The Gap theory

[PaulSacramento]

OK Read this and compare

http://separationtruth.com/resources/GAP-SECTION+4.pdf

There is a lot of "jumping to conclusions" based on very selective interpretation there...

[Audie]

How come the old earth Gap theory has been forgot about by the church? It was the bread and butter teaching of the church before Charles Darwin wrote his book "On the origin of species".William Buckland the first geology professor at Oxford taught the old earth biblical Gap theory.The old earth Gap theory needs to be revived by the church as it would give evolution serious competition problems if it was taught as fervently as say young earth creationism is today.For those that don't know the Gap theory teaches there was a Gap of time between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2 based on 2nd Peter 3:3-7 and Jeremiah 4:23-28.

The Gap theory tells us there was a former world on this earth full of life but it perished in a flood(not Noah's flood)Genesis 1:2 and all life that existed in it perished until God created this world and everything after Genesis 1:3 was God creating this world about 6-10,000 years ago. The geological evidence of an old earth with the fossils,coal and oil testify to a former world that existed but evolutionists hijacked this evidence away from the church after evolution became so popular and the Gap theory was forgot about by the church.

Why is regular OEC better than the Gap theory?I don't like stretching the 6 days of creation beyond 24 hour days and the Gap theory is old earth creationism too.

I think both Young earth creationists and Old earth creationists need to accept the Gap theory and stop ignoring it as evolution wouldn't stand a chance when we can remove a lot of their evidence off of the table using the old earth Gap theory to do it while pointing out there is no evidence that demonstrates life evolves and so you cannot use the fossils,etc as evidence for evolution.Evolutionists cannot use the fossils as evidence for evolution because they prove a former world existed that perished NOT evolution.Also the Gap theory is biblically sound which is why it was the bread and butter teaching of the church before Charles Darwin came along.

J Vernon McGee taught and believed in the Gap theory eventhough I don't think he got into the science of it.You can find the Gap theory in the Scofield reference bible,Dake reference bible,etc.

I wonder who are these people you refer to as 'evolutionists"? People who accept the theory would make up about the entire earth's scientific community. As well, of course, a great many religious and other educated people.

A theory is good only if the data consistently supports it, and nothing comes along to disprove it. The flood seems an important component of the gap thing, and as the flood is without a scientific basis, disproved by many many lines of evidence, there cannot be properly said to be a "gap theory".

[abelcainsbrother]

How come the old earth Gap theory has been forgot about by the church? It was the bread and butter teaching of the church before Charles Darwin wrote his book "On the origin of species".William Buckland the first geology professor at Oxford taught the old earth biblical Gap theory.The old earth Gap theory needs to be revived by the church as it would give evolution serious competition problems if it was taught as fervently as say young earth creationism is today.For those that don't know the Gap theory teaches there was a Gap of time between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2 based on 2nd Peter 3:3-7 and Jeremiah 4:23-28.

The Gap theory tells us there was a former world on this earth full of life but it perished in a flood(not Noah's flood)Genesis 1:2 and all life that existed in it perished until God created this world and everything after Genesis 1:3 was God creating this world about 6-10,000 years ago. The geological evidence of an old earth with the fossils,coal and oil testify to a former world that existed but evolutionists hijacked this evidence away from the church after evolution became so popular and the Gap theory was forgot about by the church.

Why is regular OEC better than the Gap theory?I don't like stretching the 6 days of creation beyond 24 hour days and the Gap theory is old earth creationism too.

I think both Young earth creationists and Old earth creationists need to accept the Gap theory and stop ignoring it as evolution wouldn't stand a chance when we can remove a lot of their evidence off of the table using the old earth Gap theory to do it while pointing out there is no evidence that demonstrates life evolves and so you cannot use the fossils,etc as evidence for evolution.Evolutionists cannot use the fossils as evidence for evolution because they prove a former world existed that perished NOT evolution.Also the Gap theory is biblically sound which is why it was the bread and butter teaching of the church before Charles Darwin came along.

J Vernon McGee taught and believed in the Gap theory eventhough I don't think he got into the science of it.You can find the Gap theory in the Scofield reference bible,Dake reference bible,etc.

I wonder who are these people you refer to as 'evolutionists"? People who accept the theory would make up about the entire earth's scientific community. As well, of course, a great many religious and other educated people.

A theory is good only if the data consistently supports it, and nothing comes along to disprove it. The flood seems an important component of the gap thing, and as the flood is without a scientific basis, disproved by many many lines of evidence, there cannot be properly said to be a "gap theory".

Evolutionists are those who have accepted evolution as proven science.I know the vast majority of scientists accept evolution but is that a reason to accept it?They are forced into accepting it too and risk losing their career in science if they come out against evolution Rupert Sheldrake is one example and he is an evolutionist and look at how he has been treated and he is trying to help evolution because of problems he sees with evolution science and DNA.As for Christians who have accepted evolution I say if both evolution and the bible are believed by faith then the bible God's word should win.

How does a flood early in the earth's beginning after it was formed and covered in water before the continents rose up and before any life which secular science teaches today,How can you say there is no evidence for a flood? You are going against science when you deny it. You can find National Geographic:The story of the earth on youtube and watch it and get out your bible and follow along and you'll see they teach the earth became covered in water before the continents rose up and before any life billions of years ago and they believe comets brought this water to the earth and yet Genesis 1:2 makes it clear the earth was covered in water also at one time so I think we do have science reasons to believe Genesis.Also the Gap theory proves evolution is false because all life perished in the former world eventually and so life could not have evolved like they say.There is no way the primates that lived in the former world evolved into man because they perished as all life did until God created the animals,etc for this world and then he created man in his image.

[Audie]

Any scientist knows not to start with a conclusion,
and the easiest person to fool is yourself.
You seem to embrace those mistakes as highest
values, so you are beyond reach of anything more
from me.

[abelcainsbrother]

Any scientist knows not to start with a conclusion,
and the easiest person to fool is yourself.
You seem to embrace those mistakes as highest
values, so you are beyond reach of anything more
from me.

Then why do the majority of scientists believe evolution if you say scientists know not to start with a conclusion? That is exactly what they've done because it has never been demonstrated life evolves and yet they have believed it and built all of this evidence around the conclusion life evolves.Most of the time science does not operate this way as they actually give evidence to support it and then build evidence around it but not when it comes to evolution.

[Audie]

Any scientist knows not to start with a conclusion,
and the easiest person to fool is yourself.
You seem to embrace those mistakes as highest
values, so you are beyond reach of anything more
from me.

Then why do the majority of scientists believe evolution if you say scientists know not to start with a conclusion? That is exactly what they've done because it has never been demonstrated life evolves and yet they have believed it and built all of this evidence around the conclusion life evolves.Most of the time science does not operate this way as they actually give evidence to support it and then build evidence around it but not when it comes to evolution.

If evolutionists are those of take as a proven fact (there may be such people) they are quite uneducated and their opinions are of no value. There are no proofs in science.

I wonder where you get the information you have been repeating?

The theory of evolution began as an explanation for extensive observations.
That is how any theory works. Observation-theory.

If a theory is unsound then someone will come across information that falsifies, or in more
recent parlance, disproves it.

One could I suppose say as you did of evolution that all of us, scientists included "start with conclusions" (science does not do conclusions) because there is a body of reliable information that we all find useful. We dont check all the original research
when we trust electricity to work. Disproof of evolution would blow a smoking crater, in all the physical sciences.

In the absence of any reason to think that has happened or is about to happen, we go about with
the working hypothesis that it is not about to happen.

I did see your list, which is from, where?

All theories and laws in science, tho, are provisional, and open to modification or disproof.

Old theories litter the landscape. Phony science like astrology or alchemy has no place.

The theory of evolution is no different. It is subject to disproof; it is not a religion. Disproof potentially could come
from a physics grad student in Beijing,

A Nobel awaits such a discovery.

[Byblos]

Any scientist knows not to start with a conclusion,
and the easiest person to fool is yourself.
You seem to embrace those mistakes as highest
values, so you are beyond reach of anything more
from me.

Then why do the majority of scientists believe evolution if you say scientists know not to start with a conclusion? That is exactly what they've done because it has never been demonstrated life evolves and yet they have believed it and built all of this evidence around the conclusion life evolves.Most of the time science does not operate this way as they actually give evidence to support it and then build evidence around it but not when it comes to evolution.

If evolutionists are those of take as a proven fact (there may be such people) they are quite uneducated and their opinions are of no value. There are no proofs in science.

I wonder where you get the information you have been repeating?

The theory of evolution began as an explanation for extensive observations.
That is how any theory works. Observation-theory.

If a theory is unsound then someone will come across information that falsifies, or in more
recent parlance, disproves it.

One could I suppose say as you did of evolution that all of us, scientists included "start with conclusions" (science does not do conclusions) because there is a body of reliable information that we all find useful. We dont check all the original research
when we trust electricity to work. Disproof of evolution would blow a smoking crater, in all the physical sciences.

In the absence of any reason to think that has happened or is about to happen, we go about with
the working hypothesis that it is not about to happen.

I did see your list, which is from, where?

All theories and laws in science, tho, are provisional, and open to modification or disproof.

Old theories litter the landscape. Phony science like astrology or alchemy has no place.

The theory of evolution is no different. It is subject to disproof; it is not a religion. Disproof potentially could come
from a physics grad student in Beijing,

A Nobel awaits such a discovery.

^ now that is a sensible post Audie.

[abelcainsbrother]

Any scientist knows not to start with a conclusion,
and the easiest person to fool is yourself.
You seem to embrace those mistakes as highest
values, so you are beyond reach of anything more
from me.

Then why do the majority of scientists believe evolution if you say scientists know not to start with a conclusion? That is exactly what they've done because it has never been demonstrated life evolves and yet they have believed it and built all of this evidence around the conclusion life evolves.Most of the time science does not operate this way as they actually give evidence to support it and then build evidence around it but not when it comes to evolution.

If evolutionists are those of take as a proven fact (there may be such people) they are quite uneducated and their opinions are of no value. There are no proofs in science.

I wonder where you get the information you have been repeating?

The theory of evolution began as an explanation for extensive observations.
That is how any theory works. Observation-theory.

If a theory is unsound then someone will come across information that falsifies, or in more
recent parlance, disproves it.

One could I suppose say as you did of evolution that all of us, scientists included "start with conclusions" (science does not do conclusions) because there is a body of reliable information that we all find useful. We dont check all the original research
when we trust electricity to work. Disproof of evolution would blow a smoking crater, in all the physical sciences.

In the absence of any reason to think that has happened or is about to happen, we go about with
the working hypothesis that it is not about to happen.

I did see your list, which is from, where?

All theories and laws in science, tho, are provisional, and open to modification or disproof.

Old theories litter the landscape. Phony science like astrology or alchemy has no place.

The theory of evolution is no different. It is subject to disproof; it is not a religion. Disproof potentially could come
from a physics grad student in Beijing,

A Nobel awaits such a discovery.

So you admit scientists started out with a conclusion and that was my point and no I don't buy it that other areas of science are just theories.We can look into other areas of science and look at the evidence and know they are not just theories yet not when it comes to evolution.And if a Nobel awaits anybody who disproves evolution and they will win a Nobel prize then what do you have to say is the reason those that have come out against it have been treated?

National Geographic:"The story of the earth" backs up the points I've made about the earth being covered in water billions of years ago and this lines up with Genesis 1:2 and Genesis 1:8-10 too according to what science says happened. National Geographic:"The story of the earth" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYOarZKipnU The Gap theory could win a Nobel prize for you if you would thoroughly examine it and then compare it to much of the evidence used for evolution.

This is because much of the evidence used as evidence for the Gap theory which was being taught by Christians before Charles Darwin came along was hijacked by evolutionists away from the Gap theory like I said earlier and after 150 years of evolution science still cannot demonstrate life evolves like they teach and believe and so the Gap theory is still just as true as before Charles Darwin came along.

William Buckland the first geology professor at Oxford was a Christian and taught the Gap theory and Charles Darwin was trying to thwart the Gap theory not young earth creationism when he wrote his book "On the origin of species".Read "On the origin of Species" from a perspective of trying to thwart the Gap theory and you'll see it in there.This history has been forgotten.Rev Thomas Chalmers who led many people to the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ was preaching and teaching the Gap theory about 50 years before Darwin wrote his book.

So if you truly believe a Nobel prize can be won look into the Gap theory and then get tough in Christ when you propose it as a scientific theory.

[Audie]

Any scientist knows not to start with a conclusion,
and the easiest person to fool is yourself.
You seem to embrace those mistakes as highest
values, so you are beyond reach of anything more
from me.

Then why do the majority of scientists believe evolution if you say scientists know not to start with a conclusion? That is exactly what they've done because it has never been demonstrated life evolves and yet they have believed it and built all of this evidence around the conclusion life evolves.Most of the time science does not operate this way as they actually give evidence to support it and then build evidence around it but not when it comes to evolution.

If evolutionists are those of take as a proven fact (there may be such people) they are quite uneducated and their opinions are of no value. There are no proofs in science.

I wonder where you get the information you have been repeating?

The theory of evolution began as an explanation for extensive observations.
That is how any theory works. Observation-theory.

If a theory is unsound then someone will come across information that falsifies, or in more
recent parlance, disproves it.

One could I suppose say as you did of evolution that all of us, scientists included "start with conclusions" (science does not do conclusions) because there is a body of reliable information that we all find useful. We dont check all the original research
when we trust electricity to work. Disproof of evolution would blow a smoking crater, in all the physical sciences.

In the absence of any reason to think that has happened or is about to happen, we go about with
the working hypothesis that it is not about to happen.

I did see your list, which is from, where?

All theories and laws in science, tho, are provisional, and open to modification or disproof.

Old theories litter the landscape. Phony science like astrology or alchemy has no place.

The theory of evolution is no different. It is subject to disproof; it is not a religion. Disproof potentially could come
from a physics grad student in Beijing,

A Nobel awaits such a discovery.

So you admit scientists started out with a conclusion and that was my point and no I don't buy it that other areas of science are just theories.We can look into other areas of science and look at the evidence and know they are not just theories yet not when it comes to evolution.And if a Nobel awaits anybody who disproves evolution and they will win a Nobel prize then what do you have to say is the reason those that have come out against. have been treated?

National Geographic:"The story of the earth" backs up the points I've made about the earth being covered in water billions of years ago and this lines up with Genesis 1:2 and Genesis 1:8-10 too according to what science says happened. National Geographic:"The story of the earth" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYOarZKipnU The Gap theory could win a Nobel prize for you if you would thoroughly examine it and then compare it to much of the evidence used for evolution.

This is because much of the evidence used as evidence for the Gap theory which was being taught by Christians before Charles Darwin came along was hijacked by evolutionists away from the Gap theory like I said earlier and after 150 years of evolution science still cannot demonstrate life evolves like they teach and believe and so the Gap theory is still just as true as before Charles Darwin came along.

William Buckland the first geology professor at Oxford was a Christian and taught the Gap theory and Charles Darwin was trying to thwart the Gap theory not young earth creationism when he wrote his book "On the origin of species".Read "On the origin of Species" from a perspective of trying to thwart the Gap theory and you'll see it in there.This history has been forgotten.Rev Thomas Chalmers who led many people to the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ was preaching and teaching the Gap theory about 50 years before Darwin wrote his book.

So if you truly believe a Nobel prize can be won look into the Gap theory and then get tough in Christ when you propose it as a scientific theory.

To repeat if you didnt get it. Theories cannot be proved. Your description of "evolutionists" would only apply tp
the grossly uneducated.

Regarding "conclusion first"...
I "admitted" nothing of the sort, whether you misread deliberately or otherwise.
I simply pointed out that all of life and science is working provisional hypothesis.
Perhaps you dont know what I meant, but dont invent a. meaning or present that
when it comes to evolution people in their hundreds of millions suddenly all sense
and intellectual honesty.

National geo doesnt sponsor, promote, agree with or in any way support any sort of "creationism"

My father is a geologist, I have a year of grad school in aquatic entomology; I have been around science / scientists
all my life. I dont use any pop science source for what I know. Long hours of lab lecture study and field work...
and you? Do you think science does "proof" ?

Your "just theories" is perplexing. What would rank higher as scientific achievement than to develop a new
theory?

[abelcainsbrother]

Audie

I know National Geographic does not support creationism they support evolution science but you still fail to see the evidence I have presented and why and how it confirms Genesis 1:2 and Genesis 1:9-10.Evolution is taught as scientific truth to society and yet you say it a just a theory.Welcome to the world of faith which goes back to what I said earlier if both evolution and the bible are believed by faith then God's word should win.

Science has proven many things with evidence like the 2nd law of thermodynamics,we can observe around us what scientists have proven with evidence.Everyday we see man putting energy into slowing entropy down because we know things don't last as long if we don't,this is why we have so many jobs out there that do maintenance on the things we own because of the 2nd law.Yet when it comes to evolution we must believe scientists by faith and allow them to interpret the evidence in the earth from an evolution perspective.I am not saying the 2nd law prevents life from evolving only pointing out that science has proven the 2nd law is at work in our world.

[Audie]

Audie

I know National Geographic does not support creationism they support evolution science but you still fail to see the evidence I have presented and why and how it confirms Genesis 1:2 and Genesis 1:9-10

I dont want to discuss things as an adversary, I'm sure we can have a respectful conversation, and learn from eachother. Dont you think so?

Im sorry but yes, I do fail to see evidence that you have presented. Could you pick one important item of evidence for me, and present that?

Evolution is taught as scientific truth to society and yet you say it a just a theory.

Im not saying here that evolution is right, or wrong; but Id like to show you how you can better present your case to someone who is not in your camp.

You are making some misstatements about science, I can show you where you are making mistakes.
You might try trusting me a bit, as I do know science pretty well. I could provide links if it suits you.

Here are your mistakes in that sentence:
Science does not do "Truth". There simply is no such thing as "scientific truth'. Science deals in data and probabilities. If you mean to say "scientific fact", that isnt it either.

The only time you will hear a scientist speak of a 'fact' will be something like, "it is a fact that this is the data I got".

"Just a theory" is a bit of a misnomer. "Theory" has a very different meaning in science than it does in daily life where you might say "I've a theory (hunch) that they will serve meatloaf again.."

A scientific theory is an explanation for a large and consistent data set. Try reading this...http://www.livescience.com/21491-what-i ... heory.html


Finally, how science is presented to the public varies widely, around the world and across social classes. Some of it is sadly incompetent, the quality of science education in American is a national disgrace.

Welcome to the world of faith which goes back to what I said earlier if both evolution and the bible are believed by faith then God's word should win.

Why yes, but we have to think of the word "If"! Evolution, the science that goes into it is not about faith. Its about data. And IF the word of God is the word of God, and IF one can read it with unerring understanding, then of course, the word of God preempts all.

Many many Christians find that the natural world around them is not at odds with the God in whom they have faith.

Science has proven many things with evidence like the 2nd law of thermodynamics,we can observe around us what scientists have proven with evidence

Again, you will improve your presentation if you do not speak as one who is not familiar with the terms and concepts of science. Please do try to trust me on this, but if you do not choose to, you can look for yourself and you will see that I will not mislead you.

Science does not do proof. There is no proof in science. Nothing can be proven by science. Proof is done in math, not in science.

The various physical laws we have, gas laws etc, are not and can never be proved to be correct.

The reason is very simple. Many observations showed that this "law" makes a general statement about how the law works.

However, and this is important, it is impossible to make every observation of every possible situation. There COULD be an exception; you cannot prove there is no e exception. So the law is not proved, and never can be. Same thing with theories.

.Everyday we see man putting energy into slowing entropy down because we know things don't last as long if we don't,this is why we have so many jobs out there that do maintenance on the things we own because of the 2nd law.Yet when it comes to evolution we must believe scientists by faith and allow them to interpret the evidence in the earth from an evolution perspective.I am not saying the 2nd law prevents life from evolving only pointing out that science has proven the 2nd law is at work in our world.

No faith involved, and no proof, sorry.

Here is a cool concept that may help you with a wider perspective on 2LOT. Yes, things wear out break down, dissipate, get disorganized.

But there is also a countercurrent, that organizes things. Your Mom, when you were a kid, straightened out your room. She put energy in. ANY flow of energy will act to organize matter in some way. Look at a magnet and iron filings. Observe the forming of an ice crystal. The flow of water, making a river system. But I guess you know that anyway, as you agreed (as some cant seem to) that entropy is not going to intefere with evoltuion. ToE may be right and it may be wrong, but 2LOT isnt the reason.

Any questions about those ideas, I will be glad to try my best to explain or find you a suitable reference.

Exchange of ideas, tho, not arguing ok?

[Audie]

Sorry about the poor form of previous post, I havent gotten it figured out yet how to edit. I made it look as if most of the post was from a previous exchange.

[RickD]

Audie, just between you and me, you have been a breath of fresh air to this forum. Lately, we have had more than our fair share of unpleasant atheists here. It's really nice to see someone like yourself, having actual conversations, with actual listening to what others say.


But please don't tell anyone I said this. They'll all think I'm a nice person. We can't have that.

[Audie]

Audie, just between you and me, you have been a breath of fresh air to this forum. Lately, we have had more than our fair share of unpleasant atheists here. It's really nice to see someone like yourself, having actual conversations, with actual listening to what others say.


But please don't tell anyone I said this. They'll all think I'm a nice person. We can't have that.

Thanks Rick, your encouragement will help keep me in line, Im kind of an excitable sort and may be tempted to be intemperate.

[abelcainsbrother]

Audie

I know National Geographic does not support creationism they support evolution science but you still fail to see the evidence I have presented and why and how it confirms Genesis 1:2 and Genesis 1:9-10

I dont want to discuss things as an adversary, I'm sure we can have a respectful conversation, and learn from eachother. Dont you think so?

Im sorry but yes, I do fail to see evidence that you have presented. Could you pick one important item of evidence for me, and present that?

Evolution is taught as scientific truth to society and yet you say it a just a theory.

Im not saying here that evolution is right, or wrong; but Id like to show you how you can better present your case to someone who is not in your camp.

You are making some misstatements about science, I can show you where you are making mistakes.
You might try trusting me a bit, as I do know science pretty well. I could provide links if it suits you.

Here are your mistakes in that sentence:
Science does not do "Truth". There simply is no such thing as "scientific truth'. Science deals in data and probabilities. If you mean to say "scientific fact", that isnt it either.

The only time you will hear a scientist speak of a 'fact' will be something like, "it is a fact that this is the data I got".

"Just a theory" is a bit of a misnomer. "Theory" has a very different meaning in science than it does in daily life where you might say "I've a theory (hunch) that they will serve meatloaf again.."

A scientific theory is an explanation for a large and consistent data set. Try reading this...http://www.livescience.com/21491-what-i ... heory.html


Finally, how science is presented to the public varies widely, around the world and across social classes. Some of it is sadly incompetent, the quality of science education in American is a national disgrace.

Welcome to the world of faith which goes back to what I said earlier if both evolution and the bible are believed by faith then God's word should win.

Why yes, but we have to think of the word "If"! Evolution, the science that goes into it is not about faith. Its about data. And IF the word of God is the word of God, and IF one can read it with unerring understanding, then of course, the word of God preempts all.

Many many Christians find that the natural world around them is not at odds with the God in whom they have faith.

Science has proven many things with evidence like the 2nd law of thermodynamics,we can observe around us what scientists have proven with evidence

Again, you will improve your presentation if you do not speak as one who is not familiar with the terms and concepts of science. Please do try to trust me on this, but if you do not choose to, you can look for yourself and you will see that I will not mislead you.

Science does not do proof. There is no proof in science. Nothing can be proven by science. Proof is done in math, not in science.

The various physical laws we have, gas laws etc, are not and can never be proved to be correct.

The reason is very simple. Many observations showed that this "law" makes a general statement about how the law works.

However, and this is important, it is impossible to make every observation of every possible situation. There COULD be an exception; you cannot prove there is no e exception. So the law is not proved, and never can be. Same thing with theories.

.Everyday we see man putting energy into slowing entropy down because we know things don't last as long if we don't,this is why we have so many jobs out there that do maintenance on the things we own because of the 2nd law.Yet when it comes to evolution we must believe scientists by faith and allow them to interpret the evidence in the earth from an evolution perspective.I am not saying the 2nd law prevents life from evolving only pointing out that science has proven the 2nd law is at work in our world.

No faith involved, and no proof, sorry.

Here is a cool concept that may help you with a wider perspective on 2LOT. Yes, things wear out break down, dissipate, get disorganized.

But there is also a countercurrent, that organizes things. Your Mom, when you were a kid, straightened out your room. She put energy in. ANY flow of energy will act to organize matter in some way. Look at a magnet and iron filings. Observe the forming of an ice crystal. The flow of water, making a river system. But I guess you know that anyway, as you agreed (as some cant seem to) that entropy is not going to intefere with evoltuion. ToE may be right and it may be wrong, but 2LOT isnt the reason.

Any questions about those ideas, I will be glad to try my best to explain or find you a suitable reference.

Exchange of ideas, tho, not arguing ok?

I did not say that the 2nd law prevents evolution but that there is no evidence in science that demonstrates life evolves and my point was there is evidence all around us for the 2nd law which is proven science unlike evolution,so this idea that science is full of theories for the sake of evolution is not true,the 2nd law is at work and we can observe it like you pointed out and man is able to put energy into it to slow entropy down but since we can't get to the sun,we cannot put energy into slowing its entropy down.My point is evolution is believed by faith as much as the bible is believed by faith yet evolution is propped up and taught as scientific truth.

This is why the Gap theory still beats evolution after 150 years of evolution because at the end of the day you can tell us all you want to that life evolves but you cannot demonstrate it does.You can only preach "macro-evolution" like a preacher preaching about Jesus and both require faith to believe and so God and his word wins based on this because there is no reason to have two faiths especially if you are a Christian who accepts evolution.

Evolution is a lie from Satan to cover up the truth of the Gap theory because evolution uses the evidence that proves the Gap theory true for much its evidence,this is no different than how Satan has covered up the truth of the 12 constellations that reveal the gospel in the heavens with astrology.Satan is a liar and a deceiver and covers up the truth.

The Gap theory was being taught and preached in the church before Darwin wrote his book and it still is the real truth and just because evolutionists hijacked the evidence used for evolution now away from the Gap theory whether intentional or not does not change it.The Gap theory removes the age of the earth,fossils,coal and oil,etc off of the table because they prove forensically that a former world full of life existed on this earth before this word was created and since you cannot demonstrate life evolves you cannot use the evidence for evolution.The Gap theory proves evolution wrong because the former world on this earth perished and all life perished until God created this world.

This is why God created the beasts of the field after their kind which is often overlooked when reading Genesis.God created the animals,creatures,plants,etc after their kind because of the former world that existed and the former world probably fully perished at the ice age until this world was created.