Evidence for God from Science

DBowling wrote:Since we're still discussing the Gap Theory here... let me jump back in with a point that I brought up earlier.

The direct contradiction between the sequence of events claimed by the Gap Theory and the sequence of events explicitly presented by Scripture in Genesis 1.

DBowling wrote: There is no flood mentioned in Genesis 1:2. There is no world that was destroyed by a flood mentioned in Genesis 1:2. It's just not there in Scripture.
According to Scripture the earth was formed out of the waters after Genesis 1:2.
According to Scripture all plant life was created after Genesis 1:2
According to Scripture all animal life was created after Genesis 1:2
According to Scripture humans were created after Genesis 1:2.

There is no destruction of the world by a flood mentioned anywhere in Genesis 1:2. That assertion is an extraScriptural presupposition that has been invented to support a tradition.

The Gap Theory asserts that God made dry land appear before Genesis 1:2.
Scripture tells us that God made dry land appear after Genesis 1:2 (Genesis 1:9-10)

The Gap Theory asserts that God created vegetation before Genesis 1:2.
Scripture tells us that God created vegetation after Genesis 1:2. (Genesis 1:11-12)

The Gap Theory asserts that God created living creatures in the sea, air, and land before Genesis 1:2.
Scripture tells us that God created living creatures in the sea, air, and land after Genesis 1:2. (Genesis 1:20-25)

We have already discussed at length how the Gap Theory misrepresents what Peter says in 2 Peter 3:6, but I haven't seen any response yet to the direct contradiction between the sequence of events asserted by the Gap Theory and the sequence of events presented by Scripture in Genesis 1.

In Christ

You claim there was no flood mentioned in Genesis 1:2 and yet the earth is covered with waters and notice it is plural. The earth is flooded in Genesis 1:2. You overlook this and cannot accept the earth is flooded.

It is true Dake taught the earth in Genesis 1:1 meant dry land but we know based on bara that the heavens and earth were brand new in Genesis 1:1 And we know that God did not create the earth in a empty and waste state because of Isaiah 45:18 "For thus saith the LORD that created(bara-new)the heavens:God himself that formed the earth and made it(asah- work on something)he hath established it,he created it(bara-new)not in vain(waste),he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD;and there is none else."

So we know that when God created the earth in the beginning it was not in a empty and waist state like is in Genesis 1:2 but also it was inhabited from the beginning too.

The Gap Theory teaches God made every thing in Genesis 1 which means to do work on something that had already been created before and there are only certiam things God created in Genesis 1 and it was certian animals and man. God created certian animal after its kind but he also made certian animals after its kind and these are animals that were not new but had already been created before because the earth was inhabited from the beginning like I showed above.

Further more it makes God who can speak anything into existence to believe God created the earth in a empty and waste state and then decorated it look weak.When God creates it is always perfect like when Jesus healed the sick,cast out demons,turned water into wine,etc God does not create junk and then decorate it. The earth was perfect in the beginning and inhabited when he created it. See also Job 38:4-7 and notice all angels shouted for joy this would include Lucifer.

So we know judgment was poured out and this is why the earth is in the state its in in Genesis 1:2 in a empty and waste state and it was not like this before then,it was perfect and zircon crystals are confirming this true and is changing the scientific view that the earth was a molten lave hell in its beginning. zircon crystals are showing that water was on the earth from the beginning and this would confirm the Gap Theory interpretation.

If you need a link about zircon crystals? Let me know because I have several links about them and what they show and how it is changing what science believed before. Slowly more and more evidence is coming out which is confirming our Gap Theory interpretation.

Surely if its plural then it suggests there wasnt in fact a flood. There is something seperating the waters. So no flood. Merely the formation of land and our seas and oceans.

Storyteller wrote:Surely if its plural then it suggests there wasnt in fact a flood. There is something seperating the waters. So no flood. Merely the formation of land and our seas and oceans.

Just FYI, there is no singular Hebrew word for "water." The word is mayim, which is just the plural form. In Hebrew, the -im ending is sort of like our -s ending. That's how you make a word plural (in fact, there is actually a second kind of plural ending that just deals with pairs of things, which is what we have here, but that's not really important for you to worry about). But you couldn't take the -im off of mayim to talk about a singular water. That is, there is no Hebrew word may. The only word for "water" is mayim. In contrast, look at Gen 1:10, where it says God called the water the "seas" (plural). So the Hebrew word used for "seas" here is yamim. (You can see it here if you like. It's the one that looks like this: יַמִּים. To help you find it, remember that Hebrew is read right to left, and it's the last word (the furthest on the left) of the first Hebrew line you see--that line starts with the number 10). Those last two little marks, one that looks like a box and one that looks like a big apostrophe . . . those are the letters -im. The apostrophe looking thing is called a "yod" as makes (in this case) the "i" sound like in machine (if you look you'll see the same letter at the beginning of the word; there, it makes the "y" sound), and the square looking thing to the left of the yod is called a "mem" and makes the "m" sound. So the word Moses uses here is yamim, which is the plural form of yam. And the word yam is the singular word for "sea." But, again, you don't have that singular form for mayim. It just doesn't exist.

Two things that might help you see this a little clearer. First, check out this link. It's nothing special or scholarly. It's just the Strong's definition of the Hebrew word we're talking about. (Same thing I just linked to above.) You can see in the link that the word is mayim. Now, something you may not know is that when a Hebrew dictionary (really, any dictionary) defines a word, it uses what is technically called the "lexical form." In Hebrew dictionaries, the lexical form of a noun is in the singular. Therefore, if a word appears in a plural (or dual) form in a Hebrew dictionary (like Strong's), you know that there is no singular version of the word--that is, that the "plural" word just is singular. In fact, look back at Gen 1:10 I linked you to just above. If you look down in the verse, you'll see that the word yam IS in the singular form where each word is defined. And if you click the word yam (or just click here), you'll see that is an example of a word in the lexical, singular form (again, no im) ending.

Another way to see this is to look at other instances in which "water" is translated in the singular. Here's a link to several verses:

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen ... conc_18004
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen ... conc_21025
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen ... conc_24043
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen ... conc_49004

Once again, there is just no such thing as a plural form of "water." Therefore, any argument based on a plural form is incorrect. Hope this was a little helpful . . .

Jac3510 wrote:

Storyteller wrote:Surely if its plural then it suggests there wasnt in fact a flood. There is something seperating the waters. So no flood. Merely the formation of land and our seas and oceans.

Just FYI, there is no singular Hebrew word for "water." The word is mayim, which is just the plural form. In Hebrew, the -im ending is sort of like our -s ending. That's how you make a word plural (in fact, there is actually a second kind of plural ending that just deals with pairs of things, which is what we have here, but that's not really important for you to worry about). But you couldn't take the -im off of mayim to talk about a singular water. That is, there is no Hebrew word may. The only word for "water" is mayim. In contrast, look at Gen 1:10, where it says God called the water the "seas" (plural). So the Hebrew word used for "seas" here is yamim. (You can see it here if you like. It's the one that looks like this: יַמִּים. To help you find it, remember that Hebrew is read right to left, and it's the last word (the furthest on the left) of the first Hebrew line you see--that line starts with the number 10). Those last two little marks, one that looks like a box and one that looks like a big apostrophe . . . those are the letters -im. The apostrophe looking thing is called a "yod" as makes (in this case) the "i" sound like in machine (if you look you'll see the same letter at the beginning of the word; there, it makes the "y" sound), and the square looking thing to the left of the yod is called a "mem" and makes the "m" sound. So the word Moses uses here is yamim, which is the plural form of yam. And the word yam is the singular word for "sea." But, again, you don't have that singular form for mayim. It just doesn't exist.

Two things that might help you see this a little clearer. First, check out this link. It's nothing special or scholarly. It's just the Strong's definition of the Hebrew word we're talking about. (Same thing I just linked to above.) You can see in the link that the word is mayim. Now, something you may not know is that when a Hebrew dictionary (really, any dictionary) defines a word, it uses what is technically called the "lexical form." In Hebrew dictionaries, the lexical form of a noun is in the singular. Therefore, if a word appears in a plural (or dual) form in a Hebrew dictionary (like Strong's), you know that there is no singular version of the word--that is, that the "plural" word just is singular. In fact, look back at Gen 1:10 I linked you to just above. If you look down in the verse, you'll see that the word yam IS in the singular form where each word is defined. And if you click the word yam (or just click here), you'll see that is an example of a word in the lexical, singular form (again, no im) ending.

Another way to see this is to look at other instances in which "water" is translated in the singular. Here's a link to several verses:

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen ... conc_18004
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen ... conc_21025
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen ... conc_24043
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen ... conc_49004

Once again, there is just no such thing as a plural form of "water." Therefore, any argument based on a plural form is incorrect. Hope this was a little helpful . . .

Good point Jac but the earth still has water on it so we can say it was a flood.In this case you are right about plural however there are times when it is translated in the singular instead of plural,so the translater choosing to make it plural in Genesis 1:2 instead of singular reveals something to us.

Storyteller wrote:Surely if its plural then it suggests there wasnt in fact a flood. There is something seperating the waters. So no flood. Merely the formation of land and our seas and oceans.

When I think of waters in the plural I think of water that had been on the earth and water in the heavens also and I base it in 2nd Peter 3:4-7. If you disagree? I have no problem with it,alot of people disagree.This is just another biblical interpretation.

abelcainsbrother wrote:

DBowling wrote:Since we're still discussing the Gap Theory here... let me jump back in with a point that I brought up earlier.

The direct contradiction between the sequence of events claimed by the Gap Theory and the sequence of events explicitly presented by Scripture in Genesis 1.

DBowling wrote: There is no flood mentioned in Genesis 1:2. There is no world that was destroyed by a flood mentioned in Genesis 1:2. It's just not there in Scripture.
According to Scripture the earth was formed out of the waters after Genesis 1:2.
According to Scripture all plant life was created after Genesis 1:2
According to Scripture all animal life was created after Genesis 1:2
According to Scripture humans were created after Genesis 1:2.

There is no destruction of the world by a flood mentioned anywhere in Genesis 1:2. That assertion is an extraScriptural presupposition that has been invented to support a tradition.

The Gap Theory asserts that God made dry land appear before Genesis 1:2.
Scripture tells us that God made dry land appear after Genesis 1:2 (Genesis 1:9-10)

The Gap Theory asserts that God created vegetation before Genesis 1:2.
Scripture tells us that God created vegetation after Genesis 1:2. (Genesis 1:11-12)

The Gap Theory asserts that God created living creatures in the sea, air, and land before Genesis 1:2.
Scripture tells us that God created living creatures in the sea, air, and land after Genesis 1:2. (Genesis 1:20-25)

We have already discussed at length how the Gap Theory misrepresents what Peter says in 2 Peter 3:6, but I haven't seen any response yet to the direct contradiction between the sequence of events asserted by the Gap Theory and the sequence of events presented by Scripture in Genesis 1.

In Christ

You claim there was no flood mentioned in Genesis 1:2 and yet the earth is covered with waters and notice it is plural. The earth is flooded in Genesis 1:2. You overlook this and cannot accept the earth is flooded.

No... I'm not overlooking what you are asserting.

I am reading what you are asserting.
I am taking time to comprehend what you are asserting.
I am comparing what you are asserting with what Scripture states.
And then I am dismissing what you are asserting, because it is directly contradicted by Scripture.

So let's return to the direct contradiction between the Gap Theory and Scriptures that I mention above.

According to Genesis 1, when did God make dry land appear?
Does this take place before or after Genesis 1:2?

According to Genesis 1. when did God create vegetation?
Does this take place before or after Genesis 1:2?

According to Genesis 1, when did God create living creatures in the sea, air and land?
Does this take place before or after Genesis 1:2?

In Christ

ACB; the gap theory is borderline idolatry for you, if not there already. In most of your post/talks here, you always bring up Christianity and gap theory. Not Christianity and Jesus. Your focus is not Him and you waste so much time on something that was purposefully not revealed to us. Please take a look at all your previous posts, just skim them. See how you always promote the gap theory and not Jesus (even though I know you love Him). The message of the gospel is the kingdom that is coming, not how everything was created. Please let this go. If you don't want to let go of your beliefs of the gap theory, that's fine (even though I think you've hardened your own heart to see it's folly), but please let go of how important you think it is, and portray it being. Because it doesn't matter at all, and He would rather you focus your energy/time on relaying what we can know about Him.

DBowling wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:

DBowling wrote:Since we're still discussing the Gap Theory here... let me jump back in with a point that I brought up earlier.

The direct contradiction between the sequence of events claimed by the Gap Theory and the sequence of events explicitly presented by Scripture in Genesis 1.

DBowling wrote: There is no flood mentioned in Genesis 1:2. There is no world that was destroyed by a flood mentioned in Genesis 1:2. It's just not there in Scripture.
According to Scripture the earth was formed out of the waters after Genesis 1:2.
According to Scripture all plant life was created after Genesis 1:2
According to Scripture all animal life was created after Genesis 1:2
According to Scripture humans were created after Genesis 1:2.

There is no destruction of the world by a flood mentioned anywhere in Genesis 1:2. That assertion is an extraScriptural presupposition that has been invented to support a tradition.

The Gap Theory asserts that God made dry land appear before Genesis 1:2.
Scripture tells us that God made dry land appear after Genesis 1:2 (Genesis 1:9-10)

The Gap Theory asserts that God created vegetation before Genesis 1:2.
Scripture tells us that God created vegetation after Genesis 1:2. (Genesis 1:11-12)

The Gap Theory asserts that God created living creatures in the sea, air, and land before Genesis 1:2.
Scripture tells us that God created living creatures in the sea, air, and land after Genesis 1:2. (Genesis 1:20-25)

We have already discussed at length how the Gap Theory misrepresents what Peter says in 2 Peter 3:6, but I haven't seen any response yet to the direct contradiction between the sequence of events asserted by the Gap Theory and the sequence of events presented by Scripture in Genesis 1.

In Christ

You claim there was no flood mentioned in Genesis 1:2 and yet the earth is covered with waters and notice it is plural. The earth is flooded in Genesis 1:2. You overlook this and cannot accept the earth is flooded.

No... I'm not overlooking what you are asserting.

I am reading what you are asserting.
I am taking time to comprehend what you are asserting.
I am comparing what you are asserting with what Scripture states.
And then I am dismissing what you are asserting, because it is directly contradicted by Scripture.

So let's return to the direct contradiction between the Gap Theory and Scriptures that I mention above.

According to Genesis 1, when did God make dry land appear?
Does this take place before or after Genesis 1:2?

According to Genesis 1. when did God create vegetation?
Does this take place before or after Genesis 1:2?

According to Genesis 1, when did God create living creatures in the sea, air and land?
Does this take place before or after Genesis 1:2?

In Christ

God MADE dry land appear on the 3rd day.
God MADE vegetation on the third day.
God created on day 5 sea creatures,and every living creature that moveth,which the waters brought forth abundantly,after their kind.and every winged fowl after his kind:and God saw it was good." God created these but let's go into day 6 and you'll see God MADE animals -"And God MADE the beast of the field after his kind,and cattle after their kind,and everything that creepeth upon the earth after his kind:and God saw it was good.

Genesis 2:2-4 "And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had MADE;and he rested on the seventh day from all his word which he had MADE.
"And God blessed the seventh day,and sancified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which he CREATED and MADE."
"These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were CREATED,in the day that the LORD God MADE the EARTH and the HEAVENS."

It is important that we know the difference between created and made to understand Genesis 1 properly.Moses stressed this.

Mallz wrote:ACB; the gap theory is borderline idolatry for you, if not there already. In most of your post/talks here, you always bring up Christianity and gap theory. Not Christianity and Jesus. Your focus is not Him and you waste so much time on something that was purposefully not revealed to us. Please take a look at all your previous posts, just skim them. See how you always promote the gap theory and not Jesus (even though I know you love Him). The message of the gospel is the kingdom that is coming, not how everything was created. Please let this go. If you don't want to let go of your beliefs of the gap theory, that's fine (even though I think you've hardened your own heart to see it's folly), but please let go of how important you think it is, and portray it being. Because it doesn't matter at all, and He would rather you focus your energy/time on relaying what we can know about Him.

I'm just trying to help people understand why I believe it.We have different theories and interpretations and so I'm just trying to show why I believe it.The Gap Theory has actually increased my bible knowledge. If somebody was questioning or criticizing your interpretation for your creation view I would think you would try to show why you believe what you do biblically which is all I'm trying to do. These are the kinds of discussions I prefer on here because I learn new things from it even when/if we don't agree. You can learn new things from having these discussions about creationism. Are you saying I should let go of the Gap Theory because you think its idolatry for me? It's got to be biblically refuted first and I don't think it has been despite rejections to it that are anything but biblical reasons. I've pretty much been told to believe man over God's word.I'm just going as close as I can to what God's word says, to me.

ACB wrote:
I've pretty much been told to believe man over God's word.I'm just going as close as I can to what God's word says, to me.

This is particularly troubling to me.

You're saying that the Gap theory, one man made interpretation, is equal to God's word.

That's bordering on, if not outright cultic.

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Mallz wrote:ACB; the gap theory is borderline idolatry for you, if not there already. In most of your post/talks here, you always bring up Christianity and gap theory. Not Christianity and Jesus. Your focus is not Him and you waste so much time on something that was purposefully not revealed to us. Please take a look at all your previous posts, just skim them. See how you always promote the gap theory and not Jesus (even though I know you love Him). The message of the gospel is the kingdom that is coming, not how everything was created. Please let this go. If you don't want to let go of your beliefs of the gap theory, that's fine (even though I think you've hardened your own heart to see it's folly), but please let go of how important you think it is, and portray it being. Because it doesn't matter at all, and He would rather you focus your energy/time on relaying what we can know about Him.

I'm just trying to help people understand why I believe it.We have different theories and interpretations and so I'm just trying to show why I believe it.The Gap Theory has actually increased my bible knowledge. If somebody was questioning or criticizing your interpretation for your creation view I would think you would try to show why you believe what you do biblically which is all I'm trying to do. These are the kinds of discussions I prefer on here because I learn new things from it even when/if we don't agree. You can learn new things from having these discussions about creationism. Are you saying I should let go of the Gap Theory because you think its idolatry for me? It's got to be biblically refuted first and I don't think it has been despite rejections to it that are anything but biblical reasons. I've pretty much been told to believe man over God's word.I'm just going as close as I can to what God's word says, to me.

ACB?
I think most on here, if not all, know why you believe in the Gap Theory. You tell us often enough

Seriously though, you seem obsessed with this.
Even if you`re right and the Gap Theory is true, it`s pretty much all you talk about. Whatever creation theory we hold is not important, I really don`t think God cares which, if any, we believe in. It`s about Christ, not how it was all created, Christ is the most important thing here.
Being honest here, no one else seems to mention their creation stance as much as you do. Why are you so fixated on it? I understand you`re passionate about it but just imagine how much that passion could achieve if it was directed towards spreading the Gospel, talking about Christ with the passion you have for the Gap Theory.

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Mallz wrote:ACB; the gap theory is borderline idolatry for you, if not there already. In most of your post/talks here, you always bring up Christianity and gap theory. Not Christianity and Jesus. Your focus is not Him and you waste so much time on something that was purposefully not revealed to us. Please take a look at all your previous posts, just skim them. See how you always promote the gap theory and not Jesus (even though I know you love Him). The message of the gospel is the kingdom that is coming, not how everything was created. Please let this go. If you don't want to let go of your beliefs of the gap theory, that's fine (even though I think you've hardened your own heart to see it's folly), but please let go of how important you think it is, and portray it being. Because it doesn't matter at all, and He would rather you focus your energy/time on relaying what we can know about Him.

I'm just trying to help people understand why I believe it.We have different theories and interpretations and so I'm just trying to show why I believe it.The Gap Theory has actually increased my bible knowledge. If somebody was questioning or criticizing your interpretation for your creation view I would think you would try to show why you believe what you do biblically which is all I'm trying to do. These are the kinds of discussions I prefer on here because I learn new things from it even when/if we don't agree. You can learn new things from having these discussions about creationism. Are you saying I should let go of the Gap Theory because you think its idolatry for me? It's got to be biblically refuted first and I don't think it has been despite rejections to it that are anything but biblical reasons. I've pretty much been told to believe man over God's word.I'm just going as close as I can to what God's word says, to me.

Thing is though ACB, your interpretation of God`s Word could be wrong, in fact, has been shown several times why it is wrong. I`m not saying to believe man over God but it wouldn`t hurt to listen and be prepared that perhaps the many, many scholars that have studied this for well, who knows how long, but a while... they say the Gap Theory is wrong, it`s been shown to you time and time again.
Maybe, just maybe, God is using the posters here to reach you, to guide you.

Why is your creation stance so important to you?

It's interesting that ACB believes anyone who holds to a different creation stance than the Gap Theory, is taking man's word over God's word, even though no reputable biblical scholars today, accept the Gap theory.

It's not altogether different than certain dogmatic YECs who believe anyone who holds to a different creation position than YEC, are taking man's word over God's word. Despite the fact that no reputable scientists today, believe the earth and universe are 6,000-10,000 years old.

ACB,

Doesn't it bother you that your dogmatism regarding the Gap Theory rivals certain dogmatic YECs?

That you are beginning to be known here as the "Ken Ham" of Gap Theorists?

RickD wrote:It's interesting that ACB believes anyone who holds to a different creation stance than the Gap Theory, is taking man's word over God's word, even though no reputable biblical scholars today, accept the Gap theory.

It's not altogether different than certain dogmatic YECs who believe anyone who holds to a different creation position than YEC, are taking man's word over God's word. Despite the fact that no reputable scientists today, believe the earth and universe are 6,000-10,000 years old.

ACB,

Doesn't it bother you that your dogmatism regarding the Gap Theory rivals certain dogmatic YECs?

That you are beginning to be known here as the "Ken Ham" of Gap Theorists?

I don't see how you are saying that.I never said that.I said clearly nobody has 100% authority on their interpretation.I'm just trying to show why I think this interpretation is right biblically.I have'nt judged anybody. I'm the one who has been judged and yet I'm just trying to show why this interpretation is right.I have been told to believe man over God's word.

Storyteller wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Mallz wrote:ACB; the gap theory is borderline idolatry for you, if not there already. In most of your post/talks here, you always bring up Christianity and gap theory. Not Christianity and Jesus. Your focus is not Him and you waste so much time on something that was purposefully not revealed to us. Please take a look at all your previous posts, just skim them. See how you always promote the gap theory and not Jesus (even though I know you love Him). The message of the gospel is the kingdom that is coming, not how everything was created. Please let this go. If you don't want to let go of your beliefs of the gap theory, that's fine (even though I think you've hardened your own heart to see it's folly), but please let go of how important you think it is, and portray it being. Because it doesn't matter at all, and He would rather you focus your energy/time on relaying what we can know about Him.

I'm just trying to help people understand why I believe it.We have different theories and interpretations and so I'm just trying to show why I believe it.The Gap Theory has actually increased my bible knowledge. If somebody was questioning or criticizing your interpretation for your creation view I would think you would try to show why you believe what you do biblically which is all I'm trying to do. These are the kinds of discussions I prefer on here because I learn new things from it even when/if we don't agree. You can learn new things from having these discussions about creationism. Are you saying I should let go of the Gap Theory because you think its idolatry for me? It's got to be biblically refuted first and I don't think it has been despite rejections to it that are anything but biblical reasons. I've pretty much been told to believe man over God's word.I'm just going as close as I can to what God's word says, to me.

Thing is though ACB, your interpretation of God`s Word could be wrong, in fact, has been shown several times why it is wrong. I`m not saying to believe man over God but it wouldn`t hurt to listen and be prepared that perhaps the many, many scholars that have studied this for well, who knows how long, but a while... they say the Gap Theory is wrong, it`s been shown to you time and time again.
Maybe, just maybe, God is using the posters here to reach you, to guide you.

Why is your creation stance so important to you?

I know my interpretation can be wrong.But I disagree that it has been shown wrong.I have acknowledged that todays bible scholars reject it but I know that from about the 1800's up to about the 1970's the majority of bible scholars and Christians were either Gap Theory or Day Age.Many bible scholars believed and accepted this interpretation. YEC did not become popular until Henry Morris published "The Genesis Flood" in the early 1960's and he lobbied for YEC and it became popular from then but at that time most all Christians and bible scholars were either Gap theory or Day Age Creationists.