-
This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective. Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed. 1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team 2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.
Big bang... a big NO!
- Thread starter Right Divider
- Start date
Right Divider
Body part
I'm surprised that there were no comments on this video.
SeaScience Film Labs
New member
A total 𝐌𝐲𝐭𝐡...
SeaScience Film Labs
New member
Rebel for truth
Member
Well the Bible says there are heaven s' which implies there are multiple universes. Man can only see so far who knows what's on the other side of what they can't see since space is infinite.
Right Divider
Body part
No, it does not imply that. There are multiple things called heaven in the Bible. Even the surface of the earth is called Heaven at one time.
Gen 1:8 (AKJV/PCE)
(1:8) And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
What leads you to believe that "space is infinite"?
How does that imply that there are multiple universes?
There is exactly zero evidence that whatever is past what we can see is appreciably different than that which we can see. There is an equal amount of evidence that "space" is infinite. That is, if by "space" you mean the physical universe.
(Actual space does not exist except as an idea. Space is simply the distance between objects. Objects exist but the expanse between those objects is not itself another object. In a perfect vacuum, nothing exists.)
So this isn't going to be a comment about the Big Bang and so forgive the rabbit trail but I just wanted to make an observation about the way Answers in Genesis (AiG) does their videos and see if anyone agrees with me or if I'm just all wet.
Am I wrong or is there just no comparison in watchability between the two videos that have been presented in this thread (Posts 1 & 4)? The AiG video presents information that is good but the style belongs in the 1980s & 90s! It reminds me of stuff my church would put on from time to time when I was in high school, three decades ago. Zero energy from a sort of stuffy looking guy in khakis and a tie who speaks with a sort of flat voice and does so for what feel like forever at pace my dead grandmother could keep up with. Somebody get that dude a Red Bull or something!
The video presented by Dr. Craig, on the other hand is simply excellent. It presents the information in a manner that is both intellectually and visually compelling and it does so in a concise manner that is paced correctly, neither speeding through the material nor plodding through unnecessary details and, as a result, it just feels like something that is aimed at a modern audience.
Don't get me wrong, here. I like the folks over at AiG and think that they're doing some excellent work. Indeed, Dr. Craig has some disastrously horrible errors in much of his material; far more so than AiG on its worst day. It's just that I feel like someone needs to tell AiG that we're fully two decades into the 21st century. They need to hire some younger people to present their material who can do so with some energy and in a style that doesn't feel like its aimed at senior citizens.
Clete
I'm always entertained by the style and quality of Genesis Apologetics