2 Christian biologists on evolution

[crochet1949]

ACB --I Have found a couple of articles -- "Is there a gap between the 1st and second verse in the 1st chapter of Genesis?"

Put out by NeverThirsty

http://www.neverthirsty.org/bible-qu-qa ... en-the-fir...

And "In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood-
"Is there a large gap of time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2?

www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ313.html


Okay -- the earth Was flooded --but -- the Gap people say there was destruction, yes, but don't name a flood that destroyed everything. Just that there was great destruction that took place.

[abelcainsbrother]

ACB --I Have found a couple of articles -- "Is there a gap between the 1st and second verse in the 1st chapter of Genesis?"

Put out by NeverThirsty

http://www.neverthirsty.org/bible-qu-qa ... en-the-fir...

And "In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood-
"Is there a large gap of time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2?

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ313.html


Okay -- the earth Was flooded --but -- the Gap people say there was destruction, yes, but don't name a flood that destroyed everything. Just that there was great destruction that took place.

Yes the flood has been named,we call it Lucifer's flood and it is based on Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28,etc.
Why don't you challenge them critics in the links you've posted and make sure they are right or not? Don't just believe critics of Gap Creationism. I already gave you scripture that backs up why Gap Creationists believe a former world did indeed perish before Genesis 1:2, so why not really consider it,pray about it and sincerely question it from a Holy Spirit and biblical truth perspective? I think you can understand clearly why we say there was a gap of time in between the former world and this world,but I think you just might choose to believe critics who deny what God's word clearly says in order to hold to their interpretation. You don't have to read what critics say as you can just read the scriptures given,read them yourselves and realize who is right and who is wrong. If you have any questions about it? Just ask me.

[crochet1949]

ACB --I Have found a couple of articles -- "Is there a gap between the 1st and second verse in the 1st chapter of Genesis?"

Put out by NeverThirsty

http://www.neverthirsty.org/bible-qu-qa ... en-the-fir...

And "In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood-
"Is there a large gap of time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2?

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ313.html


Okay -- the earth Was flooded --but -- the Gap people say there was destruction, yes, but don't name a flood that destroyed everything. Just that there was great destruction that took place.

Yes the flood has been named,we call it Lucifer's flood and it is based on Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28,etc.
Why don't you challenge them critics in the links you've posted and make sure they are right or not? Don't just believe critics of Gap Creationism. I already gave you scripture that backs up why Gap Creationists believe a former world did indeed perish before Genesis 1:2, so why not really consider it,pray about it and sincerely question it from a Holy Spirit and biblical truth perspective? I think you can understand clearly why we say there was a gap of time in between the former world and this world,but I think you just might choose to believe critics who deny what God's word clearly says in order to hold to their interpretation. You don't have to read what critics say as you can just read the scriptures given,read them yourselves and realize who is right and who is wrong. If you have any questions about it? Just ask me.

Yes, those passages Do tell of Lucifer being full of pride and being kicked out of heaven. But that didn't result in a flood. It Did result in Lucifer's 'landing' on earth -- in the Garden and approaching Eve 1st in the form of the serpent. She and Adam ate of that fruit that God told them Not to. The only thing God told them No to. As a Result of that Every one was penalized. Noah's flood came later.
Reading Scripture -- myself -- it's Noah's flood not Lucifer's.
I don't go with a pre-Adamic race. And I've Not put Anything in that supposed gap between those two verses. Cause I'm not really sure there Is one. I've heard discussion on Both sides.
And, you're free to share anything you want to about it.

[abelcainsbrother]

ACB --I Have found a couple of articles -- "Is there a gap between the 1st and second verse in the 1st chapter of Genesis?"

Put out by NeverThirsty

http://www.neverthirsty.org/bible-qu-qa ... en-the-fir...

And "In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood-
"Is there a large gap of time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2?

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ313.html


Okay -- the earth Was flooded --but -- the Gap people say there was destruction, yes, but don't name a flood that destroyed everything. Just that there was great destruction that took place.

Yes the flood has been named,we call it Lucifer's flood and it is based on Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28,etc.
Why don't you challenge them critics in the links you've posted and make sure they are right or not? Don't just believe critics of Gap Creationism. I already gave you scripture that backs up why Gap Creationists believe a former world did indeed perish before Genesis 1:2, so why not really consider it,pray about it and sincerely question it from a Holy Spirit and biblical truth perspective? I think you can understand clearly why we say there was a gap of time in between the former world and this world,but I think you just might choose to believe critics who deny what God's word clearly says in order to hold to their interpretation. You don't have to read what critics say as you can just read the scriptures given,read them yourselves and realize who is right and who is wrong. If you have any questions about it? Just ask me.

Yes, those passages Do tell of Lucifer being full of pride and being kicked out of heaven. But that didn't result in a flood. It Did result in Lucifer's 'landing' on earth -- in the Garden and approaching Eve 1st in the form of the serpent. She and Adam ate of that fruit that God told them Not to. The only thing God told them No to. As a Result of that Every one was penalized. Noah's flood came later.
Reading Scripture -- myself -- it's Noah's flood not Lucifer's.
I don't go with a pre-Adamic race. And I've Not put Anything in that supposed gap between those two verses. Cause I'm not really sure there Is one. I've heard discussion on Both sides.
And, you're free to share anything you want to about it.

I did not necessarily say Isaiah 14 and Ezekeil 28 says there was a flood. It is 2nd Peter 3:6 that tells us of a flood that caused the world at that time to perish. Yes I believe Lucifer was kicked out landing on the earth. What I don't agree with is the Eden that Ezekeil 28 tells of was the garden of Eden in Genesis 3. It was a different Eden in the former world. I agree Satan was in the garden of Eden in Genesis 3 and he tempted Eve. But something that critics have overlooked is that there are no angels created in the six days of restoration. Angels had already been created including Lucifer before God made this world and one way we know that Lucifer and a third of the angels had already rebelled against God is because on the first day God says"Let there be light." So light shown into darkness and the darkness represents Satan's kingdom and this is why no angels are created in the six days of creation and so based on this we can take Lucifer back into the former world when he rebelled against God causing judgment to be poured out by God on that former world in which it perished,being overflowed with water. So that Satan already existed to tempt Eve in the garden of Eden.

You say it is Noah's flood and not another flood,but have to admit this world did not perish and the sin of Adam and Eve effected this world. How do you know that Peter is not talking about Noah's flood but instead the flooded earth in Genesis 1:2 instead? How would it change your understanding if Peter was not talking about Noah's flood but Genesis 1:2 instead? You'd then have to acknowledge a former world did indeed exist that perished before Genesis 1:2 which is what we believe. I acknowledge if Peter is talking about Noah's flood then you are right but if he is talking about Genesis 1:2? I am right and a former world did indeed perish before Genesis 1:2.

The reason why I don't believe it is talking about Noah's flood is because the time between Adam and Eve to Noah's flood cannot be considered a world that perished biblically. Also Peter tells us that all things have not gone on continually since the beginning of the creation like scoffers and critics declare happened. In order for you being a YEC to believe all things have gone on continually since the beginning of the creation is contrary to what Peter is explaining, because he is explaining why things have not gone on continually since the beginning of the creation like you believe if you accept YEC. Why does it seem hard for you to accept that a former world perished is the bible says it? Will you believe what critics say or what God's word says? Would it effect you as a Christian to accept an old earth because a former world existed that perished because of Lucifer's rebellion against God?

[crochet1949]

Ezekiel 28:13 "You were in Eden, the garden of God; " just assumed it meant the Garden of Eden because God created it for Adam and Eve and their descendants.

2 Peter 3 passage Is talking about 'the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. vs 7 'But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgement and perdition of ungodly men'.
God caused the earth to be destroyed by flood waters -- and promised mankind that He'd never again destroy all of mankind. But - in the End - this earth / world Will be destroyed as Revelation says and there will be The New Jerusalem in it's place / heaven.
I'm not all that convinced that there Was an earlier world.
There definitely Was a war in heaven. And the angelic world must have existed Before the earth and Adam and Eve got here -- or there would not be a place that Lucifer and a third of all the angels got thrown out Of.
( Job 1:6- 12 is a fascinating passage. Conversation between 'the sons of God' and Satan' -- that passage also says the 'sons of God' came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came amongst them. vs 7 "And the Lord said to Satan, 'From where do you come?" So Satan answered the Lord and said, "From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking back and forth on it".)
I DO believe that the earth is young compared to the millions/billions of years that evolution teaches. But I'm not in real agreement , apparently, with what the YEC as a Group believes. Or, at least, not with all that you've been sharing 'here'.
Recently I've been researching both This topic and another thread talking about the importance of ice ages in proving evolution. Both threads are talking - big picture about the same thing. How long this earth has Really been existing and what's happened to it.
The world Did perish Biblically as a result of Noahs' flood. That was the whole point Of the flood. Genesis 6:13 "And God said to Noah, "The end of all flesh has come before Me, for the earth is filled with violence through them; and behold, I will destroy them With the Earth."
Unless it would not be considered "destroying" the earth in the process of turning it upside down and inside out. We can observe from the destruction cause by earthquakes, sunamis, large areas being flooded -- that destruction Does take place. Entire villages, towns, means of transportation have been destroyed. The earth Is still 'there', but destroying life or making it Very difficult to survive in those affected areas. The disease that results from human / animal waste and contaminated drinking water. Bodies deteriorating, etc. And it Has been explained how all of That could / would result in an ice age.
That which I Have been doing is comparing what the various articles say, what you share and what I've read in Bible. And what we have observed in nature during our lifetime. It's very interesting.

[abelcainsbrother]

Ezekiel 28:13 "You were in Eden, the garden of God; " just assumed it meant the Garden of Eden because God created it for Adam and Eve and their descendants.

2 Peter 3 passage Is talking about 'the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. vs 7 'But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgement and perdition of ungodly men'.
God caused the earth to be destroyed by flood waters -- and promised mankind that He'd never again destroy all of mankind. But - in the End - this earth / world Will be destroyed as Revelation says and there will be The New Jerusalem in it's place / heaven.
I'm not all that convinced that there Was an earlier world.
There definitely Was a war in heaven. And the angelic world must have existed Before the earth and Adam and Eve got here -- or there would not be a place that Lucifer and a third of all the angels got thrown out Of.
( Job 1:6- 12 is a fascinating passage. Conversation between 'the sons of God' and Satan' -- that passage also says the 'sons of God' came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came amongst them. vs 7 "And the Lord said to Satan, 'From where do you come?" So Satan answered the Lord and said, "From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking back and forth on it".)
I DO believe that the earth is young compared to the millions/billions of years that evolution teaches. But I'm not in real agreement , apparently, with what the YEC as a Group believes. Or, at least, not with all that you've been sharing 'here'.
Recently I've been researching both This topic and another thread talking about the importance of ice ages in proving evolution. Both threads are talking - big picture about the same thing. How long this earth has Really been existing and what's happened to it.
The world Did perish Biblically as a result of Noahs' flood. That was the whole point Of the flood. Genesis 6:13 "And God said to Noah, "The end of all flesh has come before Me, for the earth is filled with violence through them; and behold, I will destroy them With the Earth."
Unless it would not be considered "destroying" the earth in the process of turning it upside down and inside out. We can observe from the destruction cause by earthquakes, sunamis, large areas being flooded -- that destruction Does take place. Entire villages, towns, means of transportation have been destroyed. The earth Is still 'there', but destroying life or making it Very difficult to survive in those affected areas. The disease that results from human / animal waste and contaminated drinking water. Bodies deteriorating, etc. And it Has been explained how all of That could / would result in an ice age.
That which I Have been doing is comparing what the various articles say, what you share and what I've read in Bible. And what we have observed in nature during our lifetime. It's very interesting.

OK you still think Peter is talking about Noah's flood and not the flooded earth in Genesis 1:2 eventhogh you really didn't give biblical reasons why you think so. It is OK to disagree and I understand how different creation interpretations can be but one thing that is common with YEC's is this idea that it is because of evolution that it is said the earth is old,which is not true. It was discovered by mostly Christians who started modern day science before evolution became a scientific theory. In a way the truth is that the evidence discovered by Christians was hyjacked away and made to fit into the theory of evolution.

YEC's also tend to believe in a young earth because it denies evolutionists the long amounts of time they need for life to evolve. But I want you to know that you can believe in an old earth and reject the theory of evolution too. I've tried to show you biblically why and how we say the bible teaches there was a former world that perished before Genesis 1:2 but you just cannot see it. So I'll just encourage you to read 2nd Peter 3:3-7 again and instead of only considering Noah's flood consider that he was referring us to Genesis 1:2 instead the only other flood in the bible besides Noah's flood. You just might come to understand why there was a former world that perished and that the earth is old because of it. I already pretty much know how YEC's interpret it.