement.

[@tiagohardman]

Thank you for this!

[@terminusest5902]

We are at an extremely young age of astrophysics and modern science. We have much more to learn. And knowledge is advancing so fast because of new technologies. From microscopes, to even larger supercolliders and telescopes.

[@danbarnett3765]

We are trying to understand God's mind/understanding by our catching up in our understanding today.

[@LuciferAlmighty]

Nevermind we can still observe the big bang

[@zerosteel0123]

Thanks ICR

[@revv45acp71]

Helpful! Thank you! God bless you both!

[@davidbradley5687]

How does electric universe theory impact your view of cosmic evolution?

[@varsenika8651]

Praying for you please keep up the good work ❤

[@terminusest5902]

Knew data is often supporting our understanding of science and asking even more complex questions.

[@georgeherod4252]

I so appreciate that he says, "if the Bible says it, it's right, that's it."

[@dominiqueubersfeld2282]

The funny thing many people don't know is that the Big Bang Theory originally was introduced by a Belgian Catholic priest named Abbé Georges Lemaître who was also an astronomer and an astrophysicist.

[@rubiks6]

Okay. So what. Does that make it valid?

[@Alec_Cox]

The Roman Catholic church has caused more damage because of its power grab than they would like to admit. Constantine just took the old pagan priests and were not and still are not the 1st church, but were given that title as an authority grab... Hence, the reformation that the Catholics are still trying to catch up with.

[@nathancook2852]

@@rubiks6 Not in and of itself, but the mountains of data that support it do.

[@rubiks6]

@@nathancook2852 - There is more than one way to interpret evidence.

[@TheChadPad]

That makes me question it even more. Satan’s church

[@moonshiner5412]

I totally agree that we will get to explore the universe. I often fall asleep thinking about that exact thing. I look forward to eternity! Praise the Lord!

[@stuartofblyth]

Bear in mind you've only a limited time to explore this broken universe. Please see 2 Peter 3 vv 11,12 and Revelation 21 vv 4, 5.

[@terminusest5902]

There are still many things science can not show. That does not mean all science is wrong. The scientific process is a self correcting method that involves logic, thought, evaluation, evidence, testing, predicting, development, argument, replicating, and improvement. As humans gain more knowledge about the universe, they find even more questions. We are in an age of very rapid acquisition and technology that will take many decades to incorporate.

[@masada2828]

The earth does not have to be 6000 years old. It was without form & void, it was there at the time of creation, it could be a lot older.

[@larrybedouin2921]

The begetting ages: {Genesis 11:11-26} Shem: MT (*100 years), LXX (100 years), SP (100 years)na Arphaxad: MT (35 years), LXX (**135 years), SP (135 years) Kainan: LXX (°130 years)? Shelah: MT (30 years), LXX (**130 years), SP (130 years) Eber: MT (34 years), LXX (**134 years), SP (134 years) Peleg: MT (30 years), LXX (**130 years), SP (130 years) Reu: MT (32 years), LXX (**132 years), SP (132 years) Serug: MT (30 years), LXX (**130 years), SP (130 years) Nahor: MT (29 years), LXX (**79 years), SP (79 years) Terah: MT (*70 years), LXX (**70 years), SP (70 years) Rule: (MT) = Masoretic Text (☆minus 650 yrs and 130 yrs - Kainan/m) (LXX) = Greek Septuagint (SP) = Samaritan Penteteuch (°) = Luke 3:36 second witness (*) = The MT, the LXX, and the SP are in agreement. (**) = Josephus is in agreement with the LXX and SP. (na) = Josephus does not give a witness. ^ Flavius Josephus was a first century historian. 'Antiquities of the Jews' "The things narrated in the sacred Scriptures, are, however, innumerable, seeing that they embrace the history of *5,000* years..." (Ant. 1:13) Josephus claimed to use *Hebrew* text in his recitation of Genesis and other OT books. (Against Apion, 1:1, 54; Ant. 1:5, 9:208, 10:218) Rabbinic deflation theory (after 70 A.D.): a), Motive....Chrono-Messianism b), Means and Athority....Rabbi Akiba 40-137 A.D. c), Opperatunity....Judaism had been reduced to one Pharisaic sect after 70 A.D. -->There is no unbiased reliable second witness to the complete time-line of the MT before Eusebius in the 4th century A.D. Then Abraham gave up the ghost, and died in *a good old age* an old man, and full of years; and was gathered to his people. (175 years) {Genesis 25:8} ^ By MT Chronology this statement would be untrue. According to the MT, Eber was still alive and lived to be a good old age of 464 years, more than twice the age of Abraham. Shem lived to be 600 years old, yet according to the MT he only dies 25 years before Abraham death. (The Jews also falsely claim that he is the high priest of Salem, Melchizedek in a vain attempt to discredit Christ claim of being a priest in the order of Melchizedek.)

[@umvhu]

Does light decay in a similar way to the decay of sound. My example is thunder, heard nearby it is a very sharp sound, heard at distance it is a dull sound, I assume as you get into the higher frequency range those parts of the sound decay over distance much more than the lower frequency sounds. So, lets say the blue end of the optical range are higher frequency emissions, and red, the lower frequency. Does this provoke thought?

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

No. It does, however, observe the inverse square law which means as you move away from the source, the power reduces by the square of the distance. Sound is propergated through the atmospher and air absorbes higher frequencies more effectively than lower ones. That is why you hear the low rumble many miles away.

[@TheChadPad]

That is an amazing idea, actually. What if blue light decays and can’t get to us as well as red light? That would explain the red shift we’re seeing?

[@gracemember101]

Since discovering Jer. 31:37 I have been pumped by every new telescope built or space probe launched that is virtually guaranteed to show us something that has never been detected before. It's like God saying no matter how sophisticated your instruments there will always be evidence of my handiwork you have yet to see.

[@matthewshockey-nq3ix]

Infinite heat of the singularity cant create our mind game over

[@nathancook2852]

It can create punctuation marks though.

[@samename1st]

I agree with the math of Relativity but not the conclusion. It henges on that time is a product or property of space and matter, not something separate. Einstein equates our measurements to the reality of the object. This sounds like pure empiricalism, but makes the intangible defined by measurements. "Deep time, but only in deep space" is a retelling of the day-age theory.

[@schnauzerloversmom]

Gen 1:1. In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Note the period at the end of the sentence. There is no time frame included. In fact, there isn’t a time reference until Gen 5. So, we don’t know when or how long ago Gen 1 happened.

[@dradelet]

I was thinking, God often compared Abraham's descendants to the numerous stars and grains of sand, so who says stars can't also be born as we see them die, just like the number of sand doesn't remain stationary... ;-). It says nothing about their original creation :). My other recent thought (as a YEC) was that, we have no measure of time from when the raw materials of earth and the heavens were first created to when light was brought to earth, allowing the first day and measure of time to be produced. So how can we know how old the rocks are - we only have a human genealogy to give us an idea of the time span from creation of light and form on earth...

[@nathancook2852]

Good thing science doesn't rely on genealogy. Do you know that Japan has a written history older than than 10,000 yrs?

[@xXGENDAMAGEXx]

I like how you like his Idea. Because it follows the Speed of light with a logical argument. That is you or God Sped up the speed of light He would have to Speed up Time to coincide rather than violate physics.

[@Hydroverse]

Between Isaiah 34:4, 2 Peter 3:10, and Revelation 21:1, I believe the spiral arms and the galactic jets foreshadow the Final Judgment. The heavens are to be destroyed by their fire as the earth was by its water. The whirlpool structures were formed during the cosmic-scale judgment of Noah's Flood.

[@nathancook2852]

You mean the flood that there is zero proof of?

[@user-vn8so9rf3d]

Why do recent comments disappear???

[@studykitchen9853]

Sir ,i am Harshit, - to deal with the problem of Dual nature of light , I discover ' Morse-code model of Light ' ,this model proof non monochromatic nature of light. and this model is also explain Radiation effect . this model also explain diffraction effect of light. sir please pay attention to my model, it can help in physics.

[@terminusest5902]

Arguments against science is very often proven wrong as new information is discovered.

[@wrippley103]

You can't gauge the age of the universe any more than you could gauge the age of Adam after God created Him. Adam was created fully grown and formed, he didn't start off as a zygote.

[@clarkh238]

"Conventional scientists?" How about referring to them as secular humanist scientists.

[@josephscottadams39]

I agree. Let's call a spade a spade.

[@jounisuninen]

Naturalistic scientists. I'm creationist and I see creationism as much more firmly based on science than naturalism. Naturalists need presuppositions and preconceptions. Thus they break the most important principles in making science. Naturalists consider methodological naturalism as the preferred method of research. However, methodological naturalism is not scientific, when we insist that science must not reject any theories in advance. Holding preconception as the guiding principle of work makes atheistic research a pseudoscience, a godless religion. Atheistic preconception is "No intelligent design!". Any observation that seems to point towards intelligent design is automatically abandoned. That's religious, that’s pseudoscience. That's the reason why naturalistic science makes constantly false deductions, constantly correcting itself, never being able to find the truth. Creationist science has critical rationalism as the preferred method of scientific studies. In critical rationalism no theory is rejected for ideological reasons. Whether a research points to a natural or to a supernatural solution it is accepted, based on evidence only. Critical rationalism recognizes that our senses and other factors may get in the way between us as researchers and the researched reality.

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

Or just, scientists?

[@nathancook2852]

@@josephscottadams39 Then we can call you all ignorant.

[@josephscottadams39]

@@nathancook2852 ignorant of what sir?

[@user-wh1ex4sq3t]

God created a mature universe. He could easily create light that looks like it took a long time to get here. But I think God created light that extended from the star to the end of the universe the same time He created everything else.

[@freakngroovn]

Right? He created everything. That includes photons and other forms of radiation. Why does it seem ICR can't believe God created the light/photons enroute between the source and earth?

[@globalcoupledances]

So according to him all galaxies we see are not more than 6000 light years away., consisting of micro stars

[@freakngroovn]

I don't understand why light from objects billions of light years away poses a problem for creationists. Light was created before the stars so there had to be photons. Why can't it be said that the light from the celestial objects was created enroute? Nobody seems to have a problem with adult Adam and Eve. Nobody has an issue with there being no mention of individual cells being created to make Adam and Eve. Creating photons enroute at the time of the creation of the sun and stars seems logical to me. Look at the imensity of what He created. Would photons be beyond Him? No mental gymnastics needed.

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

The light from a star has a source, it is energy given off as part of a nuclear reaction - literally part of the mass of the star being converted to energy using the equation E=MC2. Everything in you post is conjecture which is provably incorrect.

[@pj_ytmt-123]

Yes, because space is not dark but bright. The reason space looks dark to us is because our eyes only see light when it reflects off objects, and density of objects in space is very low. If we could see light _in transit_ space will be filled with light (rays).

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

@@pj_ytmt-123 Space is full of electro-magnetic radiation then. A lot of which has travelled many tens of thousands and even millions of light years, not to mention billions for some.

[@pj_ytmt-123]

@@StudentDad-mc3pu Well, of course space is full of light because all the stars in the sky (light sources) are constantly emitting it in all directions, and probably you can find the full spectrum of electro-magnetism always present somewhere (but not necessarily in all spots).

[@pj_ytmt-123]

@@StudentDad-mc3pu Eg. Black-hole radiation is emitted along an axis.

[@rockroll9761]

🦖🦕🦖

[@salvadoremarinaro6350]

Every ten years everything changes... The main explanation from secular is.... such and such collided with such and such and that created x, y, z. Its always there answer... Smash crash bang boom... 💥💥💥💥💥💥💥

[@painmt651]

Yup! Whenever they don’t understand why some thing is laying in this direction or moving this way or whatever, they say,…oh it was smashed by another planet or some gigantic impactor. What wiped out the dinosaurs? A giant impactor. Why is Uranus on its side? Giant impact. Where did the moon come from?….why is earth tilted? Every time, the answer is the same…

[@nathancook2852]

@@painmt651 Well, there are lots of giant objects in space, there are lots of giant holes on the moon, mars, Earth, etc. When you put 2 and 2 together... you all get 5, I know, but that isn't the asnwer.

[@nathancook2852]

You obviously do not keep up with the world of science. Scientists are willing to adjust viewpoints when new information is gather. You all should try it sometime.

[@johnosborne7637]

Doesn't the Bible say that God stretched out the heavens like a curtain ?

[@mrazyone]

13000 years by scripture

[@Sarcasticass]

Consider that God created the heavens and the earth and then spread out the heavens. They are not billions of years old just incredibly distant. I think they were visible from earth before and when God stretched out the heavens it caused the light to be red-shifted.

[@terminusest5902]

Spiral galaxies do not disprove science.

[@ba0cbmft]

The real question you should ask is how does arguing about the beginning of the universe secure your place in Heaven under the aegis of Father? The true lessons of Jesus are to acknowledge human suffering and to look toward the future. When you dig in the past all you find are dead things.

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

Well, since Gensis is a provably mythical book it casts doubt on Paul's assertion about how death came into the world and need for salvation.

[@TheChadPad]

@@StudentDad-mc3puGenesis seems to be holding up rather well with the scientific arguments I’m seeing

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

@@TheChadPad Goodness! Where are you seeing that, can you give an example?

[@TheChadPad]

@@StudentDad-mc3pu yes, the mitochondrial dna traces back in origin to a woman 6000-7000 years ago. As well, the y-chromosome variation traces back 6000 years, and branches off into 3 main stems 4500 years ago which fits with the Biblical account of Noah’s 3 sons repopulating the earth. It’s interesting stuff

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

@@TheChadPad Ha ha, no it absolutely does not. This is a claim made on creationist web sites misrepresenting a paper published in Nature about 12 years ago. The claim is that molecular substitution in DNA happens at a fixed rate. The irony is that Creationists insist that this rate must be consistent, when it depends on many factors, but that the rate of radioactive decay of uranium somehow was much faster in the past. Mitochondrial EVE lived well beyond 100,000 years.

[@mrazyone]

No, new heaven and earth.. so not this earth

[@justaguy4real]

nice try, but naahh

[@l.m.892]

All roads lead to God. No matter what you start off with (big bang, or young Earth) it ends at His feet.

[@MastaE2288]

Funny how it also started with God. It's amazing how the truth works.

[@kingklank6732]

That's right , you can't have something come from nothing! Had to be a Creator! And that Creator very likely always was.

[@l.m.892]

@@kingklank6732 The Creator most definitely always was, always is, and always will be. No doubt.

[@MrWeezer55]

No scientist is 'worried' about new information. They thrive on it. Unlike creationists, scientists don't have to throw out any evidence that challenges their presuppositions.

[@AcmeAstro]

Nonsense. Our faith in Jesus as creator does not require any worry whatsoever. Are there questions? Of course! We are after all thinking God's thoughts after him. If he created all things and you know only 1% of everything it means he knows the rest. He discovers nothing new, we discover what he has made and that brings him glory. Proverbs 25:2, “It is the glory of God to conceal a thing, but the honor of kings is to search out a matter.” You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.” Notice mind. Greek nous. Reasoning center, intellect. God does not require blind faith unlike naturalism. You have to believe everything came from nothing when nothing expanded. That is magic.

[@MrWeezer55]

@@AcmeAstro I'm sure you don't need to worry. Nobody said 'everything came from nothing '. And faith is your department, not mine.

[@AcmeAstro]

​@@MrWeezer55 Aboslutely false. The April 2002 Discover magazine cover shows a red marble a little larger than a centimeter across with the text, “The Universe at about 10-34 seconds (actual size).” Underneath this is the following teaser: “The universe burst into something from absolutely nothing-zero, nada. And as it got bigger, it became filled with even more stuff that came from absolutely nowhere. How is that possible? Ask Alan Guth. His theory of inflation helps explain everything.” The original model of the big bang attempts to explain the existence of everything from NOTHING. The problem is, physics breaks down entirely in this state. Christians have been dumping on these ideas for a long time so the more "modern" scienctists have taken it upon themselves to make nothing mean something. "inflation" is not nothing. The law of gravity is not "nothing", virtuual particles are not nothing, quantum fields are not nothing. These are all physical things. The problem with those things are that laws create NOTHING at all. They only describe the normally observe events we can see in nature. For example when did the law of mathmatics that 2+2=4 every put 4 bucks in your bank account on its own? Laws create nothing. NOthing creates nothing Nothing cannot explode or expand to create soemthing. What would it expand into? When would it expand? What would actually be doing the expanding? So yes, you believe in a cosmic magic rabbit while the Christian believes in a sufficient cause. God.

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

Why 'counter the Big Bang' theory - are you saying the Universe did NOT have a begining? That would be a problem for Genesis, surely?

[@pj_ytmt-123]

The answer to the chicken-and-egg problem also answers your question. The chicken came first because God created it fully-formed; also, eggs need to be incubated for a few weeks. ✌️

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

@@pj_ytmt-123 Okay, that didn't happen but never mind.

[@nathancook2852]

@@pj_ytmt-123 Again, chickens aren't old enough for God to have created them.

[@pj_ytmt-123]

@@nathancook2852 If you look hard enough you will probably find a chicken femur bone in the stomach of a dino fossil somewhere. 🤣🤣

[@painmt651]

Does not the speed of light depend upon the medium through which it moves? The density of matter is WAY less in the space between stars. We only know the speed of light in the local matter density. The speed of light is variable.

[@TriRabbi]

Doesn't the Bible say that on the last day, God will destroy this universe and create a new heaven and earth?

[@deletewindoze]

You're speculating way too much to be taken seriously.

[@stevenwhite8937]

You might look into the idea that you don’t need a black hole or anything in the center if you have a system of bodies. Even in our solar system the planets do not orbit the sun, the planets and the sun orbit a center of mass of all the bodies combined, which is sometimes outside of the surface of the sun itself. And when this center of mass crosses inside and outside of the surface of the sun It doesn’t tear up the sun because it has no gravitational attraction. It is just a null center point around which all the mass orbits. Hence the galactic rotation problem because they’re assuming there is this large mass around which the galaxy orbits. Just as with binary stars. There is no mass between them, just a null point around which they orbit. And don’t forget the giant halo’s of plasma around the galaxy with twice the mass of the galaxy if you attempt the calculations… I don’t know anyone than can do the calculations. It is certainly beyond me.

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

Right - but you have to have the Sun in the centre or the model does not work - what would happen is that the planets would all come together under their own attraction. Same as the Galaxy would.

[@stevenwhite8937]

@@StudentDad-mc3pu globular clusters falsify that belief…. They are neither collapsing nor flying apart…. And there is nothing in their center….. They simply orbit a common shared barycenter….. Empirical proof that no mass is required for bodies or stars to orbit around….

[@TheChadPad]

I am sensing that y’all will have the last laugh.

[@h077ings3ad]

So, where is heaven - God’s throne? From where in the universe did Satan and his angel followers fall from? Where in the universe did sin begin? It certainly was not at the tree in the garden! I believe that the Bible is God’s communication to humans for our benefit, and understanding to make sense of where we came from and why there is evil in this world. There are “crumbs of evidence sprinkled throughout the Bible, such as Job 1 & 2, Revelation 12, Isaiah 14, and Ezekiel 28. If God is eternal then why would we limit his creative powers to six days on this tiny planet? During all of eternity didn’t God have anything to look at? No, I’m afraid the evidence is that God “made the stars also” and He didn’t wait until He created this planet and solar system. We pretend to know everything, when actually we know next to nothing in comparison to God! The God who created time and space has the answers. We can speculate among ourselves but let’s not be dogmatic about how it happened!

[@pj_ytmt-123]

Hey hey the chicken-and-egg problem has been SOLVED. The chicken came first because God created it. Also, eggs need to be incubated. 🎉🎉🎉

[@nathancook2852]

Chickens haven't been around long enough for God to create them.

[@pj_ytmt-123]

@@nathancook2852 If you look hard enough, you will probably find a chicken femur bone in the stomach of a dino fossil somewhere. 🤣

[@nunyabusiness4226]

I thought that my boss has a big forehead, but Dr Hebert must have at least a fivehead, if not a sixhead. Sorry Doc, I hope you have a good sense of humour.

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

There are small planets in orbit around it.

[@nunyabusiness4226]

@@StudentDad-mc3pu 🤣 🤣

[@ConservativeMirror]

So ICR's explanation for apparent processes in space that seem to require a lot of time is to say that billions of years passed in space. What's next? Will ICR explain that the processes on earth that seem to require a lot of time were a result of billions of years passing quickly during creation week?

[@josephscottadams39]

What process on earth require billions of years?

[@rubiks6]

@@mirandahotspring4019 - Who cares what they think? I believe God's narrative.

[@rubiks6]

@@mirandahotspring4019 - Is that all you have? Rant?

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

There was simpy no creation week. That solves the problem

[@rubiks6]

@@StudentDad-mc3pu- According to God, there were six days of creation. He wrote it Himself in stone.

[@adelinomorte7421]

***do you really know what this theory of the Big Bang is all about? just study the subject and became an astro-physicist, or astronomer, or a simple scientist, but a word of advise, it is not an easy task, lots of people like you now will try to destroy your labour of a lifetime.***

[@javanautski]

Did you check if the ladder of success was leaning against the right building before climbing it?

[@larryharrell6998]

Just believe the Bible (GOD's WORD)

[@reubenpelham5735]

Get over it... There is not big bang.

[@revelationakagoldeneagle8045]

Thanks for all you share according to God's Holy Word 🙏🏼 Blessings from Georgia USA 🪶 👆

[@mr_sm1ley910]

Big Bang is real, we just don't know how old it really is..

[@user-xs2ln9fv7l]

If you read the bible you will have the same information as if you read the Iliad. The bible is a book of mythology, we have rocks under our feet that are clearly older than 6000 years. We have bones that are older than the 6000 supposes ages from the bible.

[@speedygonsales1043]

🤣😂 Hahaha I can’t man This is the same guy who said soft tissue dinos prove the Bible Ah man I’m tearing up from laughing at this Even if he’s right on the astronomy(he’s not 💀) Biology still is to be disproven,also every different era Oxygen creature existed with human(the levels of oxygen would kill humans💀) And he fr say “evolutionists” say stuff of space Bro your even miss categorizing a whole research field Every era you just mentioned ain’t evolution It’s cosmology,astronomy,physics,aerodynamics and many more that ain’t evolution 😂😂😂😂 Ah man It’s still scary how many people listen to y’all

[@fisherbuys1]

Oh what a let down. I thought this was a real science channel. File this channel with the flat earth theory people.

[@thomdavis4142]

No wonder so many are leaving christianity. This type of content is killing the value and sanctoty of the bible. The bible is not a science book.

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

It is not.

[@studykitchen9853]

Sir ,i am Harshit, - to deal with the problem of Dual nature of light , I discover ' Morse-code model of Light ' ,this model proof non monochromatic nature of light. and this model is also explain Radiation effect . this model also explain diffraction effect of light. sir please pay attention to my model, it can help in physics.

[@TheChadPad]

Would love to hear more about what you think about light. Please share your thoughts!

[@studykitchen9853]

@@TheChadPad i publish all my thoughts in my post plz see and give ur Opinion

[@thomdavis4142]

No wonder so many are leaving christianity. This type of content is killing the value and sanctoty of the bible. The bible is not a science book.

[@markpiller6608]

In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it. EXACTLY!

[@michaeldiedrich1424]

The Bible is authored by the Creator through his Creation. Therefore when it speaks of science it can be trusted. You either trust God who was there or atheistic scientists who guess with theories. Just at least acknowledge the awesomeness of our Great God and Savior Jesus Christ.

[@nathancook2852]

@@michaeldiedrich1424 The Bible is authored by men. It is organized by men. By men that we know changed words during translation to say what those MEN wanted it to say. By men who met in a council to decide what should go in the Bible and what should not. We know for a fact that they left out parts that contradicted popular belief at the time. It isn't hard to follow the facts.

[@Nox-mb7iu]

@@nathancook2852 Fun fact. This myth first appeared in the fiction novel called the Davinci Code by Dan Brown. There is no source for these claims that predate that book. Since then these misconceptions have spread like wild fire. Time for the second factoid of the day! All of the books in the Bible predate the council of Nicea by centuries.