00:01:47.640Mr. Owen directs the Kolbe Center for the Study of Creation, which provides a forum for Catholic
00:01:52.880theologians, philosophers, and natural scientists all over the world who defend the traditional
00:01:57.700Catholic doctrine of creation that was handed down from the apostles. He and his wife Maria
00:02:02.940have nine children, including one who is a nun with the Benedictines of Mary, and 24 grandchildren
00:02:10.260So far, I'm so jealous. And they live in the beautiful Shenandoah Valley near Mount Jackson, Virginia. We'll stop there. I will have another two guests to introduce to you after. But we'll start with Dr. Mazza. You have 15 minutes starting now.
00:02:30.660Thank you, John Henry. So I'd like to start by just expressing my respect for Hugh Owen and the Colby Center. I think they've done fine work combating materialism, Darwinism, but an old universe does not equal evolution. Neither I nor Dr. Hugh Ross would ever advocate evolution.
00:02:54.440That being said, I think I understand where Mr. Owen is coming from, and so let me lay out where I see his position.
00:03:11.140God's revelation is contained in the 73 books of the inspired, inerrant Word of God and in sacred tradition.
00:03:20.120It is infallibly interpreted through the authoritative teaching of St. Peter and the apostles and their successors in the unanimous teaching of the Church Fathers and approved theologians.
00:03:35.100According to all of these, the entire universe and all the different kinds of spiritual and corporeal creatures were created from nothing by God less than 10,000 years ago.
00:03:50.120Hey, my friends. I just heard about a great Catholic mobile phone company that gives
00:03:55.000100% of its profits to traditional Catholic religious orders, monasteries, and Catholic
00:04:01.220media. And no, I'm not joking. They support traditional Catholic priests and religious.
00:04:07.300Do you even know that every time you make a call, send a text, or use mobile data,
00:04:13.060your provider earns revenue? Have you ever thought about where that money goes?
00:04:18.280Many companies support causes that conflict with traditional Catholic values.
00:04:23.900But now there's a traditional Catholic alternative.
00:05:01.380What they, the fathers, unanimously teach to be of the faith is of the faith.
00:05:08.400What they unanimously reject as heretical is heretical.
00:05:13.520They are the mouthpiece of the infallible teaching body of the church.
00:05:19.060The church acknowledges them as witnesses of her own faith.
00:05:24.020Or we could quote Adolf Tanqueray from 1930, from his Manual of Dogmatic Theology,
00:05:32.940The morally unanimous agreement of the fathers declaring that a doctrine is de fide is a certain argument of divine tradition.
00:05:46.500Three conditions are necessary that an argument be considered certain that it relate to a doctrine pertaining to the faith, that the fathers declare positively that the doctrine is a doctrine of the church, that the agreement of the fathers be not mathematically but morally unanimous.
00:06:09.240With these conditions posited, it can be said that the fathers record the teaching of the universal church, but the church is infallible in teaching Christ's doctrine.
00:06:22.940And so, as I understand the claim, both the six days of creation and the thousands of years of history are of faith, not natural science, and are infallibly taught, and so must be held.
00:06:43.780Therefore, a scientific appraisal of billions of years would not be a faithful interpretation of sacred scripture.
00:06:52.440However, if we consult the Reverend Joseph Pohl, his 1912 book, God, the Author of Nature and the Supernatural, he says natural sciences, astronomy, geology, paleontology, are able to furnish valuable aids to the exegete who undertakes to interpret the mosaic cosmogony, Genesis.
00:07:19.380The respect he owes to the Almighty Creator, whose vestiges these sciences seek to trace, will prompt him to welcome their cooperation and pay due regard to whatever evidence they may have to offer.
00:07:36.580God has set down an objective commentary on the Bible in the Book of Nature, to which the theologian can and should devote most careful attention.
00:07:52.240Also, we could turn to the Reverend Charles Coppens, a systematic study of the Catholic religion from 1917.
00:08:00.660team. Quote, as to the meaning of the six days of the creation, little is known for certain.
00:08:09.060While the scripture is the word of God, the world around us is his work, and one is a commentary
00:08:17.980on the other. The more we get to understand the world, the better we may understand the book.
00:08:25.720The literal meaning of six days was, until recent times, generally accepted
00:08:33.440and was supported by an immense amount of authority.
00:08:38.520But there need be no hesitation in departing from it if good reason can be shown for so doing,
00:08:45.480as it is taught by Pope Leo XIII in his Encyclical on the Scripture.
00:08:51.720Geology and paleontology now appear to show such reason.
00:08:58.400Most modern writers believe that they have deciphered portions of nature's commentary on the scriptures.
00:09:07.280The encyclical that Father was referring to is Providentiamus Deus from 1893.
00:09:14.820The unshrinking defense of the Holy Scripture does not require that we should equally uphold all the opinions which each of the fathers have put forth in explaining it.
00:09:27.220For, in commenting on passages where physical matters occur, they have sometimes expressed the ideas of their own times, and thus made statements which, in these days, have been abandoned as incorrect.
00:09:41.720Now, in his debate a couple of months ago with Timothy Gordon on rules for retrogrades, Brother Owens said the following,
00:09:50.240For St. Thomas and all the fathers and doctors, any fact that is related in an historical book of the Bible is ipso facto, automatically, of faith, and we cannot, therefore, disagree with it.
00:10:12.480Now we need to unpack, however, what St. Thomas says faith is.
00:10:19.320St. Thomas writes in his commentary on the sentences,
00:10:22.260What pertains to faith is distinguished in two ways.
00:10:28.780For some are of the substance of faith, such that God is three and one,
00:10:37.120about which no one may licitly think otherwise.
00:10:42.480Other things are only incidental to faith.
00:10:48.800In the Latin, it's per accident, as opposed to substantia.
00:10:54.960Other things are only incidental to faith, insofar as they are treated in Scripture,
00:11:02.460which faith holds to be promulgated under the dictation of the Holy Spirit,
00:11:07.460but which can be ignored by those who are not held to know Scripture,
00:12:28.140According to Augustine, Moses, in instructing the unlearned people about the creation of the world, divided into stages, things that were actually brought into being simultaneously.
00:12:42.740On the other hand, Gregory and other saints, however, maintained that a chronological order was observed in the distinction of things.
00:12:50.560And while this view is indeed more common, unanimous, and seems more in accord with the literal surface meaning, the former view of Augustine is more rational and better defends Holy Scripture against the mockery of unbelievers.
00:13:11.420a matter Augustine teaches must be strictly observed, namely, that scripture should be
00:13:19.340expounded in such a way as not to be ridiculed by unbelievers, and this opinion pleases me more.
00:13:28.060St. Thomas Aquinas is perhaps the greatest theological genius in 2,000 years of church
00:13:33.780history. The other disputant for that title would be St. Augustine of Hippo. Let's go to him
00:13:41.220directly, he writes, it happens that something about the earth, about the sky, about other
00:13:48.100elements of this world, about the motion and rotation, or even the magnitude and distances
00:13:54.460of the stars, about definite eclipses of the sun and moon, etc., may be known with the greatest
00:14:01.840certainty by reasoning or by experience, even by one who is not a Christian. It is too disgraceful
00:14:12.120and ruinous, though, and greatly to be avoided, that he, the non-Christian, should hear a Christian
00:14:19.160speaking so idiotically on these matters, and as if in accord with Christian writings. An
00:14:26.560embarrassing situation in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to
00:14:31.720scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside
00:14:37.580the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinion and to the great loss of those
00:14:44.640for whose salvation we toil. The writers of our scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned
00:14:51.080men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him
00:14:58.120maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in
00:15:03.400matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of
00:15:08.060heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods on facts which they themselves have
00:15:13.480learned from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of holy
00:15:19.460Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their
00:15:25.900mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of
00:15:31.680our sacred books. For then to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will
00:15:36.940try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think
00:15:42.240support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which
00:15:47.820they make assertion. And then Augustine writes, should one find something about these matters,
00:15:54.360about the physical universe, in our books, that it seems to be at variance with the perception
00:15:59.240of his own rational faculties, let him believe that these other things, about the physical
00:16:04.760universe, are in no way necessary to the admonitions or accounts or predictions of the scriptures.
00:16:11.160Our authors knew the truth about the nature of the skies, but it was not the intention of the
00:16:16.640Spirit of God who spoke through them to teach men anything that would not be of use to them
00:16:21.600for their salvation. And this is why in 1909, under Pope St. Pius X, his Pontifical Biblical
00:16:30.360Commission, acting with his magisterial authority, answered the following question in this way.
00:16:37.880In the designation and distinction of the six days mentioned in the first chapter of Genesis,
00:16:43.260May the word yom be taken either in the literal sense for the natural day or in an applied sense for a certain space of time, and may this question be the subject of free discussion among exegetes, answer in the affirmative.
00:17:02.560Case in point, in 1951, Pope Pius XII did precisely this.
00:17:09.860he said is science in a position to state when this mighty beginning of the cosmos took place
00:17:17.320and secondly what was the initial or primitive state of the universe he talks about edwin
00:17:25.880hubble and the expanding universe and he says um ultimately he concludes it would seem that
00:17:35.120present-day science, with one sweeping step back across millions of centuries, has succeeded in
00:17:42.320bearing witness to that primordial fiat lux, let there be light, uttered at the moment when, along
00:17:49.380with matter, there burst forth from nothing a sea of light and radiation, while the particles of
00:17:55.880chemical elements split and formed into millions of galaxies. I will rest my case for the moment.
00:18:03.440Hugh, Owen, now it's your 15 minutes starting now.
00:18:07.080With God's help, I will now explain why every faithful child of God should be a DRAC, a divinely revealed age.
00:24:35.240Dom Geraget points out that in the entire liturgical tradition of the Roman Rite,
00:24:39.760there is only one time when a longer chronology derived
00:24:43.160from the Greek Septuagint translation of the Old Testament is used,
00:24:46.860and that is in the reading from the Roman Martyrology at the Midnight Mass for Christmas,
00:24:50.980which gives 5,199 years from creation to the birth of Christ.
00:24:55.940On this one day alone, Don Garaget writes, does the Church adopt the Septuagint chronology,
00:25:02.200according to which the birth of our Savior took place 5,000 years after creation,
00:25:07.000whereas the Vulgate version and the Hebrew text place only 4,000 years between the two events.
00:25:12.020This is not a fitting place to explain the discrepancy.
00:25:14.840We merely allude to it as showing the liberty which the Church allows on this question.
00:25:21.220So, my brothers in Christ, that is the liberty that the Church allows us on this question.
00:25:26.640Either 4,000 years from creation to the birth of Christ, as it is in the original Hebrew text,
00:25:32.300or 5,000 to 5,500 years, according to the Septuagint.
00:25:37.940Indeed, all the particular churches of the Catholic Church bear witness to the historical reality of the six 24-hour days every day of the liturgical year.
00:25:49.780For example, why does our liturgical day begin in the evening with vespers?
00:25:55.100Is it because the Big Bang took place in the evening?
00:25:58.160No, it's because Moses tells us he called the light day and the darkness night,
00:26:03.840and there was evening and morning one day.
00:26:07.320That is why, for example, the official prayer book of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church
00:26:12.120teaches right at the beginning that liturgical day begins in the evening with vespers,
00:26:17.080because that is the order that God established from the first day of creation.
00:26:22.780In fact, St. Thomas sums up the entire patristic tradition in the Summa by saying,
00:26:27.960quote, the words one day are used when day is first instituted to denote that one day is made up of 24 hours.
00:26:36.040Hence, by mentioning one, the measure of a natural day is fixed.
00:26:40.140in monasteries all over the world for 1400 years consecrated religious have chanted
00:26:46.100the vespers hymns attributed to pope saint gregory the great which at the end of each day give glory
00:26:51.720to god for what he created on that particular day of creation week for example in saint gregory's
00:26:58.180vespers hymn for tuesday the third day of the week the church prays benignant creator of the world
00:27:03.920who didst divide the surface of the earth and driving off the troubled waters that's firmly
00:27:09.460establish the land that it might bring forth appropriate produce, be adorned with golden
00:27:15.420flowers, become prolific in fruits. St. Lawrence of Brindisi mastered all the languages of the Bible,
00:27:22.760knew the entire Bible by heart, and is the last doctor of the church to write a detailed
00:27:27.580commentary on Genesis. And in his commentary, he considers the traditional Vespers prayers of
00:27:33.900St. Gregory so authoritative that they settled a long-standing theological question.
00:27:39.460was the sun created on the fourth day, or was it merely formed from light that God had created on
00:27:45.540day one? St. Lawrence answers. We must now see what is understood by the name light in Genesis
00:27:51.0801-3. Some think that it is the sun itself that ought to be understood here. However, Holy Writ
00:27:57.600denies this assertion, for the Bible says that the sun itself was created on the fourth day.
00:28:03.400The Church also confesses such, saying in the Vespers hymn for Wednesdays,
00:28:09.800Thou on the fourth day establishing the fiery wheel of the sun.
00:28:14.180So according to the principle of Lex Arandi, Lex Credendi,
00:28:17.440we can see that every faithful child of the Church should be a DRAC,
00:30:59.920in millions of years, elapsed for these two creations.
00:31:03.720Many people today object, well, Moses didn't have modern science,
00:31:07.960and that's why God allowed him to believe the fairy tale of fiat creation less than 10,000 years ago.
00:31:13.940But if God had used long ages to prepare the world for the first human beings,
00:31:18.540he could easily have shown that to Moses.
00:31:20.960And then on the walls of our cathedrals, we would have beautiful icons of one-celled organisms giving way to fish, giving way to amphibians, giving way to reptiles, giving way to mammals over long ages of time.
00:31:32.780The reason we don't see such images in our cathedrals is that progressive creation is a myth based on the false assumption of Descartes that things have always been the same from the beginning of creation.
00:31:44.060and that therefore we can explain the timing of the origin of the different kinds of creatures
00:31:49.340by extrapolating from the material processes that we observe in this fallen world.
00:31:53.980And that is why St. Maximus the Confessor, doctor of the Church, gave us this profound warning.
00:32:01.760Try to learn why God created, for that is true knowledge.
00:32:05.500But do not try to learn how he created or why he did so comparatively recently,
00:32:11.620for that does not come within the compass of your intellect. Unbridled speculation, as one of the
00:32:18.760saints has said, can drive one headlong over the precipice. So my brothers and sisters in Christ,
00:32:25.380let us pray that our Lord and the Blessed Mother will bring us back from the precipice of unbridled
00:32:30.740speculation and plant us securely on the rock of the traditional faith of the Catholic Church
00:32:37.100so that we can all rejoice together in the knowledge
00:32:39.980that God created everything for us perfectly in the beginning,
00:32:43.740just as he said, and that we are the apple of his eye and not an afterthought.
00:32:48.240In the name of Jesus, in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Amen.
00:32:53.900So, as I mentioned before, Pope Pius XII interpreted the six days of Genesis
00:33:00.840according to a scientific appraisal of billions of years.
00:33:06.040Now, remember what we said earlier, what Hugh is claiming is that the fathers are teaching unanimously that not only the creation but the how of creation is of faith, and what they declare to be of faith is of faith, that they are the mouthpiece of the infallible teaching of the church.
00:33:30.820But the implication of this is that anyone who deviates from that is a heretic.
00:33:40.220If the fathers unanimously teach that it is of faith that the universe is less than 10,000 years old, then this is an infallible teaching of the church.
00:33:52.240To deny an infallible de fide teaching of the church is heresy.
00:33:58.180Therefore, Pope Pius XII was at minimum a public material heretic.
00:34:05.880Even merely material heretics do not belong as members to the visible church.
00:34:14.140To be a valid pope or bishop, one must belong to the visible church.
00:34:20.280Therefore, if Hugh is correct, Pope Pius XII was a public material heretic who lost his office and was an anti-pope from 1951 to 1958.
00:34:33.380Hugh, I think you just started a new, I've heard of 1958 Sede Vicantus, but never 1951 Sede Vicantus.
00:34:41.500again ludwig ott in fundamentals of catholic dogma says public heretics even those who err
00:34:52.120in good faith do not belong to the body of the church that is the legal commonwealth of the
00:35:00.140church so if he was right that the fathers of the church are unanimous that the six-day creation
00:35:07.400and the less than 10,000 years of history is a matter of faith.
00:35:12.260Anyone who would deny this is at least a material heretic
00:35:16.400and not a Catholic and does not belong to the visible Church.
00:35:20.180This is why, if we read a manual of Catholic theology from 1909,
00:37:31.280I'm very happy to have the opportunity to clear up a terrible misunderstanding
00:37:36.860on part of Brother Ed about the position of the Kolbe Setter.
00:37:42.660We never have said that Pope Pius XII or anybody who embraced the Long Ages was a heretic.
00:37:50.700And it is extremely important to understand what we actually hold, because what we actually hold is that the overwhelming weight of evidence from Scripture, tradition, and authoritative magisterial teaching supports the literal historical truth of everything in the sacred history of Genesis, which teaches us that God created everything in six 24-hour days or less, much less than 10,000 years ago.
00:38:19.760That's all that we hold. And right in the source that Brother Ed quoted, Providentismus Deus, we're following the rule laid down by Pope Leo XIII, continued by Pope St. Pius X, that the commentator in Scripture must observe the rule not to depart from the literal and obvious sense, except only where reason makes it untenable or necessity requires.
00:38:43.440And we're going to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that nobody has come close to proving that reason dictates or necessity requires that we abandon the literal historical interpretation of Genesis 1.
00:38:57.280Now, the other thing that we need to understand is that St. Thomas is categorical in the Summa.
00:39:05.740That anybody who denies any factual statement in the Bible is undermining the entire Catholic faith, which is based on the authority of Holy Writ.
00:39:16.400You can look that up and confirm that very easily.
00:39:18.840But the major point that our distinguished opponents are missing is the distinction between the work of creation, which was supernatural, and the natural order, what the doctors call the order of providence, what we're living in now.
00:39:37.260And this is the very error that St. Peter, our first poor, warned us about almost 2,000 years ago, because in 2 Peter chapter 3, he warns us that far in the future, scoffers will come into the church saying things have always been the same from the beginning of creation, from the moment of the Big Bang, if you will.
00:40:00.340But he goes on to say they're going to have to ignore the fact that it was actually the Word of God that supernaturally created the heavens and the earth and all they contain.
00:40:11.680And he says they're also going to deny the fact that there was a divine judgment on the whole earth with Noah's flood, which created the fossil record and happened and buried all the different kinds of creatures catastrophically.
00:40:26.000Now, Descartes and the Enlightenment philosophers are the ones who came on the scene and argued
00:40:32.300that it would be more reasonable to explain the origins of things in nature, like stars,
00:40:38.440animals, plants, in terms of the same material processes that are going on now.
00:40:43.300Well, his works were put on the index of forbidden books, because any theologian worth his salt
00:40:51.480It would be like reading the account of the miracle at Cana and saying, well, it seems as if St. John is saying that our Lord just willed to change the containers of water into wine instantly.
00:41:03.680But I think it would be more reasonable to give a natural explanation.
00:41:08.720Maybe there were some microbes in the water and they interacted in such a way as to make the water smell, taste and look just like wine.
00:41:18.360But every theologian worth his salt knew that it was just as absurd to hold that, well, we can see that every father of the church understood Genesis 1 to teach that God created everything by fiat supernaturally.
00:41:34.880But I think it would be more reasonable to explain how everything came to be in terms of the same material processes that are going on now over long periods of time.
00:41:45.580And there you have the direct quote from St. Thomas that it is unlawful to hold that any false assertion is contained in any canonical scripture because faith would be deprived of its certitude, which is based on the authority of Holy Writ.
00:42:00.560And St. Thomas is adamant that we are not falling into the error that St. Augustine talked about that Dr. Matson mentioned.
00:42:08.880he's talking about people who pontificate about natural science we're not doing that
00:42:16.400we are defending what the god what god revealed about the supernatural creation of the world
00:42:22.200in the name of jesus in the name of the father the son of the holy ghost and what we see in
00:42:28.640psalm 19 is that god has revealed himself faithfully through two utterly trustworthy
00:42:34.260books, the book of scripture, and the book of nature. And what we note is that both books
00:42:40.960teach the immutability of the laws of physics. We've got passages like Jeremiah 33, where God
00:42:49.020says he's immutable, contrasting himself with the Jews who are not, and says for proof, what do the
00:42:54.940laws that govern the heavens and the earth? As they don't change, I don't change. Then you've
00:43:00.080out in Romans chapter 8, speaking about the pervasive law of entropy or decay and how that
00:43:06.460remains in effect until all the humans that God intends to redeem are redeemed. And in fact,
00:43:13.260what I've written in my book is that these laws of physics play crucial roles in the redemption
00:43:19.240of billions of human beings from their sin and evil, which is why they remain intact during the
00:43:25.320entire human era and during the entire existence of the universe. The book of nature indisputably
00:43:32.900affirms this. Every time we astronomers take a spectrum of a star or a galaxy, we're measuring
00:43:40.880the laws of physics when the light left that galaxy or star. In response to Hugh Owen, we
00:43:47.880astronomers are direct witnesses of past events. We don't see the present, but we do see the past
00:43:54.780And God has placed us at just the right time in the history of the universe, just the right location in the universe, that we can read the entire history book of the universe from the cosmic creation event to the present moment.
00:44:09.020One reason we get such powerful evidences for the God of the Bible is that we astronomers can directly witness, without assumptions, the cosmic creation event.
00:44:19.720And this is actually acknowledged by young Earth creationists as being a problem for their model.
00:44:28.460For example, you have the RATE study put up by a number of young Earth creationist organizations,
00:44:34.760which makes a concession repeatedly that if the laws of physics are indeed immutable,
00:44:40.800then the universe and the Earth must be billions of years old.
00:44:45.780And so you got the example for argon in the atmosphere of the moon, argon in the atmosphere of Mercury.
00:44:52.520And based on the gravitational pull, you can calculate how long it would take for potassium to decay into the argon to make up that amount of the argon.
00:45:06.460It has been written in numerous books, The Problem of the Light Travel Time.
00:45:10.720The fact that we actually see light coming from galaxies that are billions of light years away.
00:45:17.740As we look at the spectrum, the reddening of the continuum, and the broadening of the spectral lines,
00:45:24.260we can determine that the light actually left that particular star or galaxy.
00:45:32.320And in spite of many claims by young earth creationists, we can prove that the velocity of light is rigidly constant.
00:45:39.460If it wasn't, life would be impossible.
00:45:42.640The existence of physical life critically depends on the velocity of light having not changed any time in cosmic history.
00:45:51.480And today we have telescopes powerful enough that we can directly witness using trigonometric distance measurements,
00:46:00.280namely assumption-free distance measurements, out to galaxies 470 million light-years away,
00:46:07.760affirming that indeed our redshift distant measurements are accurately measuring the distances to those stars and galaxies
00:46:16.760and therefore that it really did take millions or billions of years for the light to reach our telescopes.
00:46:25.000The other thing we notice in astronomy is that we have a wide range of measurements for the ages of stars and galaxies.
00:46:34.720We see stars that we know form literally just years ago.
00:46:40.120We actually see stars that form thousands of years ago, stars that form millions of years ago, stars that form billions of years ago.
00:46:49.380And so the challenge is, how is it that all these stars have a wide range of age measurements that go from zero to about 13.6 billion years?
00:47:01.140and you could say well God artificially imposed those ages on those stars but to claim that
00:47:08.620would make God a deceiver and a liar and eight times in the Bible it tells us it's impossible
00:47:15.040for God to lie or deceive and we actually see millions of burnt out stars 20% of the stars
00:47:23.740we see in the universe are stars that have completed their nuclear burning and we can
00:47:29.220actually see them cooling down. A good analogy is what happens with an open fire where the fuel is
00:47:36.840all consumed in the logs that are burning and what you do is you watch the slow cooling down of those
00:47:43.440logs and it goes from a bright yellow color to an orange to a red and finally to black. Well we see
00:47:51.180this happening with burnt out stars. We call them white dwarf stars but we can actually measure
00:47:57.460are their luminosity and their spectral response, and that tells us how long they've been cooling.
00:48:04.420And we actually see white dwarf stars with a range of cooling times that runs from zero
00:48:10.180to about eight billion years. And again, why do we see this continuous range of cooling times
00:48:17.780if indeed the universe is only 10,000 years old or less? Now I remember having a lunch with Henry
00:48:25.700Morris, who founded the Institute of Recreation Research. And over that once, he realized he had
00:48:33.800a huge problem with the astronomical evidence, especially since the evidence was directly coming
00:48:39.840from the past. And he said, Hugh, how about if I say the universe is billions of years old,
00:48:45.640but the earth is only thousands of years old? And I said to Henry, well, I think the best book you
00:48:51.160ever wrote is a book where you explain why it's impossible to separate the scientific evidence
00:48:57.740for the age of the universe from the scientific evidence for the age of the earth. You know one
00:49:03.280example is we see the decay products of radioisotope decay in the specter of stars and
00:49:10.180galaxies. We also see it here on earth. So for example we see the radioisotope daughter products
00:49:17.640telling us that earth had plutonium well today there's no plutonium on the face of the earth
00:49:24.380but the daughter products tells us that there was plutonium in the past on the earth and the amount
00:49:30.820of these daughter products tells us how long indeed the earth has been upon the scene we also
00:49:37.600see in a province of africa the remnants of a natural nuclear reactor and what's happening in
00:49:45.580the past, there was more uranium-235 on the face of the Earth than there is today. Today, so much
00:49:52.280of it has decayed away that natural nuclear reactors were no longer possible. But we've
00:49:57.940been disputable evidence that in Okla, Gabon, Africa, indeed there was a nuclear reactor
00:50:04.120running as recently as 2 billion years ago. Then we have the problem of the quantity of
00:50:12.820biodeposits in the crust of the earth. And we're not just talking about oil, coal, and natural gas.
00:50:20.120There's way more abundance of plathrates than there is of natural gas that we can mine. Then
00:50:26.180there's the limestone, the marble, and the gypsum. It adds up to nearly 100 quadrillion tons of
00:50:33.280biodeposits. And we have the isotope ratio signatures that tell us that this 100 quadrillion
00:50:41.760tons indeed comes from biological sources, living plants and animals and microbes that have decayed
00:50:49.980and produce these biodeposits. The sheer quantity of these biodeposits defies the energy flow from
00:50:57.740the sun to the earth. I mean, if you're converting the energy flow of the sun to the earth
00:51:04.340with 100% efficiency, you'd only be getting less than a tenth of a percent of the biodeposits
00:53:51.080And I would also add that, you know, the age of the earth is not a scientific debate.
00:53:58.920If it was a scientific debate, you would find published research papers in the peer-reviewed literature actually saying, here's some evidence that I've uncovered that the earth or the universe may be young.
00:54:11.920When you go to the exhaustive website of research papers in physical science at adsww.arbor.edu, you can do a search of literally hundreds of thousands of research papers.
00:54:27.760you won't find a single one giving any evidence for a young earth.
00:54:33.860And this explains why in the 1987 U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the age of the earth,
00:54:41.120where young earth creationists tried to argue that they had the right to teach their doctrines in public education.
00:54:48.620Basically, the Supreme Court ruler said,
00:54:51.020you already have the right to teach anything you want on origins or creation,
00:54:57.420providing it has at least some documented scientific credibility or integrity.
00:55:03.000And they challenged the young earth creationists to provide some.
00:55:06.700So if you can provide some, you have the right.
00:59:47.560does that he speaks and it happens he writes there is no deception in these miracles of god
00:59:55.240no subtle pretense to please or to deceive he whom countless myriads of angels serve never
01:00:02.620deluded man what was there of ours that he could need through whom all that we have was created
01:00:08.900he the image of the invisible god created all their host in himself
01:00:13.620made the worlds established the heavens appointed the stars fixed the earth laid the foundations of
01:00:21.440the deep because in after time he was born he conquered death broke the gates of hell one for
01:00:30.480himself a people to be his fellow heirs lifted flesh from corruption up to the glory of eternity
01:00:37.640So this idea that there has been deception by God if he created in less than 10,000 years is, of course, absurd because he told us straight up in his scripture what he did.
01:00:52.640and all of the church fathers and everyone who's honest can realize that through the early biblical
01:01:00.380record we have these chronologies these genealogies that you can add up and throughout
01:01:06.180christian history we've had various people that have done just that and added up the numbers and
01:01:11.680it is impossible to get anything over 10 000 years by using scripture itself god of course
01:01:18.260would be deceptive if he says one thing and does another. That is deception. When it comes to the
01:01:26.780creation providence framework, this is what is missing from our opponents. Dr. Ross was saying
01:01:35.800that the laws of physics haven't changed. Well, he's failing to distinguish that there was a time
01:01:42.980in the beginning, the creation week, where this was a week of miracles. This was God working not
01:01:50.980according to the providence, upholding things once he rested. This is a completely separate
01:01:58.660time frame from everything that went on to follow. When you mix those two things up,
01:02:06.100you're only going to have problems and of course even within the time frame now god can choose to
01:02:16.340perform miracles and suspend nature whenever he wills though obviously that doesn't happen
01:02:25.440in every instance it only happens in select instances now there's many problems with this
01:02:31.440big bang model that our opponents are relying on in the big bang model we have the whole concept
01:02:39.660of star formation where supposedly gases condense and form stars this is of course
01:02:47.900not something that has ever been observed the origin of stars represents one of the most
01:02:56.560fundamental unsolved problems of contemporary astrophysics so says harvard astronomy professor
01:03:03.560charles lotta and harvard grad and astrophysicist frank shoe former cornell astronomy professor
01:03:10.200martin harwitt writes in the journal science the silent embarrassment of modern astrophysics is
01:03:16.440that we do not know how even a single one of these stars managed to form and if you think that
01:03:22.220can't happen, then how is it possible that galaxies could be formed where there's millions
01:03:27.280and billions or trillions of stars? We should be able to observe the distant past through
01:03:34.740distant starlight, like Hugh Ross is saying. But of course, there is no unambiguous example of
01:03:41.740galaxy formation. There's a problem. We don't see young galaxies. We see old ones. They have
01:03:47.200pretty much the same range of stars as old galaxies. This is a quote from someone who's
01:03:50.820not even a creationist eric lerner in the journal new scientist and of course when he says old ones
01:03:56.760he simply means mature ones uh in another article 13 billion year old supposedly light was measured
01:04:06.000and they found the formation of the first galaxies may have gotten underway earlier than previously
01:04:11.380thought the real puzzle is that these galaxies seem to already be quite old when the universe
01:04:16.260was already only about five percent of its current age why would that be if the big bang theory was
01:04:24.580true they have this idea that planets can just form themselves they have this planetesimal
01:04:30.660hypothesis unfortunately when you look in the literature you can read for instance in nature
01:04:36.100dust grains coalesced into planetesimals objects of one to thousand kilometers in diameter through
01:04:41.980an unknown process. The formation of planetesimals, the kilometer-sized planetary precursors, is still
01:04:49.180a puzzling process. The process by which micrometer-sized protoplanetary dust particles
01:04:54.640evolve to kilometer-sized planetesimals is still enigmatic, so says Juergen Blum and
01:05:03.140Jardard Wurm from the Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics. So just how did the planets in
01:05:09.660solar system develop well we read in a astrophysical textbook once these planetesimals
01:05:16.060have been formed further growth of planets may have may occur through their gravitational
01:05:20.840accretion into larger bodies just how that takes place is not understood we have seen that we know
01:05:25.760very little about the development of the solar system i'm quoting from martin harwick people
01:05:31.480within the scientific community are questioning this big bang model that all of the cosmology
01:05:38.160from our opponents rests upon we have them questioning it because of it relying on these
01:05:45.660hypothetical entities they've invented this concept of inflation to supposedly solve their
01:05:52.020horizon problem where you you can just read through the wikipedia entry on inflation and
01:05:58.920see how ridiculous this is acting as though they are certain this thing happened when there's no
01:06:05.520evidence of it other than they need it for their mathematical equations, claiming that this great
01:06:11.540expansion happened where its volume increased by a factor of at least 10 to the 78, whatever they
01:06:19.100say existed before the Big Bang. And it went from about the equivalent of one nanometer to
01:06:26.74062 trillion miles long in about 10 to the negative 35 of a second. The next thing that is crazy
01:06:35.460about uh what they're saying about the big bang is this the fact that they're ignoring that dark
01:06:41.040matter which they need to um rescue the um effect of spiral galaxies and dark energy which they need
01:06:49.660to rescue what they observe from supernovas supposedly makes up 95 percent of the known
01:06:55.480universe's substance while only five percent of it is ordinary matter again these are just
01:07:00.980hypothetical entities and all of the cosmology of our opponents rests upon this being true
01:07:08.460when we're talking about biodeposits our model has a much more reasonable explanation for
01:07:14.540biodeposits the giant amount of plant life that was there before the flood was consumed in the
01:07:26.120flight it was destroyed and over time it became oil and natural gas and whatnot and so this is a
01:07:33.920more coherent explanation than why do you even have all of these deposits in the old age theory
01:07:41.280you have these ad hoc explanations of course but it's easier to have an explanation that
01:07:47.380um kind of explains more our opponents are claiming that their theory the big bang works
01:07:55.840with um believing in god but the um modernist liberal priest who invented the big bang george
01:08:05.380lemaitre said that for the believer it removes any attempted familiarity with god it is consonant
01:08:13.040with isaiah speaking of the hidden god hidden even in the beginning of the universe so he says
01:08:20.980he mentioned radiometric dating rocks are not clocks all that can be measured from rocks are
01:08:26.960amounts and ratios of chemicals and so if you're using chemicals to make definitive assertions
01:08:33.820about ages you're relying on assumptions and this is commonly not told to people how many assumptions
01:08:40.400have gone into this most people aren't aware that when they date the earth to
01:08:45.260uh over 4.5 billion years old they're not even dating the earth they're dating meteorites which
01:08:51.540this nebular hypothesis theory claims that it happened at the exact same time as the formation
01:08:57.960of the earth i'll get into that later nebular hypothesis theory and its origins but um this is
01:09:04.620a very dubious assertion that we certainly have no proof of and radiometric dating finally can be
01:09:11.400valid but you need to test it against objects of known age uh such as um things that you can do
01:09:19.480with carbon 14 and that's where we can see coal diamonds dinosaur bones and whatnot showing
01:09:27.600measurable amounts of c14 clearly showing that they're not even close to as old as we're told
01:09:34.060they are. Coal from strata allegedly ranging in age from 37 million to 318 million years
01:09:41.640dates at 44,000 to 57,000 years with carbon dating. Diamonds allegedly one to three billion
01:09:48.700years old date to 55,700 years with carbon dating. And carbon-14 has been found in dinosaur bones
01:09:56.140and they all come back as 20-some thousand to 30-some thousand years old. Of course,
01:10:03.220these findings are completely ignored and just dismissed by the scientific community because
01:10:07.840they don't want to deal with it this is a letter that i don't have time to go through here but
01:10:12.000showing that the um labs doing these testing they know that these samples were not contaminated
01:10:19.700but only once they find that they were dinosaur bones that they're testing uh do they refuse to
01:10:25.800do tests on them any longer so where did billions of years where did this idea come from it came
01:10:32.680originally from the hindus next the um pagan greeks latched on to billions of years and then
01:10:40.620for the christian era we completely rejected it we believed in the bible until the scoffers came
01:10:46.480along which were mostly deists and unitarians and these were the ones that inflated the ages
01:10:52.960if you look zoom in on the ones from the last 130 years you can see these uh many millions of years
01:10:59.920billions of years um being inflated over time by a who's who of agnostics secular jews atheists
01:11:10.240uh various people who have abandoned christianity you can throw in um yeah a couple of protest
01:11:16.500liberal protestants in there but um is this really the cohort that we want to join in believing in
01:11:25.480these long ages and rejecting what our fathers in the faith clearly believed the logical conclusion
01:11:32.360why do you need god at all when you explain everything without god when napoleon bonaparte
01:11:38.040asked why his multi-volume treatise on the solar system made no mention of god as the creator
01:11:43.400laplace famously replied sire i have no need of that hypothesis saint hilary of poite doctor of
01:11:50.640the church for there are many of those wise men of the world whose wisdom is folly with god
01:11:55.020They pin their faith to certain conclusions which they have reached by the process of logic.
01:12:00.540This is that wisdom of the world which was foreseen by God even in the prophet's days
01:12:04.400and condemned through him in the words,
01:12:06.720I will destroy the wisdom of the wise and reject the understanding of the prudent.
01:12:10.920And the apostle says, where is the wise, where is the scribe, where is the inkler of this world?
01:12:15.040Yeah, what I know this is that both of our opponents brought up the biblical genealogies.
01:12:20.300But what's interesting, if you look at the biblical genealogies
01:12:23.940and start from Adam and go forward in time, you get a date for Noah's flood that's 110 years
01:12:31.460different than if you start from Moses and go back. So the irony is even on Young Earth
01:12:37.320Creation's websites, they can't make the genealogies work if they assume that there's
01:12:43.120no gaps or that there are no gaps in the genealogies. So I would argue the genealogies
01:12:48.820are not biblical clocks for when events took place.
01:12:53.180And I would agree that God is not subject to the laws of physics,
01:13:43.720On the other hand, they've observed tens of millions of stars in different stages of star formation.
01:13:51.020And the observations of all those tens of millions of stars leaves no doubt that star formation is taking place today
01:13:58.640and has occurred throughout the entire history of the universe.
01:14:02.460And I think it's worth pointing out the physics of star formation is much simpler than the physics of raindrop formation and snowflake formation.
01:14:11.820We believe that snowflakes and rains form through the natural processes God set up.
01:14:19.280Well, star formation is actually physically quite a bit simpler.
01:14:23.780And likewise, we do see galaxies at all different stages of formation.
01:14:30.480Many young Earth creations have claimed that the James Webb Space Telescope
01:14:34.980has proven that galaxies in the early universe look just as old as galaxies in the present
01:14:41.600universe. That is simply incorrect. When we look in what's called the cosmic dawn,
01:14:48.160the first 800 million years of the history of the universe, we note that we see the cores of
01:14:54.080emerging galaxies, but not fully formed spiral galaxies. The earliest one we see is when the
01:15:01.360universe is about 800 million years old. And what we do note, however, is that these emerging
01:15:08.920cores of galaxies are forming differently than galaxies we see today, which has ruled out a
01:15:16.140number of Big Bang creation models, but has proven the validity of many other Big Bang creation
01:15:21.900models. Basically, what James Webb is telling us is that the firstborn stars, many of them are
01:15:28.360hundreds, even thousands of times the mass of our star of the sun. And this proves why we see
01:15:34.540early galaxies with supermassive black holes that weigh almost a billion times the mass of our star
01:15:41.360of the sun. In all the research papers, none of them are denying Big Bang cosmology. Rather,
01:15:48.280what they're doing is they're saying, of the 20 Big Bang creation models we have, these ones are
01:15:53.820not fitting the observations, whereas the rest of them are fitting the observations. Now with
01:16:00.020respect to planet formation, the papers cited are a little bit out of date because we now actually
01:16:06.420have seen earth clouds of planetismals and dust and, you know, comets and asteroids orbiting other
01:16:15.300stars. And we see them in different stages of formation. So this has really affirmed the planet
01:16:21.560of formation models that have been theoretically around for several decades. With respect to
01:16:27.660inflation, it's a mistake to say it's not been observationally affirmed. When we look at the
01:16:34.740polarization of maps of the cosmic background radiation, we can measure something called the
01:16:41.320scalar spectral index. If that's less than 0.95, that means inflation did not occur. Likewise,
01:16:49.360if it's more than 1.0, inflation did not occur. But if it's between 0.95 and 1.0, inflation
01:16:57.600definitely has occurred. And the latest measurements show that it's about 0.9638,
01:17:04.700which actually tells us not only that inflation must have occurred, it tells us what kind of
01:17:10.320inflation must have occurred. When I was thinking of how to share these with you, I was considering
01:17:17.300sharing Mount St. Helens how it erupted and 10 years later samples were sent in and it turns out
01:17:26.720the samples came back 350,000 to 2.8 million years old even though they were only about a decade old
01:17:33.900you can look at various other volcanic eruptions of known ages and when samples have been sent in
01:17:43.480they come back hundreds of thousands or millions of years old even though they're only decades
01:17:49.780hundreds or a thousand years old approximately again we mentioned the c14 that's been found in
01:17:57.600cold diamonds and dinosaur bones that puts an upper limit on their age at a hundred thousand
01:18:03.800years they can't possibly be older than that because of the amounts of carbon 14 that have
01:18:09.080been found in them mitochondrial dna differences have been studied in various organisms like fruit
01:18:16.440flies roundworms water fleas and even humans and if their history had been uh exceptionally long
01:18:25.160we would have expected way more mitochondrial dna differences instead the dna differences
01:18:30.460in the mitochondria um in fact fit very well with a less than 10 000 year old birth when you look at
01:18:39.540the miracles of jesus he spoke and they were made he commanded and they were created in all of the
01:18:44.720miracles that where he speaks the miracle happens right away in fact the other miracles show the
01:18:52.500same thing but this parallels the creation god said and it was made he's showing that he is the
01:19:00.920creator this is so obvious that this is what he was doing for the jews because the jews when they
01:19:08.360saw him doing this they knew that god created all of those miracles of creation in the beginning
01:19:14.080in six days and they knew that only god could do this of course only the believing jews that have
01:19:21.020been given that gift of faith could believe such a thing the other scoffers refused to believe it
01:19:25.760the speed at which these miracles happened showed his power saint chrysostom doctor of the church
01:19:33.660says nature obeyed the word of the purifier with proper speed whence it follows and straight his
01:19:38.380leprosy was cleansed but even this word straight away is too slow to express the speed at which
01:19:44.980the deed was done of course we could give you plenty of quotes from church fathers where they
01:19:51.940clearly express the speed at which creation event the creation event happened but god created
01:19:59.200everything in the beginning perfectly who was free from disease deformity and it this only
01:20:06.460happened after original sin this is the problem with progressive creationism it makes god
01:20:11.820responsible for deformity, disease, all of this before original sin, making God the author of
01:20:19.640these things. The fossil record contains cancerous tumors and dinosaur bones, showing that this
01:20:25.500happened after original sin, not before. And this is a major problem for theology, making God the
01:20:34.160author of all of this disease and deformity. Now the appearance of age is a part of most
01:20:42.160miracles. Adam was created a man. He wasn't created a child. Surely this doesn't make
01:20:46.520God a deceiver. God told us he made a man supernaturally. So too when he made the earth,
01:20:52.140the firmament, the sun, moon, and stars, and the rest of creation. Since he told us he did
01:20:55.980that, surely he's not a deceiver and that they did not have a natural history. A deceptive
01:21:01.040God would have been one who told us one thing and did another. It's foolish to look at chemical
01:21:05.740signatures in rocks and to attempt to claim that this proves a history that never existed. How do
01:21:10.800we know when any historical event occurred? We know this because of written or inscribed records
01:21:18.220authenticated by an authority of repute. Look at anything that we know about history. This is how
01:21:25.480we know it why would we not believe a document given to us where we are taught by holy mother
01:21:31.980church that god is the primary author now it's important to know that cosmology is into science
01:21:39.680so says professor of astronomy at princeton university james gunn cosmology may look like
01:21:44.940a science but it isn't a science a basic tentative science is that you can do repeatable experiments
01:21:49.880and you can't do that in cosmology when it comes to the speed of light no one has ever measured
01:21:56.220the one-way speed of light and it's perfectly valid to assume that the one-way speed of light
01:22:02.120is instantaneous and that means we actually are seeing things in real time when we look out into
01:22:06.940space so this is a fantasy this idea that we're looking backwards in time okay what you see in
01:22:13.820Romans 5.12, it's death through sin came upon all people. Here Paul makes two distinct qualifications.
01:22:23.320It's the death you get through sin, the only species of life on planet earth that can sin
01:22:28.820are human beings, and he says death to all people. He does not say death to all life.
01:22:35.180He repeats that qualification throughout Romans 5, and again at 1 Corinthians 15.
01:22:41.440So Adam's sin brought death to humanity.
01:22:44.340It did not bring death to the microbes, the plants, and the animals.
01:22:49.040The Bible is actually silent on that point.
01:22:51.800But the record of nature, of course, is not.
01:22:54.460Yeah, just to add, unless Dr. Ross wanted to add something more,
01:22:57.360I wanted to say, according to St. Thomas Aquinas, he writes,
01:23:01.280in the opinion of some, those animals, which now are fierce and kill others,
01:23:06.040would, in that state of innocence, have been tame, not only in regard to man, but also in
01:23:13.040regard to other animals. But this is quite unreasonable, for the nature of animals was not
01:23:19.940changed by man's sin, as if those whose nature now it is to devour the flesh of others would
01:23:27.460then have lived on herbs as the lion and the falcon. Nor does Bede's gloss on Genesis 1.30
01:23:34.120say that trees and herbs were given as food to all animals and birds but to some
01:23:38.260thus there would have been a natural antipathy between some animals. It's very interesting that
01:23:46.960in that passage St. Thomas can only find the gloss on bead to support his position
01:23:56.160Because if you study what the fathers taught on animal death before the fall, you will not find one single case where they unequivocally argue that there was animal death before the fall.
01:24:13.120The overwhelming majority of the fathers who left commentary on that point say there was no animal death before the fall.
01:24:22.600So, for example, St. Ephraim the Syrian teaches that when God clothed St. Adam and St. Eve in animal skins, he was communicating to them that they had not only brought death to the human race, but they had brought death to the animals, because you can't get animal skins from animals without sacrificing them.
01:24:48.120and it's important to notice that St. Thomas is not using Scripture to make his case.
01:27:32.700St. Augustine has that for an authority.
01:27:39.520For Adam, before he sinned, can be said to have had a body that was in one way mortal, but in another way immortal.
01:27:48.500This immortality was provided him by the tree of life and not by the constitution of his own nature.
01:27:59.700When he sinned, he was separated from that tree so that he was able to die, who, if he had not sinned, had been able not to die.
01:28:10.160He was mortal, therefore, by the condition of his body, but immortal by the kindness of the creator.
01:28:17.480So St. Augustine maintains that not only were animals capable of sin before Adam's sin, but Adam himself was capable of decay before in death before he said.
01:28:31.060But that doesn't mean that Adam had any defect. And the fossil record, which you attribute to the hundreds of millions of years between the Big Bang, the formation of the Earth, and the emergence of man, the creation of man, is full of things that St. Augustine would never have accepted as being part of the original creation.
01:28:56.820saint ambrose said moses did not look forward to a late and leisurely creation of the world
01:29:04.220out of a concourse of atoms and fittingly moses added he created lest it be thought that there
01:29:11.200was a delay in creation furthermore men would see also how incomparable the creator was
01:29:17.520who completed such a great work in the briefest moment of his creative act so much so that the
01:29:24.920effect of his will anticipated the perception of time now if you find yourself in any movement
01:29:32.840for instance a philosophy or system of thought and you find out the fathers of your movement
01:29:37.600were wicked it's a good idea to get out of that movement let's look at a famous astronomer and
01:29:42.860pivotal figure from the late 1800s who helped cement the idea that scientific and mathematical
01:29:48.380reasoning can and must determine the age of the earth and see where this reasoning leads remember
01:29:53.920those lists that i briefly showed he's from that list of men who invented these ages the canadian
01:29:59.920american astronomer simon newcomb was the most authoritative student of the solar system in the
01:30:04.740last years of the 19th century he calculated the time it would take for the sun to condense down
01:30:10.080to its current diameter and brightness from the nebula of gas and dust from which it was supposedly
01:30:15.100be born 18 million years he wrote that the nebular hypothesis was the doctrine of cosmic evolution
01:30:24.120note that the nebular hypothesis is what day-agers or progressive creationists ascribe to therefore
01:30:31.060they are evolutionists newcomb was not only an astronomer but while raised christian he became
01:30:37.120a militant anti-christian due to what he saw as the progress of science the church says newcomb
01:30:42.320is moving toward the mind of a skeptic like a drifting ship the passengers of which see no
01:30:47.220change in the ocean are unconscious of their change of position because of modern science
01:30:52.500he says men have ceased to demand doctrines not necessarily because they have ceased to believe
01:30:57.560in them but because they have taken the first step toward unbelief by losing interest in them
01:31:01.960their faith is dragging its anchor without knowing it few now believe in the punishment of the wicked
01:31:07.300doctrines are now seen as less literal more mystical and poetical if not done away with
01:31:12.220altogether church doctrines are now quote silently modified under the influence of a current of
01:31:17.500thought peculiar to our time to an extent with to which it is difficult to define newcomb said
01:31:23.420the best example of the readiness of theology to temporize with the irreligious thought of the day
01:31:28.820and to explain away doctrines it once held dear is seen in its attitude toward the now fashionable
01:31:34.240theory of evolution no other theory says newcomb is so directly opposed to the doctrine which lies
01:31:39.480at the basis of our orthodox system of theology newcomb says one cannot remain religiously
01:31:44.860orthodox while accepting evolution according to newcomb christian orthodoxy will die because of
01:31:49.800those believers willing to accept orthodoxy adapt orthodoxy to modern thought newcomb says a new
01:31:55.900religion will replace christianity one which bears one which fears no false teaching sets no limit
01:32:01.560on the freedom of human thought and views with perfect calm the subversion of any and every form
01:32:06.280of doctrinal belief confident that the ultimate result will tend to the elevation of the human
01:32:11.160soul and the unceasing progress of spiritual development the great progress which the last
01:32:17.080three centuries have witnessed has been wholly in the field of phenomena the progress here alluded
01:32:21.780to has been rendered possible only by entirely rejecting the mode of thinking about nature which
01:32:26.980was prevalent in former ages and into which the untrained mind is almost sure to fall at the
01:32:31.860present day newcomb sees contemporary men of science as the new prophets of the people and
01:32:38.300the new religion that arises out of modern science will have quote humanity as its god i invite the
01:32:44.920audience to do a deep dive into the lives of the revolutionaries who helped lay the foundation of
01:32:49.740long ages like millions and billions of years and see if this is a group you wish to number yourself
01:32:55.480a part of the fathers of the old age revolution were wicked revolutionaries the apostles
01:33:00.740and the church fathers were saints choose your doctrine of creation wisely adulterers know you
01:33:08.140not that the friendship of this world is the enemy of god whosoever therefore will be a friend of
01:33:13.160this world becometh an enemy of god i heard about the one-way speed of light it has now been measured
01:33:20.660We actually see supernova erupting in distant galaxies that are gravitationally lensed,
01:33:26.660so that a single supernova eruption is actually seen multiple times on separate pathways with significant angles.
01:33:34.660This establishes that indeed the one-way speed of light is the same as a return path speed of light.
01:33:44.660He did not come from the womb of a woman.
01:33:48.220So his size when God created him would not be an indicator of his age.
01:33:52.640I would argue that God made him brand new, but made him full size because he wanted to be able to communicate with him quickly,
01:33:59.960which would not be the case if he made him as a baby.
01:34:04.240And what's unique about Christianity, it's a two-creation model.
01:34:08.540God creates the universe to be a tool in his hands to eradicate all evil and suffering.
01:34:13.780And once that happens, he'll replace the universe with a brand new creation where evil and suffering will never exist again.
01:34:21.940And what you see in Romans chapter 8 is that the entire creation is subject to this pervasive law of decay,
01:34:29.860meaning that throughout the whole history of the universe, this law of decay has been in effect.
01:34:35.520As Jesus told his disciples in John 16, in this world you'll have tribulation, but take heart, I have overcome the world.
01:34:43.780Basically promising there will be a new creation that will follow the very good creation where there will no longer be any gravity, thermodynamics, decay, and indeed there will be no suffering.
01:34:58.060So this creation leads to the next creation.
01:35:02.500There's been a lot of talk here about fiat instantaneous miracles.
01:35:05.980What the Bible teaches is God creating millions of instantaneous miracles, but they're time separated.
01:35:13.780Indeed, Genesis 1 tells us that they're time-separated, so the debate is really over what are the time-separation times, and again when we look at Genesis chapter 1, we old earth creations do believe that God created in six literal days, but the Hebrew word for dayom has four distinct literal definitions, including a long period of time,
01:35:37.920And we note is that the Bible tells us there's no evening and morning for God's seventh day,
01:35:44.500meaning that that day is still ongoing.
01:35:47.480The other six days have a definite start time and a definite end time
01:35:51.680indicated by the evening was, morning was phrase.
01:35:55.520And we see in Psalm 95 in Hebrews 4 explicit statements that we're still in God's seventh day.
01:36:02.560And we see in Genesis chapter 2 is a lot happens between God creating Adam and God creating Eve.
01:36:10.780And yet Genesis chapter 1 tells us both of them were created on this sixth creation day.
01:36:17.060In fact, we have Adam exclaiming when he first sees Eve at long last.
01:36:22.480We have God commenting on the fact that he was lonely.
01:36:25.520And look at the three careers he had to go through before God created this person Eve for him.
01:36:32.560so the sixth day and the seventh day literally are long time periods the grammatical structure of genesis chapter one tells us all the days are long periods of time
01:36:44.280with respect to the sun the sun was not created on the fourth day it became visible to creatures on the surface of the earth on the fourth day
01:36:54.220the key to interpreting genesis one is to correctly establish the frame of reference that's in genesis one two is from the point of view of an observer on the surface of earth's waters looking up at the clouds not looking down through the clouds
01:37:10.300earth began with opaque clouds we know that because the earth's initial atmosphere was much thicker than it is today that's affirmed in job thirty eight where it tells us that god blanketed the early waters of the earth with clouds that kept the seas dark
01:37:26.540The sun was there, but the light of the sun didn't make it to the surface of the Earth,
01:37:31.280at least not the visible light, and it took a burst of oxygen to clear the haze in Earth's
01:37:36.780atmosphere so that animals in the face of the Earth for the first time could see the
01:37:41.900sun, moon, and stars in the sky and use them to regulate their complex biological clocks.
01:37:49.120And with respect to the statement about the biodeposits, no matter how much plant and
01:37:54.020animal matter you put on the face of the earth. It simply can't explain the huge abundance of
01:38:00.080biodeposits on the face of the earth. And again, God intended that we use those in order to be
01:38:06.100able to take the gospel to all the places of the world. Thank you. The character of God
01:38:11.420is at stake in this debate. We have seen that God's Genesis revelation, as understood in his
01:38:19.960church from the beginning tells us that he created everything for us out of love in six
01:38:26.200days or less much less than 10 000 years ago dr ross's exegesis is not catholic it's protestant
01:38:37.160exegesis which pays no attention whatsoever to the entire tradition of the church it cannot
01:38:44.600possibly be sound. And we know from the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, the constant tradition
01:38:54.060of the Church, that the first created world was completely free, not only from human death,
01:39:00.720but from any kind of deformity or disease, and that all of those natural evils came into existence
01:39:07.200because of the original sin of Adam. In the words of St. Augustine, shown here,
01:39:12.140in this creation that no one sinned, the world would have been filled and beautified with nature's
01:39:18.440good without exception. So from this perspective, we know that God's original creation reflected
01:39:24.720his perfect goodness, wisdom, and love, that deformity and disease were not part of his
01:39:30.820original plan for us, and that the cause of all these evils is not God, but our sin. And from this
01:39:37.840perspective we can appreciate even more deeply the love that our lord showed for us when he took a
01:39:42.660human nature suffered and died for us so that after his glorious resurrection he could found
01:39:48.700the holy catholic church and invite us to become new creations in him and as members of his mystical
01:39:54.680body work with him to restore all things back to the beauty that they had in the beginning
01:40:00.020and to an even more wonderful perfection at the end of time sadly dr massa and dr ross
01:40:06.100make God responsible for introducing hundreds of millions of years of death, deformity, and disease
01:40:13.440into his creation before the original sin. And even though they do not intend it as such,
01:40:18.560that is a blasphemy against the perfect goodness of God. In 1909, when the PBC was an arm of the
01:40:25.960magisterium, in its answer to eight questions about Genesis 1 to 3, in the reply to question 3,
01:40:34.400after teaching in answers to one and two that everything in the first three
01:40:39.980chapters of Genesis is historical objective truth the answer to question
01:40:44.840three teaches no one may deny facts related in the first three chapters of
01:40:49.760Genesis which pertain to the foundations of the Christian religion for example
01:40:54.440the creation of all things brought by God in the beginning of time so all
01:41:01.220All things created in the beginning of time is totally incompatible with all things being created over hundreds of millions of years.
01:41:09.820So in its last authoritative teaching on this very point, the magisterium requires us to hold fast to the truth that all things were brought by God in the beginning of time.
01:41:21.700Not just some things like hydrogen, helium, and lithium at the moment of the mythical Big Bang.
01:41:27.740so in closing my brothers and sisters throughout the world watching this like saint joshua in his
01:41:35.340time i exhort you to choose this day whom you will serve the true god of creation who made a
01:41:42.860perfectly harmonious universe for us at the beginning of time free from death deformity
01:41:47.960and disease who formed adam body and soul on the first friday of the world who created saint eve
01:41:54.320from sleeping at Adam's side on the first Friday of the world as a foreshadowing of the birth of
01:42:00.840the church from the wounded side of Christ on the Friday we call good, and who placed St. Adam and
01:42:06.220St. Eve over all creatures as the king and queen of a perfectly beautiful, harmonious, complete
01:42:12.500universe marred only later by their sin? Or will we continue to allow our children and grandchildren
01:42:19.320to be indoctrinated into the false idol of progressive creation, who created many kinds
01:42:25.880of plants and animals only to destroy most of them over hundreds of millions of years
01:42:29.820before the creation of man, who created the bodies of the first human beings in a world
01:42:34.740that he himself, the God little G of progressive creation, had filled with death, violence,
01:42:41.020deformity, and disease, who allowed his church to teach a false account of the history of the world
01:42:47.000for 1900 years and finally enlightened her, not by raising up saints and scholars from within the
01:42:53.940church, but by raising up godless men outside of the church to correct her, like Ernst Teckel and
01:42:59.580Charles Lyell. I invite everyone in the audience to join with us and all the holy angels and saints
01:43:05.540in saying, as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord, for thou hast formed me and hast laid
01:43:11.540thy hand upon me. Thou hast protected me from my mother's womb. I will praise thee for thou art
01:43:16.860fearfully magnified. Wonderful are thy works. In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy
01:43:23.240Ghost. Amen. I want to thank you all for participating in this, and I think this is a
01:43:28.320great grace and an opportunity to pursue the truth. My brother Hugh Owen cited St. Maximus
01:43:35.420the confessor, that just as we would not be able to understand the water that was subsequently
01:43:45.140turned into wine by our Lord's miracle, by studying the wine, certainly we could study
01:43:54.180the wine for the sake of the wine. The miracle of creation, as St. Thomas says, the substantial
01:44:03.140part, the part that we have to accept as of faith, is that God made time, matter, space, energy,
01:44:10.960everything from nothing. No scientist, especially no Christian scientist, would claim that they can
01:44:18.780go back and actually understand how God took nothing and made something. But certainly,
01:44:26.420once the something is here we're free to study it we can't get back to the creation event we can
01:44:36.300only get near to it so just as we can study the wine we who knows if they drank it all there was
01:44:43.680there might have been something left over it could have gone on for a week uh you could study that
01:44:48.340so too not only can scientists today have theories about the how but saint thomas says that the how
01:44:56.400is open for interpretation, that that's not a matter of faith, that we would not be a heretic
01:45:02.880if we denied the specific how of things unfolded. And so I would like to turn to an example of this
01:45:12.940from Father Poole, who I quoted earlier. An example is found in the explanation of the
01:45:22.800first chapter of Genesis, where the dogma about the creation and formation of the world is handed
01:45:29.840on, creation ex nihilo. Basil and Gregory of Nyssa explained this creation according to the
01:45:36.840philosophical notions of their age. They explained it according to the philosophical notions of their
01:45:44.460age. And afterwards, the scholastics did the same, and their explanations prevailed for many
01:45:50.200centuries. Nowadays, the explanation differs somewhat in accordance with fuller knowledge
01:45:55.780of natural things. Neither of these different creation explanations has the church judged to
01:46:01.780be necessary for belief. And in fact, if we look at a quote from our friend and father,
01:46:11.120St. Basil the Great, he explains why there was darkness on the face of the earth,
01:46:18.440using the physics of his day he says that uh the shadow of heaven forms the darkness of the wine
01:46:30.320and he compares it to a tent and that uh you mustn't think that darkness was an actual thing
01:46:38.220it was the result of the light being blocked so my brother in christ uh dr hugh ross
01:46:45.980is uh not giving a false interpretation he in his own book is giving a similar interpretation
01:46:53.660as saint basil the great again these are scientific matters and the church has said
01:47:00.200that we may disagree on these scientific matters again uh i quote for example um ludwig ott
01:47:11.220he says in these scientific matters there is no value in a consensus of the fathers since they
01:47:19.800are not here acting as witnesses of the faith but merely as private scientists and again if you talk
01:47:28.740to any theologian before Vatican II if you picked up any book of theology or dogma before Vatican II
01:47:36.100they would tell you that the consensus of the fathers on a matter of faith is infallible.
01:47:43.240You can no longer remain Catholic and go against it.
01:47:46.760And therefore, your position is making Pope Pius XII a material, a public material heretic, which he certainly was not.