Job Revisited

Ken Ham SHREDS Evolution with One Simple Question
Ken Ham | 20 June 2025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzawwl3cIPs

3:39 You are aware of the one occasion when he was doubting God, what he repented of?

After this Job opened his mouth, and cursed his day And he said Let the day perish wherein I was born, and the night in which it was said: A man child is conceived
[Job 3:1-3]

Do you know why this is what God and Job were referring to?

Let a darksome whirlwind seize upon that night, let it not be counted in the days of the year, nor numbered in the months Let that night be solitary, and not worthy of praise Let them curse it who curse the day. who are ready to raise up a leviathan Let the stars be darkened with the mist thereof: let it expect light and not see it, nor the rising of the dawning of the day
[Job 3:6-9]

God in chapter 38 appears like a whirlwind, and mentions precisely Leviathan and stars.

God was telling Job:

But I say to you not to swear at all, neither by heaven, for it is the throne of God Nor by the earth, for it is his footstool: nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great king Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black
[Matthew 5:34-36]

How do I know God did NOT disapprove of what Job told his comforters?

And after the Lord had spoken these words to Job, he said to Eliphaz the Themanite: My wrath is kindled against thee, and against thy two friends, because you have not spoken the thing that is right before me, as my servant Job hath
[Job 42:7]

"as my servant Job hath" ... in other words, to the comforters, God approved of Job's words.

Ken Ham Still Prefers Debunking Flat Earth and Only Obliquely Hinting Against Geocentrism?

Answering Ken Ham on Distant Starlight · And No, I am STILL Not a Flat Earther · Ken Ham Still Prefers Debunking Flat Earth and Only Obliquely Hinting Against Geocentrism?

I ask, because at the end of my comments, I actually ask him to notify Danny Faulkner about my challenge. As long as I have no clear refusal, I cannot really affirm. I'm lousy at taking ghosting as "clear" in this kind of respect.

The Flat Earth Movement Is Growing RAPIDLY—Are They Right About This?
Ken Ham | 30 May 2025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2B4EhBZZ-DA

1:06 I have two problems with that comment.

1) Doesn't work for Apocalypse 7, since the angels are standing in specific places, each is not standing in a whole quarter of the Earth. I presume at least.
2) And the Four Corners are a marvellous proof text against the modern Flat Earth movement, precisely if you take them literally.

If your flat earth, as for Cosmas Indicopleustes or perhaps a few more, is basically a Mercator projection, and there is simply no sea crossing between California and China, that doesn't prevent an Earth disc from having four corners. Or continents on a round earth disc from having them.

However the modern Flat Earth map instead has the North Pole in the middle. The continents then have three corners, unless you want to give two on just Australia.

So, the text is a refutation of the modern Flat Earth movement. Because the corners are four, not three.

Shifting the goalpost

@Wordsaladz3y

You can have four corners on a circle, draw a square outside it

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@hglundahl

@Wordsaladz3y In that case, the four corners would be outside the (on their view, not mine) "Antarctic Ice Wall" and inverifiable.

But the four corners passage in the Apocalypse implies a peopled area.

So, no.

2:14 And some astronomic science is presumed to be knowledge about things at a great distance where you never go.

St. Thomas says that things are not scientifically known if they are:

• contingent (like not necessary, not 2+2=4, but rather "is the triangle red or green?")
• in the past, future, distance or hidden.

So, exit "ape to man" (even before the specific problems). Exit "we will be able and need to do travel to outer space to find inhabitable planets to survive". Exit "alpha Centauri obviously isn't moving between January and July, so it has to be Earth that's moving" OR "alpha Centauri is 4 light years away". Exit also "if Hans Georg Lundahl says he's Geocentric but not Flat Earth, he really means he's both, but doesn't dare to admit the latter". Since I'm not admitting it, it would, if true, be hidden, and so you could have no scientific knowledge about it.

2:33 The way you present now depends on a very small set of eyewitness testimony.

You personally know them, I don't personally know you.

There is a way that is way more comprehensive, namely verifying that travels have been made:

• in Europe and Asia, from East to West (like Transsibirian from Vladivostok to Moscow or St. Petersburg, not sure which, and then Russia to Poland, Poland to Vienna (a journey my mother took during early stages of my pregnancy), Vienna to Paris, Paris to Le Havre,
  
  
• Le Havre over the Atlantic to New York City. OR Vienna to New York City by plane (landing for plane change in in London in 1977), but the boat journey helps you make sure you are still going from East to West and not mixing up the cardinal directions.
  
  
• In the Americas, like New York City to San Diego or Los Angeles or San Francisco.
  
  
• Over the Pacific.

The parts I haven't done myself are like anything East of Warszaw or West of California. But my Geography teacher (who was slightly Marxist) took a trip on the Transsibirian, and I have heard of one Bishop John of Shanghai and San Francisco who has obviously crossed the Pacific. I have also not done the Atlantic in boat, only by plane.

So, there is a much more multiple and uncontested eyewitness testimony that Earth has topological equivalents of a full circle. So much that this is why modern Flat Earthers have no will to defend the old Flat Earth maps, with the Cosmas Indicopleustes outlook. This leaves them in a quandry about how the four corners fit, and also to explain why travel South of the Equator is shorter and not longer per coordinates. I think that can be verified by air flight.

I think Robert Carter did an excellent job proving that by air flights. I also recall, he was very dismissive against Geocentrism, but at one point he admitted it was less easy to disprove than Flat Earth, whereon he proceded to not even trying.

DIY Trepanning

@DIYTrepanning

Anyone who's not an utter dunce can debunk the flat Earth religious fantasy just by using simple high school level trigonometry & geometry. Navigation is not possible on the flat Earth

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@hglundahl

@DIYTrepanning A Flat Earther from the Middle of India is arguably less than normally aware of Navigation.

And it may have sth to do with anti-Portuguese sentiment.

3:27 "You can see the earth spinning around."

If I took a footage from a train window, you could see trees and hills move.

Mister Wilmore is "no doubt an honorable man" (trying to sound not too much like Marc Anthony), but that doesn't change that his testimony cannot, only reason can to some extent settle whether it was Earth that spun around or he was taking the video from a space station spinning around Earth.

I'd say, as God has put 8 billion pairs of eyes on Earth, and only very few men with very big expenses have put very few pairs of eyes into that space station, that might be a hint about which of the views is the more truthful one.

3:38 That the earth is a sphere is observational.

That it spins around isn't. The observation can have been flawed by being from a moving observer. And in the case of Wilmore, there is a specific reason to suspect it, he took a route not given directly by God as the normal everyday observations we have, like when we see Sun and Moon and (with good binoculars) space stations and stars move around us each day.

4:04 You seem to be willing to argue only with people who trust you.

I have, since 2001, argued extensively with among others people who mistrust me, to the point of mistrusting whether I'm even sane.

So, if we trust you, these three men are Christians and in the testimony of two or three ... why don't you try to give an answer that will work even for people who distrust you?

Arguing over the internet is something very different from a teacher asking a pupil to trust him.

You seem mostly a trustworthy man. Until I analyse the question why you spend so much time on Flat Earth, and so little on Geocentrism. St. Augustine was a Young Earth Creationist, as can be gathered from his treatment of Flood, pre-Flood Patriarchs, post-Flood patriarchs in City of God. He was also a Geocentric, who believed the universe spins around Earth, as you can see from his De Genesi ad Litteram libri XII, book I. There is a Budé edition, so I think there should be a Loeb edition too. Reading a sentence or a Bible chapter in Latin is no problem, but reading longer texts, I prefer having translations at hand. The same book also clarifies that he's definitely not a Flat Earther. What's up with limiting the debate to people who differ from him in at least one of the three areas?

4:45 As I looked up Analemma, I noticed Danny Faulkner, a non-Geocentric astronomer you are promoting, knows some history of astronomy.

Would you mind asking him how he'd refute the following, starting with positions of Riccioli:

• Heavenly bodies move around Earth (directly, or indirectly, some then directly around the Sun) each day, roughly speaking (between Stellar Day that's shorter than 24 hours and Lunar Day which is slightly longer).
• Each individual body is moved by an angel.

However, Riccioli would have said, it is moved Westward through totally Empty space by the angel. Empty space shouldn't make rotational vectors on Earth, like Foucault's Pendulum or Geostationary Satellites, so, let's see what Riccioli replaced, in St. Thomas God moves the sphere of the fix stars, that moves (simply by contiguity) the sphere of Saturn, which moves the sphere of Jupiter, which ... finally you get down to the Moon and below that the Atmosphere and the Oceans.

However, the problem with this model is, there aren't solid crystalline spheres encapsuling the planets. Tycho disproved that by observing a comet.

So, what would work?

God is each day turning a big portion of the aether, globe shaped and centred on Earth, around us each day. Aether is said both as Maxwell would have used it when talking of electromagnetic waves (waves are ripples of something) and also as the substance in which space is located and in which Newtonian vectors are transmitted. If Einsteinian gravity is true, it's the substance that bends around a heavy object (Einsteinian terms: space, spacetime, fabric of spacetime). Within this, the movement provided directly by God is full circle in a stellar day, other speeds and directions, from retrograde to parallax (misnomer on this view) are provided by angelic movers.

Will you kindly notify Danny of the challenge?

Answering Ken Ham on Distant Starlight

Answering Ken Ham on Distant Starlight · And No, I am STILL Not a Flat Earther · Ken Ham Still Prefers Debunking Flat Earth and Only Obliquely Hinting Against Geocentrism?

How Could Light from Distant Stars Reach Earth in 6,000 Years?
Ken Ham | 23 May 2025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgEdn2LxdAU

You are aware that the very simplest answer is, fix stars are not all that far away. Right?

If the 0.76 arc seconds of alpha Centauri depend on Earth moving 2 Astronomic Units back and forth, than one can triangulate 0.76 arc seconds (known angle implying two more known angles, since the triangle is a very narrow one) and 2 Astronomic Units, and one can get 4 light years.

If on the other hand, both the "annual aberration" (c. 20 arc seconds back and forth) and the "parallax" are aspects of how angelic beings dans with the stars they carry, in time with the Sun (whom a psalm compares to a hero), to the glory of God, then no such triangulation is possible, we have only one (or if you like three) angles but the 2 AU of the Sun, per year, are not necessarily the trajectory of the star, and therefore no known distance enters the triangle.

As far as I am concerned, stars were ready on day 4 to give a light arriving on day 5 when certain birds and fish were created, and obviously their light was arriving normally on day 6 as well, so Adam and Eve could see the stars in the evening.

0:38 From the Bible we do know, there is a city up in Heaven.

It makes more sense if the stars (what used to be called fix stars) are a shell (a bit like modern astronomers imagine the Oort cloud) that this city is above this shell.

We, obviously, also know the universe was not created 13.8 billion years ago.

3:29 And there are times when my granny (if she had been Christian) could have said "only God knows where I put my glasses" and she had them lifted up on the forehead.

If "the furthest star" is actually only one light day away, that is up, then it took only one day for its light to reach earth. With normal speed of light as per one way speed of light extrapolatable from the two way speed of light.

graeme ross

@graemeross6970

Don't you mean interpolation?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@hglundahl

@graemeross6970 No, interpolation is when a footnote erroneously is copied as part of the actual text. It's manipulated INTO where it originally wasn't.

Extrapolation is seeing a pattern in one set of data and applying it OUTSIDE those data.

Sometimes a somewhat "safe bet" but check if there is no contrary evidence. And here, I think it's a safe bet.

3:49 There is also nothing in observational science that contradicts Geocentrism.

You can't go out to observe Sun and Earth from Tatooine or from Syrte-the-Magnificent, capital of the Empire of a Thousand Planets. We won't meet a Shingouz any more than a Tusken Raider.

Unlike microscopy, the object of investigation is basically observable only from one point of observation, not from different angles.

When certain men (presumably) were on the Moon, they didn't even prove that Earth turns around, since according to Geocentrism, the Moon goes around the Earth in approximately 25 hours (the stellar month is Moon going around the Zodiac, not around Earth). They were observing Earth from a moving point of observation. Circle in a chopper around the Eiffel tower (if French police allows), you will see the Eiffel tower turn around as well.

Ken Ham on LGBTQ, I Pose a Question

Ken Ham on LGBTQ, I Pose a Question · Genesis 18 and Ezechiel 16 Revisited

Christians Need to STOP Making This Mistake with LGBTQ People
Ken Ham | 29 nov. 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdqCNRgITj4

Speaking of Genesis, what do you believe about Genesis 38?

I believe contraceptive practises (short of abortion!) are "sodomy lite" ... those who commit them and don't repent will burn a little higher up in Hell, with a little less heat than those who commit sodomy "proper" ...

When I have, in the past, tried to debate gay people (and gay liberals who may themselves be hetero) over the internet, I've often taken the approach of what limiting child birth does to society.

But this is because I am Catholic, I believe contraception is sin against nature and sodomy is sin against nature, both cry out to heaven for vengeance even in this life.

Some distort this, they may be very critical of homosexuality and so on, but are totally blind to the issue of contraception, because they think Onan's displeasing of God was simply not complying with the duty of levirate. Or, perhaps on some versions, not obeying his father. No, Onan's sin was the specific act he did with his wife. The specific act which intended to not make her pregnant.

I think there is a way of bringing this home even to people who don't believe the Bible.

The Western World except US and Japan (I'm not well informed about Commonwealth outside Europe) is decreasing pensions and increasing the wait for them. In 2018 or 19 Russia was doing the same, and it nearly brought Navalny to power. Putin was happy as a day about first Covid 19 and then "special operation" ... if we believe he cherishes remaining in power, which I do believe. The US can be there in 8 or 9 years. Japan allows robots to care for the elderly. Euthanasia is evil, but it is another of the inhuman ways out of an impasse which is already inhumanly turning generations against each other.

And, homosexuality is so to speak the "flag ship" of contraception, by now at least. Except to some "conservative" but not quiverfull Protestants.

Did you know the legalisation of contraception as per "right to privacy", and that being already a given, was the motivation behind Roe v. Wade?

Sharing Ken Ham's Point on Parental Authority

This New Government Regulation Is a BIG Problem (They’re Coming for Your Kids)
Ken Ham | 13 Nov. 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpP3cIsqxXg

Ken Ham on Life Issues

New blog on the kid: Beyoncé's Daughter, Blue Ivy Carter, was Pregnant (According to Celebrity Insider) · Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: Ken Ham on Life Issues

Beware Rape, Incest, and the Life of the Mother!
Ken Ham | 18 Oct. 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbYNlrNkKg8

6:37 Even then, a mother has at least the right to sacrifice herself to save her child.

Angelo Kelly's mother died a few months after he was born. She died in a cancer, because she postponed a chemotherapy to after the birth, or maybe didn't take it even then, knowing it would not help her. But she did that, because if she had started the chemotherapy while she was pregnant, it would or at least could have killed him.
I think the cases where a mother's life is threatened by not killing (directly or indirectly) her child are maybe even rarer than when it's threatened by abortion or attempted abortion.

Bill Nye’s Views on Abortion Are DEEPLY Problematic | Ken Ham
Ken Ham | 1 Nov. 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQa7wCJp3uI

On this one you seem to be talking past each other:

Bill Nye:
I have 4:42 known a great many gay men who are 4:44 married who have babies who have kids 4:48 being uh somewhere on the spectrum of 4:51 heterosexual with homosexual being on 4:53 that is not genetically lethal you still 4:56 have kids anyway.

Ken Ham:
based on the biblical 4:59 world view marriage is one man for one 5:01 woman for life

He was not contradicting that. He was talking about men with same sex attraction doing one man for one woman and presumably for life.

He could have been adressing some evil men who say "gay men should be castrated, so they don't spread their genes" ... or in other words that the propensity and not only the evil act should be punished. It is possible that his real problem is, he was considering all of them gay in the first place. But some are, unless you define "gay" as "living a homosexual lifestyle" rather than "male homosexual" as pendant to "lesbian" for "female homosexual" ...

Why Trump’s New Views on Abortion Are Concerning | Ken Ham
Ken Ham | 11 Oct. 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efrkHsX7Dj4

Once Again, the Truth of Tota Scriptura is not the Error of Sola Scriptura, Young Earth Creationism is NOT Protestantism

Once Again, the Truth of Tota Scriptura is not the Error of Sola Scriptura, Young Earth Creationism is NOT Protestantism · First Twenty Minutes of Dr. Craig and Dr. Ken Keathley

Since I am a Roman Catholic and a Young Earth Creationist, it's pretty idiotic to pretend my YEC position depends on Sola Scriptura and could in any way shape or form be modified by showing me "other" adherents of Sola Scriptura who don't find it implies YEC.

I have lots more in common with either Cardinal Wiseman and Fulcran Vigouroux, except their deviations from YEC, or with a YEC who, unfortunately, is as yet Protestant, like Ken Ham. Here are two of his videos and my comments.

This Video About Bible Genealogies Will BLOW Your Mind | Ken Ham
Ken Ham | 9 Aug. 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVeoH4F8Q2o

4:59 In the Catholic Church (and Anglicans and Lutherans have mainly kept this custom), the texts are set and the sermon needs to be in relation to them or the object of the feast.

All Lord's Days and Feasts of the Lord have their specified own readings, and saints days sometimes have readings tailored to that saint (I think for St. Francis Mark 6:8 or its parallel in another synoptic is a given, can't recall offhand), or to the type of saint, like all martyrs have as epistle reading the Wisdom 5:1 to 5.

So, no, we have no way of telling our clergy what to preach on either. They are given it by the Church.

5:52 Same chapter, Romans 10, verse 15.

My confirmation god-father's confirmation god-father told me this was when he realised the Reformers had not been sent.

Not by the Church, snce their role as Catholic clergy where some of them had a sending was different from their role as Reformers.

Not by God, since they worked no miracles to prove they were sent by God.

This Video DESTROYS the Gap Theory | Ken Ham
Ken Ham | 23 Febr. 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLu-ZzRn0T8

1:13 Among Catholic Old Earthers, there is a cultural difference.

Englishmen are more likely to hear of Gap theory, embraced by Cardinal Wiseman, French (and SSPX, whose founder was French), more likely to hear of Day-Age. The best known proponent of which was Fulcran Vigouroux. He wrote a manual in the 1880's on OT theology, really great when it comes to defining inerrancy and inspiration, but somehow there were days when he was writing some things that seemed like ages to him, unless it was a gap in his confidence in Biblical inerrancy, and directly recommended:

• day age (up to the creation of Adam)
• limited but very large regional Flood, killing, not kangoroos or armadillos, but all men
• just possibly, not necessarily, gaps in the Genesis 11 genealogy (but not the Genesis 5 one).

As a judge on behalf of the Pope, he got occasion to allow precisely just the first of these solutions, none of the other two and the same year his pope canonised the close friend of a strict young earth author.

The Viennese preacher Clemens Maria Hofbauer, well known to oppose going to balls and dancing waltz with strangers, canonised in 1909, had as his doctor and close friend a certain Johann Emanuel Veith, who in 1865 published Die Anfänge der Menschenwelt ... basically Creation Science of the YEC school.

Obviously, taking the atmosphere as old and mankind as young is out since carbon dating, so of the three schools allowed prior to 1920, only YEC stands a chance. 1920 was a sad year, a Jesuit in Paris was allowed to publish an article in a reference work, on the Six-Day Work, where he proposed the framework theory.

3:40 How deep do you think the waters were prior to day 3?

My hunch is, very deep.

What God did on day 3 is similar to what a chemist can do with electrolysis, so, the oxygen in our atmosphere comes from then and the hydrogen in Sun and stars too.

Also some oxygen of the pre-Flood atmosphere and some hydrogen of the pre-Flood higher atmosphere met in Genesis 7:11 (the floodgates being the previous safety distance between these layers) and is now in the Oceans.

5:15 Third Commandment.

I = vv 2-6.
II = v 7
III = vv 8-11
IV = 12
V = 13
VI = 14
VII = 15
VIII = 16
IX + X = 17 (or more precisely Dt 5:21)

But yes, Fulcran Vigouroux and Cardinal Wiseman could have used a concordance a bit more often, they kind of missed Exodus 20 and Mark 10.