(Disclaimer: This transcript is auto-generated and may contain mistakes.)

Now, where is this teaching of the Big Bang coming from? Where is this idea of the Big Bang coming from? Basically, what you have to understand about the universe and about heavenly bodies like the planets and the stars and everything is that their movements are extremely predictable. So you can literally look at it like a clock and I don't even want to say it's like a clock, it is the clock. I mean, when God created the sun, moon and stars he said this is going to be for signs and for seasons and for months and for days and for years. I mean, the universe isn't like a clock, the universe is the clock. And so therefore, astronomy over the last 400 years has become very advanced and able to map these things and chart these things so that I have a software on my laptop where I can pull up exactly what the sky looks like without going outside. It shows me where everything is to just an incredible degree of accuracy where whatever it's inaccurate by you couldn't even pick up with your human eye. It's so precise. And I could go outside and that's exactly what it's going to look like. I can then wind back the clock and see what the sky looked like, you know, when I was born in 1981. I could roll back the clock to, you know, December 25th, you know, 001 and, you know, witness the birth of Christ. No, no, but literally you could scroll back the clock to, you know, 6 B.C. or something and see what the sky looked like in Jerusalem in 6 B.C. and where it all, because these things are just, they're moving according to very predictable patterns. And you say, well how do you know this stuff is accurate? Well, you know, you create these models on a computer and then basically you dig up all the old, you know, Greek documents on astronomy and maybe ancient Chinese documents on astronomy and they talk about, you know, different things that happened at different times and they have star catalogs and they drew out the stars and everything. And then you compare it and it's like, well, it's just where they said it would be. And so you can see that the universe is like a clockwork universe. So basically here's what they're doing. They're basically saying, okay, the universe is expanding, so if we kind of like reverse that clock, and if we just keep going, keep going, keep going, keep going, keep going, keep going, then pretty soon it all just kind of sucks in to a point of origin and then they calculate that if we were to back up the clock and get to where everything's together, you know, then it would be like 13 and a half billion years if we did that. But here's the thing, that doesn't mean that that's what happened. Because what actually happened? God created an existing universe with sun, moon, stars done, ready formed. So it did not happen the way that they're saying that it happened because we know God created it as a finished product, as an old universe 6400 years ago through a divine act. Because there, what they would have you to believe is that this all just happened on its own 13 billion years ago, just that there's no creator, that there's no God. And as I said before, that's absurd. So they want to say that all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation, but we know that that's not the case, that there was a cataclysmic flood that dramatically altered processes on this earth. And not only that, there could be other alterations that God made, other things that God changed that we are unaware of, that we don't understand, which means that it is impossible to speak with certainty about what happened 5,000 years ago or 6,000 years ago or you know 7,000 years ago or a million years ago or too many because you can't really talk about that with any certainty because there's no actual proof that your methods work. Because in order to you know calibrate any kind of a measuring device, you have to have a known quantity. So like when the first thermometers were made, how do you calibrate the thermometer? I mean if you're the guy making the first thermometer, where do you draw the lines and what number do you put by the lines? You got to come up with something, right? So the guys who are making these early thermometers, they chose known values such as water boiling, you know, or the freezing point of fresh water or the freezing point of salt water, human body temperature, and they use these as points of reference, okay? Like okay, well we know that water seems to boil at the same temperature every time if it's fresh water, so boom, let's just mark that and let's call that 100 degrees Celsius, right? And you know, here's where fresh water freezes, let's call that zero. Let's call the human body temperature 37, you know, and here we go. Or you can speak American and do the Fahrenheit scale and you know, hey, 212 degrees is the boiling point of water, zero degrees is the freezing, roughly not anymore, you know, it's roughly the freezing point of salt water and you know, fresh water freezes at 32, human body temperature 98.6 or whatever. But if you're making a thermometer, you have some known values and you label it and you're like, okay, this is what we know. So now let's go test the temperature of other stuff and see how it compares to the boiling point, the freezing point, whatever. Does everybody follow? Okay. So what if I just, what if I took that thermometer and just extrapolated and said, hey, I'm going to use this thermometer, this home thermometer, and I'm going to measure temperatures of, you know, negative 200 degrees Celsius with this thermometer that, you know, is made for like home use to see if you have a fever. You think that's going to work? Or hey, you know, I'm going to take this home use thermometer and I'm going to measure stuff that's 500 degrees. I'm going to put in the oven and set it to 500 degrees and see how accurate this thing is. What do you think's going to happen if you put that thermometer in there? It's not going to work, right? Because, you know, it has a certain range that it's designed to operate on. Now there could be other thermometers that are designed to handle really high temperatures or really low temperatures. But here's the thing, you have to have some basis for these things. So, you know, let's say you have some dating method and you say like, okay, well we know that this document is 300 years old because the guy wrote in his diary, today is February 17th and whatever the date. So we know that that's this old and then we do this test on it and then boom, it tells us it's that old. It's accurate. Okay, but here's the thing. What happens is when you go back to the time of Christ and then you go back a thousand years before that and then you go back two thousand years before that, you know what? You're into what's known as prehistory because there isn't any written document that's reliable to go on at that point and so how do you calibrate your dating methods if you don't know for sure when these things happen? You're just assuming that the thermometer that works for my body temperature is also going to work if I stick it in the turkey and put it in the oven for 400 degrees or whatever. You're just assuming it's going to tell you about sub-zero temperatures and so forth, but there's no way to be 100% sure of these dating methods without a control that you know is that old. Does everybody understand what I'm saying? You'd have to know like I know for a fact that this thing is 10,000 years old or something in order to be able to know that that dating method works when you extrapolate it back like that. Just like this idea of, well if I can extrapolate the stars back to the time of Christ and it matches what, you know, contemporary astronomers were saying in Greece and Rome and China or whatever, you know, I can extrapolate back five billion years or ten, you know, it might not work that way because all things might not continue the way that they were from the creation. Something might have changed at some point and so this is what God is saying that in the last, and I mean this is being predicted thousands of years in advance, I mean this is being predicted before there ever was a Charles Darwin or evolution or especially at the Big Bang because like I said the Big Bang is pretty new. You know some of you were alive when the Big Bang got popular, okay. And the thing is that the Apostle Peter almost 2,000 years ago is predicting there's going to come a time when people are willfully ignorant of the creation, they're willfully ignorant of the biblical flood and they are going to say that all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. In science this is known as uniformitarianism, you know, that basically the present is the key to the past and the processes that are happening now have always been happening. But do we really know that the processes that are happening right now have always been happening at the same rate and the same way all along? When the Bible talks about a time before the flood when things were dramatically different, you know, where there's a mist coming out of the earth and it's not raining the way that it rains now and where you have people living much longer and animals are different and you know there are genetic differences and so forth. So you know these people that he's talking about I believe are the people that we're dealing with right now because when he says all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation that's probably not something that a scientist from the 1900s in the early 1900s would have said or in the 1800s would not have said that but that's what they would say now because now they all believe in their own creation myth, the Big Bang. They have a creation that they believe in and they will hammer the fact that all things continue as they were from beginning of the creation. That's what they believe. And so therefore this is applicable today. The flood actually happened. There is evidence for it out there in the world, the fact that all cultures talk about it happening in their ancient literature, the fact that we could look at geological evidence for the flood or scientific evidence for the flood, but at the end of the day none of that is why I believe in the flood. I'll tell you why I believe in the flood because I read it in the Bible because God's word is my final authority because I have faith in what the Bible says and you know man's ideas come and go and they change but you know what God's word always ends up being vindicated and God's word always ends up being shown to be the truth. And here we are thousands of years later and virtually all of the science from 2000 years ago has been debunked, virtually all of it. You know the popular science back then was Aristotle's science and it's pretty much all considered wrong now, virtually 100%. But yet here we are 2000 years later and we believe this book just as much as Peter and Paul believe this book. We believe this book just as much. This book is a rock and a lot of the world's beliefs are like shifting sands that change and they become altered because they're imperfect. They see through a glass darkly. We see face to face when we look into the word of God. We see clearly they're looking through a glass darkly out there.