Evidence for God from Science

thatkidakayoungguy wrote: ↑Wed Jul 18, 2018 11:57 am

Philip wrote: ↑Sun Jul 15, 2018 5:24 pm To me, GAP theorists cherrypick Scripture out of context to support their theory. And just think of the monumental action God would have taken to completely destroy a supposed former world, yet without any explanation as to why! Note that every catastrophe that Scripture mentions God causes to the world or man is always explained with context, the reasons for it, and the resulting impact. And yet Abel asserts such an epic event happens from one verse to the next without any explanation and using other passages out of context to support it. And destroying a previous version of this earth teaming with living creatures without explanation - and not one prophet or apostle addresses anything but the flood of Noah. And yet Gappists place immense importance upon a supposed event the Bible never clearly says even happened, much less offers any explanations about it.

And if THIS earth has any connection at all to its supposed, former destroyed state, this would seem exceptionally important, and yet, referencing such an event without any explanation would be unique in all of Scripture. Scripture spends quite a bit talking about the early earth of today, the creations put into it, and its destruction in Noah's flood - but we're to be believe the earth's predecessor, its creatures, destruction and reasons for it are never explained??? These just make GT immediately suspect - and that is before the absurd Scriptural references trotted out to support it.

And what is really interesting is that Progressive Creationism easily explains both the fossil record and an ancient earth without having to resort to the highly dubious and creative uses of Scripture to support GT, or contradicting Scripture with evolutionary contentions. The idea that our only choice is between GT and evolution to explain the fossil record is totally absurd.

Like how the gappers will say the life in the old earth was different from that of now, though the evidence clearly says otherwise, but they'll ignore it. Not so scientific is that?

Looking at the fossil record we can see that it was a different world than this world we now live in is.The evidence proves the former world was a different kind of world than this world we now live in is and this is one way That Gap Theory destroys the theory of Evolution.Instead of using the fossils to prove evolution is true we take the very same fossil evidence and use them to prove the former world was a much different kind of world than this world is.This is what the fossil evidence proves,not evolution.We can actually see the kinds of life that lived in the former world eventhough some life was in the former world and this world also.We can also tell by the fossil evidence when the former world perished and the life changed to the kinds of life we have in this world also.It is taking the same evidence but looking at it from a former world perspective which confirrms this interpretation correct,despite the nay-sayers.

And it is known neanderthals are not related to man and neither are the hominids plus they are physically more like the hominids than man is.Man is much more unique from hominids,cro-magnon and even neanderthals but it is believed humans and neanderthals mated and so lived together at the same time,but it is an assumption.As scientists are divided about what even caused neanderthals to go extinct and yet man survived.A former world that perished is a better explanation based on the evidence.2nd Peter 3:5-6 notice the phrase "world at that time was destroyed"

Since neanderthals are more like the hominids and cro-magnon than man is I can place neanderthals in the former world that perished,then when God restored the earth in the 6 days of Genesis 1 he created man and woman for this world.This also proves Jeremiah 4:25 correct about there being no man and how it is a look back in time to the earth earth becoming without form and void as I've already explained. Jeremiah4:23-28.

I don't know why it was said in this thread that they are genetically related to humans because even evolutionists know they are not and this is why they look back further in the fossil record to Parasite Eve.It is because they realize hominids,cro-magnon,neanderthals,etc are not related to man and they are physically different than man is also.This is what we would expect with the Gap Theory also do not forget it was Gap Theorists who came up with the idea of Pre-Adamite races from bible study before they were even discovered.This gets overlooked and ignored for some reason.This is a proven Gap theory scientific prediction that confirms Gap Theorists correct.

Abel ignores why a supposed massive event as destroying an initial earth is done without stated reasons and obvious clarification - as he must desperately read meanings into other unrelated passages to support it. Meanwhile, scientists everywhere are laughing at supposed evidences for a former world. And he also ignored progressive creation as a Scriptural-based answer that doesn't need evolution or all of his Scriptural sleight of hand or bad science!

Philip wrote: ↑Fri Jul 20, 2018 5:30 am Abel ignores why a supposed massive event as destroying an initial earth is done without stated reasons and obvious clarification - as he must desperately read meanings into other unrelated passages to support it. Meanwhile, scientists everywhere are laughing at supposed evidences for a former world. And he also ignored progressive creation as a Scriptural-based answer that doesn't need evolution or all of his Scriptural sleight of hand or bad science!

That is because without evolution there isn't any real science model that explains all life. To refute it Abe has the GT, broken as it is and utterly unconvincing, but there it is. Sometimes I wonder if it's less about GT and more about refuting Evolution.

neo-x wrote: ↑Fri Jul 20, 2018 5:45 am That is because without evolution there isn't any real science model that explains all life.

Let me throw ACB a bone here...

I would acknowledge there is plausible scientific DNA and fossil evidence to support the premise of 'common descent'.

However, at every turn the processes of 'random mutation' and 'natural selection' have been demonstrated to be totally incapable of producing life as we know it today. And the starts and stops in the fossil record (particularly the Cambrian Explosion) also bear witness against the slow gradual processes presumed by Darwinism.

From my perspective, 'random mutation' and 'natural selection' alone are just as improbable (impossible) as the GAP theory when it comes to explaining what we see in the fossil record and in life today.

my .02

A Creator common to all species using the vast possibilities available from the DNA coding and genetics He created, using and deploying it uniquely and cross-functionally across millions of species, explains how they are related - as opposed to those obssessed with asserting common ancestors, as opposed to a common Creator! Abe, don't you realize progressive creation also defeats evolutionary assumptions, yet without conflicting with Scripture???!!! Not to mention, evolution does not answer why there was a moment in which nothing existed, a a mere second later, the building blocks that allowed and led to the very first simple organisms came into existence, yet many BILLIONS of years AFTER that first miraculous moment when the first existing physical things came into existence. So, even IF evolution was the mechanism for life spreading with such diversity, it can't explain the universe or it's beginning, or how the building blocks first came into existence LONG before the earth even existed. So, for non-theists - asserting evolution explains absolutely nothing about the existence of God, the universe, world, or how life is possible. So we shouldn't get sucked into pointless evolutionary arguments, as they are essentially meaningless!

Abe, don't you understand that defeating Godless evolution has to do with challenging those with such unshakeable faith in it to first be able to explain how the Big Bang was possible, and how What caused it had to be eternal and unfathomably intelligent and powerful? Because evolution, even IF it occurred, is a FAR secondary, totally dependent, and billions of years after the fact process that could only be explained by FIRST being able to explain a Big Bang without the power and intelligence of God. No First Cause, no evolution possible many billions of years later. No first things at the Big Bang, no eventual evolution, no NOTHING!!! You have been sucked into refuting the wrong thing that ultimately needs explaining, as THAT is the real thing that defeats Godless evolution even being possible - not some Scripturally and scientifically unsupportable belief in GT!

DBowling wrote: ↑Fri Jul 20, 2018 6:17 am

neo-x wrote: ↑Fri Jul 20, 2018 5:45 am That is because without evolution there isn't any real science model that explains all life.

Let me throw ACB a bone here...

I would acknowledge there is plausible scientific DNA and fossil evidence to support the premise of 'common descent'.

However, at every turn the processes of 'random mutation' and 'natural selection' have been demonstrated to be totally incapable of producing life as we know it today. And the starts and stops in the fossil record (particularly the Cambrian Explosion) also bear witness against the slow gradual processes presumed by Darwinism.

From my perspective, 'random mutation' and 'natural selection' alone are just as improbable (impossible) as the GAP theory when it comes to explaining what we see in the fossil record and in life today.

my .02

IMO, the Cambrian explosion can be understood if we take into account the rate of UV light that was hitting the earth at that time, with our atmosphere being different than it is today. Radiation like that can really boost mutation rates for all life forms. Hence, the rapid mutations might have led to rapid evolution.

neo-x wrote: ↑Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:29 pm

DBowling wrote: ↑Fri Jul 20, 2018 6:17 am

neo-x wrote: ↑Fri Jul 20, 2018 5:45 am That is because without evolution there isn't any real science model that explains all life.

However, at every turn the processes of 'random mutation' and 'natural selection' have been demonstrated to be totally incapable of producing life as we know it today. And the starts and stops in the fossil record (particularly the Cambrian Explosion) also bear witness against the slow gradual processes presumed by Darwinism.

From my perspective, 'random mutation' and 'natural selection' alone are just as improbable (impossible) as the GAP theory when it comes to explaining what we see in the fossil record and in life today.

IMO, the Cambrian explosion can be understood if we take into account the rate of UV light that was hitting the earth at that time, with our atmosphere being different than it is today. Radiation like that can really boost mutation rates for all life forms. Hence, the rapid mutations might have led to rapid evolution.

Here's my problem with that premise...
It is inconsistent with a key premise of Darwinian Evolution... rare, small changes over a long period of time.

The reason that Darwinian Evolution requires small changes over long periods of time is that rapid macromutations result in deformity, sterility, and death.
So natural selection would eliminate, not perpetuate, life forms that result from rapid macromutations.

The examples of Darwinian Evolution that we can observe do involve small changes over time, just like Darwin indicated. But we can also observe the impact of macromutations on life forms, and the result of macromutations is deformity and death, not survival of the fittest.

That is why the Cambrian Explosion was such a problem for Darwin. During the Cambrian Explosion, anatomically complex life forms suddenly appear without any preceding simpler life forms. And the rate of change we see in life forms during the Cambrian Explosion far exceeds the "rare and modest" changes that Darwin himself said were keys for Darwinian Evolution.

So I disagree that the Darwinian Evolution model comes anywhere close to explaining the complexity of life forms today and the rate of change that we observe in the fossil record.

The only model that I am aware of that can explain the complexity of life today and the changes that we observe in the fossil record is the Romans 1:19-20 model.

9 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

Of course, per GAP Theory, evolution is the wrong argument - again, showing evolution supposedly occurred does absolutely nothing for non-theists or those doubting the Bible.

But I'll bite about the Cambrian by quoting myself from several years back:

People don't realize how insanely narrow a period the earth went from having very simple form's to an astounding array of complex creatures. "Of the approximate 4.5 billion years the earth is theorized to be, that it was not until the earth was about 1.8 billion years old, before earth's first simple lifeforms were thought to exist. And until the earth was about 3.9 billion years old, the only lifeforms were mere simple cryptogamic colonies and primitive sponges, some jellyfish. Hugh Ross notes that for nearly 2 billion years, earth life had produced very simple organisms., and yet that, "in a time window narrower than 2 to 3 million years (possibly much briefer), some 40 or more phyla of complex animals appeared, including 24 or 25 of the 30 animal phyla that remain on earth today." So, the first life shows up, and never achieves more than very simple forms, and in less than 3 MILLION years, we also see "complete ecologies. Predator-prey relationships, for example, did not develop gradually. They were optimized right from the start of the Cambrian explosion" and "only five or six phyla have appeared during the past 540 million years, and about 15 have disappeared." Simply put, there was not enough time! Now, if one wants to assert GOD sped things up into hyper-evolutionary overdrive - fine. But pure naturalism and time cannot explain the Cambrian."

Philip wrote: ↑Fri Jul 20, 2018 5:30 am Abel ignores why a supposed massive event as destroying an initial earth is done without stated reasons and obvious clarification - as he must desperately read meanings into other unrelated passages to support it. Meanwhile, scientists everywhere are laughing at supposed evidences for a former world. And he also ignored progressive creation as a Scriptural-based answer that doesn't need evolution or all of his Scriptural sleight of hand or bad science!

Gap Theorists have stated reasons for destroying the earth 2nd Peter 3:5-6,Genesis 1:2. To make a long story short in the former world God tested angels and Lucifer and a third of the angels rebelled against God,while in this world God is testing man and is focused on man's relationship to himself.As you know both angels and man has free-will to obey God or not to and the angels were tested in the former world which led to the earth being destroyed.

How does Progessive Creationism destroy the theory of Evolution like the Gap Theory does once all of the evidence is put forth? Because I think you know that if we go through the fossil record as we would with the Gap Theory "a lost world" becomes more believable than the theory of evolution.

First off,I want the world to know and understand the true history of the earth instead of the scientific evolution crap we are taught as truth but I'm also tired of seeing Christians mocked and put down as scientific illiterates no matter if they are young earth creationists,Day Agers like Hugh Ross,Theistic Evolutionists like William Lane Craig,etc.The only way to stop this is to teach the true history of the earth from the bible the Gap theory while destroying the Theory of evolution at the same time. Then the bible will once again have proven man wrong about what he claimed was true.

Philip wrote: ↑Sat Jul 21, 2018 8:20 am Of course, per GAP Theory, evolution is the wrong argument - again, showing evolution supposedly occurred does absolutely nothing for non-theists or those doubting the Bible.

But I'll bite about the Cambrian by quoting myself from several years back:

People don't realize how insanely narrow a period the earth went from having very simple form's to an astounding array of complex creatures. "Of the approximate 4.5 billion years the earth is theorized to be, that it was not until the earth was about 1.8 billion years old, before earth's first simple lifeforms were thought to exist. And until the earth was about 3.9 billion years old, the only lifeforms were mere simple cryptogamic colonies and primitive sponges, some jellyfish. Hugh Ross notes that for nearly 2 billion years, earth life had produced very simple organisms., and yet that, "in a time window narrower than 2 to 3 million years (possibly much briefer), some 40 or more phyla of complex animals appeared, including 24 or 25 of the 30 animal phyla that remain on earth today." So, the first life shows up, and never achieves more than very simple forms, and in less than 3 MILLION years, we also see "complete ecologies. Predator-prey relationships, for example, did not develop gradually. They were optimized right from the start of the Cambrian explosion" and "only five or six phyla have appeared during the past 540 million years, and about 15 have disappeared." Simply put, there was not enough time! Now, if one wants to assert GOD sped things up into hyper-evolutionary overdrive - fine. But pure naturalism and time cannot explain the Cambrian."

Sorry bro,but all you're going to get from scienfiic minded people is mocked.They have heard it all before and when an atheist wants to know about science they'll shun Hugh Ross and instead look to Lawrence Krauss or Sean Carroll,etc.It is time to stop playing patty-cake with them and teach them the true history of the earth.I've told atheists many times that you can get the same science taught to you from Hugh Ross months before people like Lawrence Krauss even brings it up.Because Hugh Ross is constantly looking for new scientific findings while updating and yet they just mock him.They mock Hugh Ross almost as bad as they do Ken Ham and Kent Hovind.

DBowling wrote: ↑Fri Jul 20, 2018 6:17 am

neo-x wrote: ↑Fri Jul 20, 2018 5:45 am That is because without evolution there isn't any real science model that explains all life.

Let me throw ACB a bone here...

I would acknowledge there is plausible scientific DNA and fossil evidence to support the premise of 'common descent'.

However, at every turn the processes of 'random mutation' and 'natural selection' have been demonstrated to be totally incapable of producing life as we know it today. And the starts and stops in the fossil record (particularly the Cambrian Explosion) also bear witness against the slow gradual processes presumed by Darwinism.

From my perspective, 'random mutation' and 'natural selection' alone are just as improbable (impossible) as the GAP theory when it comes to explaining what we see in the fossil record and in life today.

my .02

Well thanks for the bone.You know we could go back and forth in circles arguing back and forth but we are just not going to agree.I appreciate your challenge to the Gap Theory and you taught me something which I always like to do.You taught me not to claim that because "bara" means new things not to claimGod never created them before which I was doing and instead just to point out it just means new things or new agenda and circumstances kindof like when there will be a new heaven and a new earth Revelation 21:1 when that world will be new and different from this world we now live in too,just like the former world was different than this world. Also three is a Godly number like the trinity,Jesus rose from the dead on the third day,etc so that three heavens and earths is biblical also.

But we are just not going to agree.I've tried to show you how this interpretation is true and yet the only thing that I realized is that you don't know what it means when the KJV,NASB,NIV,etc tells us God created the birds after their kind or according to their kind,dtc you just cannot realize how this implies these kinds of life had lived before and this is new life because of "bara" meaning new things. You just do not trust the NASB and NIV and most other translations of Genesis 1:25 and instead try to find one to say what you think it means.

Also I do not see how you can claim the world that was destroyed in 2nd Peter 3:6 is the world at that time of Noah and especially when Day Agers believe in a local flood.I do not see how you can claim the time between God creating man in Genesis 1:27 and Noah's flood was a world at that time because it was this world as Noah stepped on the ark in this world and stepped back off the ark after the flood in this world.This is one reason why I reject the bible theologions of today who claim this refers to Noah's flood and believe instead 2nd Peter 3:5-6 points is to Genesis 1:2 where the earth is in waters plural and the earth has to be formed out of these waters in order for God to make the earth habitable for life again. Based on 2nd Peter 3:5 where it tells us the earth is formed out of water this cannot be pointing us to Noah's flood because the earth was not formed out of waters in Noah's flood but in Genesis 1 because the earth is in waters plural. If we put 2nd Peter 3:5 together with Genesis 1:2 we know that the kosmos was flooded and the earth was in water.I know it hard to imagine but that it the case.This why God divides these waters on day 2 of Genesis 1.He must remove all of this water/This is why it says waters plural in Genesis 1:2.

This is where the whole debate really comes down to does 2nd Peter 3:5-6 point us to Genesis 1:2 or Noah's flood. I believe it points us to Genesis 1:2 and not Noah's flood.Because if it is pointing us to Genesis 1:2 we know that the world at that time that was destroyed 2nd Peter 3:6 existed before these waters the earth is in. Now we like to call it Lucifer's flood but even if we don't the earth is still in waters plural in Genesis 1:2.

If you think people will mock Hugh Ross with his science-based approach and appeal to published research and instead believe GAP is far more plausible - really, Abe, what planet do you really live on? Got a big list of scientists that support GAP? Nah, didn't think so!

Abe, you can't even change the minds of ANY of the Christians on this forum that DO believe in Creationism. And a good many of us have been studying this issues for many years - me for at least 30. We have people on this forum that have long studied Scripture and science, and yet you've not been able to convince one of them. And so you think you're going to convince NON-Christians of a former world - and that will help them to take the Bible seriously? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahooohoohoooyowieeeeeeee!

I heard of many people who have come to faith through Hugh Ross' writings. I've never known one person who did based upon learning about GAP. In fact, you're the only GAPPIST I've come across. And it was before advances in Bible scholarship and science had greatly advanced when the tiny few Bible scholars initially embraced GAP. Today, there is far more known about science, Scripture and Biblical Hebrew's strict rules of usage that are the collective reasons virtually no widely respected Bible scholar believes in it. You're simply wasting your time! Not to mention, you're setting up belief in evolution as unbelievers number one issue. While they might falsely believe it refutes God, YOU should know better that their REAL issue to be explained revolves around an event nearly 11 billion years before there was ANY life to evolve, at the Big Bang. Evolution arguments are pointless ones about entirely dependent and far-secondary processes that supposedly began LONG after what they really need to explain!

Philip wrote: ↑Sat Jul 21, 2018 12:43 pm If you think people will mock Hugh Ross with his science-based approach and appeal to published research and instead believe GAP is far more plausible - really, Abe, what planet do you really live on? Got a big list of scientists that support GAP? Nah, didn't think so!

Abe, you can't even change the minds of ANY of the Christians on this forum that DO believe in Creationism. And a good many of us have been studying this issues for many years - me for at least 30. We have people on this forum that have long studied Scripture and science, and yet you've not been able to convince one of them. And so you think you're going to convince NON-Christians of a former world - and that will help them to take the Bible seriously? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahooohoohoooyowieeeeeeee!

I heard of many people who have come to faith through Hugh Ross' writings. I've never known one person who did based upon learning about GAP. In fact, you're the only GAPPIST I've come across. And it was before advances in Bible scholarship and science had greatly advanced when the tiny few Bible scholars initially embraced GAP. Today, there is far more known about science, Scripture and Biblical Hebrew's strict rules of usage that are the collective reasons virtually no widely respected Bible scholar believes in it. You're simply wasting your time! Not to mention, you're setting up belief in evolution as unbelievers number one issue. While they might falsely believe it refutes God, YOU should know better that their REAL issue to be explained revolves around an event nearly 11 billion years before there was ANY life to evolve, at the Big Bang. Evolution arguments are pointless ones about entirely dependent and far-secondary processes that supposedly began LONG after what they really need to explain!

Yeah,well flat earth does not have a big list of scientists behind it and yet it is gaining in popularity.Like I said before people have not been exposed to the Gap Theory and how it destroys evolution.All they know about is Young Earth Creationism,Day Age old earth creationism - Hugh Ross,intelligent Design,Theistic Evoution,etc but not the Gap Theory.They have not even heard about Gap Creationism and if theu have they've picked up misinformation about it from critics.The truth of it has been suppressed and overlooked by the church.

You can't tell me that once people actually see debates between a knowledgable Gap Theorists and and evolutionists that once the evolutionist is destroyed by real evidence that proves a former world existed and was different than this world they will not come around to the Gap Theory.Nobody has seen this yet and so do not know,but once they do the Gap Theory will get the recognition it deserves. Evidence matters and the Gap Theory has evidence behind it to prove this interpretation is true unlike evolution.

I challenge anybody who rejects the theory of Evolution to just try a honest good attempt with the Gap Theory for 6 months against evolution instead of the others and see yourself how much more effective it is than Young Earth Creationism,Intelligent Design,etc is against evolution.If you don't see results like I have you can always go back to another one.

Abe: "Yeah,well flat earth does not have a big list of scientists behind it and yet it is gaining in popularity."

Well, you might be able to convince a flat-earther of anything - sheesh, Abe.

ACB wrote:
I challenge anybody who rejects the theory of Evolution to just try a honest good attempt with the Gap Theory for 6 months against evolution instead of the others and see yourself how much more effective it is than Young Earth Creationism,Intelligent Design,etc is against evolution.If you don't see results like I have you can always go back to another one.

If I try hard enough to convince myself of the Gap Theory, despite the overwhelming scientific evidence against it, and despite the fact that I can't make it fit into scripture, will I feel like I can win a debate against an evolutionist?

In other words, do I just ignore all the evidence, then debate, then convince myself that I won?

Is it that easy?