Evidence for God from Science

FL wrote:
It is Zyklon 36DD...you keep getting that wrong. And the saying is, Generations of Excellence... Do you have an attention deficit?

Sorry if I offended you kind alien sir. Not to make excuses, but the male of our species is known to be quite insensitive.

Attention deficit?

It's funny you should ask. If you were to ask the female of our species that I live with, she'd say my attention deficit is called, "Selective hearing".

And unfortunately, selective hearing is also restricted to only the male of our species. And selective hearing always manifests itself when the female of our species continues to endlessly ramble on opens her pie hole says anything she deems important.

Abel, IF Gap theory is true, why do you think NEXT to no theologians or Bible savvy Christians accept it? It is very curious that you and a few other obscure people have latched on to this. I mean, if you are going to go WAY out there as to your interpretation of Scripture, in an attempt to fit it to the known geologic and cosmological evidences, you might as well believe, not in the GAP Theory, but in the SPLICE Theory.

Many films are shot were portions of scenes are shot in the precise sequence of the script, but other individual parts are shot out of sequence, often due to logistics and costs. So, as God controls ALL things, all dimensions, and as time itself is but a tool to be used by God for His eternal purposes, could not He have moved portions of time around like a film editor once cut and spliced (which is done digitally, nowadays). The film editor would roll the film until there was a precise place he wanted to insert another portion of film, so as that a portion spliced in, though it was filmed subsequently, it was edited to APPEAR to the viewer that it was filmed first. What if God edited TIME sequences like the film editor inserts and cuts various film segments; He hit the Universe Pause button, edited, cut, pasted, etc See, SPLICE Theory might perfectly explain some currently inexplicable Scriptural sequences - or NOT.

Really, the silly points are that: God controls all, which means while ANYTHING is POSSIBLE (and thus might fit the available data), it doesn't necessarily doesn't mean it's the reality of what God actually did, or how He did it. You just can't credibly go cherrypicking obscurities inherent in the data (or various unknown parts of Scripture), and then just simply bend them to fit your cherished theory. So, while the Splice Theory would explain things, it doesn't follow that it is true. Same thing about Zyklon 36DD and the alien conspiracy stuff. In the modern era, with so much Scriptural/Theological scholarship being shared, around the world, the Gap Theory is literally like the "spiritual tree" that fell in the metaphorical woods.

Philip wrote:Abel, IF Gap theory is true, why do you think NEXT to no theologians or Bible savvy Christians accept it? It is very curious that you and a few other obscure people have latched on to this. I mean, if you are going to go WAY out there as to your interpretation of Scripture, in an attempt to fit it to the known geologic and cosmological evidences, you might as well believe, not in the GAP Theory, but in the SPLICE Theory.

Many films are shot were portions of scenes are shot in the precise sequence of the script, but other individual parts are shot out of sequence, often due to logistics and costs. So, as God controls ALL things, all dimensions, and as time itself is but a tool to be used by God for His eternal purposes, could not He have moved portions of time around like a film editor once cut and spliced (which is done digitally, nowadays). The film editor would roll the film until there was a precise place he wanted to insert another portion of film, so as that a portion spliced in, though it was filmed subsequently, it was edited to APPEAR to the viewer that it was filmed first. What if God edited TIME sequences like the film editor inserts and cuts various film segments; He hit the Universe Pause button, edited, cut, pasted, etc See, SPLICE Theory might perfectly explain some currently inexplicable Scriptural sequences - or NOT.

Really, the silly points are that: God controls all, which means while ANYTHING is POSSIBLE (and thus might fit the available data), it doesn't necessarily doesn't mean it's the reality of what God actually did, or how He did it. You just can't credibly go cherrypicking obscurities inherent in the data (or various unknown parts of Scripture), and then just simply bend them to fit your cherished theory. So, while the Splice Theory would explain things, it doesn't follow that it is true. Same thing about Zyklon 36DD and the alien conspiracy stuff. In the modern era, with so much Scriptural/Theological scholarship being shared, around the world, the Gap Theory is literally like the "spiritual tree" that fell in the metaphorical woods.

There are more popular creation stances that have a bigger platform to promote their creation stance and people have been saturated with them. If God's word tells us there was a former world why would you not want to find evidence for it? Especially when everybody is looking at the evidence in the earth from an evolution perspective?It is blinding us to the truth of God's word and is decieving alot of scientific minded people away from God and yet it seems you are willing to overlook it just because there are already more popular creation stances to choose from. But from a GapTheory perspective there is deception in the world about what the evidence in the earth confirms and it is confirmation that a former world perished so that God's word is proven correct again,if we could just get people to see the truth.

Instead of looking at everything in the earth from an evolution perspective we should instead be looking at it from a former world that perished perspective. It matters what the evidence in the earth reveals and it is not evolution despite them being given a pass.NO! The truth needs to be taught so that we can begin to look at the evidence from the proper perspective.

We Gap Theorists have God's word telling us a former world perished and we actually have the evidence in the earth to confirm it true and if we can get Christians to realize it themselves then we can win back those people who have been duped by evolution away from God and we can present the gospel to scientific minded people. We cannot expect scientific minded people to just realize they need Jesus when their mind has been decieved by evolution science,only a miracle from God can cause it to happen.

Meanwhile it would be so much easier to reach scientific minded people by showing them the bible teaches us a former world perished and the evidence in the earth confirms it true,and not evolution,because once they see evolution be destroyed then they will be more easily convinced they need Jesus.The veil can be removed from their eyes that is now blinding them to the truth.

I see no reason to not promote the Gap Theory just because there are Theistic evolutionists who might be effected.If the truth matters? It won't offend them.

2nd Peter 3:4-6 "Knowing this first,that there shall come in the last days scoffers,walking after their own lusts,And saying,Where is the promise of his coming?for since the fathers fell asleep/died ,all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.For this they willingly are ignorant of,that by the word of God the heavens were of old,and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was,being overflowed with water perished.

So we know all things have not continued as they were from the beginning of the creation that would be Genesis 1:1 regardless of your creation stance. We also know that the earth was actually out of and in water at one time and that this caused the former world to perish.

So we know from scripture there was a Gap somewhere since the beginning of the creation,we know all things have not gone on continually since the beginning of the creation like the scoffers in these last days say.Therefore there was a gap somewhere since the beginning of the creation.

Since it talks about the earth "out of and in the water" we realize the earth was not "out of and in the water" in Noah's flood like is claimed by others but also this world did not perish in Noah's flood,we know God spared this world so that Jesus would be born,so we know it cannot be talking about Noah's flood,yet we cannot just ignore what it says,so when was the earth "out of and in the water"? Genesis 1:2. This is not hard to figure out at all if you know what happened in Noah's flood.

SIGH...

Philip wrote: SIGH...

Why the sigh? I was just trying to explain to you based on what you said.So I just tried to give an explanation then try to back myself up with scripture so that it is not just me giving my opinion.I think that me and you differ about creationism and you seem to not really want to discuss the differences and issues that we face as Christians,while I do want to discuss the differences and issues we face as Christians when it comes to our views and why.

I know these are difficult issues and they can divide us if we are not careful,which is why I try to be respectful about this if/when it comes up. I believe we can discuss these things in a respectful way without being offensive and I try to do that.

I was really trying to help him understand from the time he first made this thread. I wanted him to know we do have evidence if he was referring to Gap creationism.I have come to realize that the Gap Theory is not going to get the recognition it deserves until people actually see how badly it defeats evolution in debates.Then it will change people's perceptions about it and it will get the recognition it is'nt getting now. Through the years we've all saw how the others have dealt with evolution but people have not seen how Gap Theory creationism defeats evolution and yet it is barely even known about.

If people ever get to see how it defeats evolution? Then the perception will change.I'm hoping to see this someday.This is the one area where Gap Theory creationism bothers me,because nobody has stepped up to the plate to promote it. But if they ever do?It won't matter what critics say then.People can only reject the truth for so long until it comes back around and confronts them head on.

Some brief thoughts on the relationship of the Gap Theory to the Original Post.

From the Original Post

It feels like there is so much evidence against the world-wide flood and a before flood world.

One of the issues the OP is struggling with is the apparent conflict between Scripture and Science regarding a Global Flood.

The YEC Tradition asserts that Noah's Flood was global in scope, which comes into direct conflict with the scientific geological evidence that there has never been a flood that covered and destroyed the whole planet.
This is why I directed the OP to the article:
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... flood.html
which demonstrates that Scripture does not claim that Noah's flood was global in scope.
This alleviates the alleged conflict the OP sees between Scripture and Science.

The Gap Theory has a similar problem.
Geological science contradicts the Tradition that Noah's Flood was global in scope.
Geological science also contradicts a Tradition of any pre-Adamic flood that was global in scope.

Even though geological science comes into direct conflict with any tradition that asserts a global flood.
Geology does agree with the statement of Peter in 2 Peter 3:5
"the earth was formed out of water and by water"
Geology tells us that the earth was originally covered with water and the continental land masses started appearing around 2.5 billion years ago.
This is consistent with what Peter says in 2 Peter 3. And it is also consistent with Genesis 1:9 in the Genesis Creation narrative.
"Then God said, “Let the waters below the heavens be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear”; and it was so."

2 Peter 3:6 tells us that "the world at that time" was destroyed by the flood. This is not a reference to the whole planet. This is a reference to the known world at the time of Noah... which was the land of Mesopotamia.

The bottom line is this. Traditions that assert a global flood may come into conflict with the findings of the geological sciences, but Scripture itself does not make any claims about a global flood.

In Christ

I think both of you guys have really good points and are both justified in your belief.

Hmmmm, did adam have a belly button?

winningedge101 wrote:When I pray I usually am scared of what to say I don't want to accidently say something stupid LOL.

After I came to Jesus, like you, I didn't know how to pray. I grew up in a place where we used every swear word in almost sentence we spoke. My first prayers were like that too....

Well. God didn't toss me over the cliff and leave me. He listened and even answered a few prayer too despites my language and when he did, I learned to no longer swear.

So just start talking to the Lord and don't worry do much. Jesus hires imperfect people so welcome aboard!
-
-
-

DBowling wrote:Some brief thoughts on the relationship of the Gap Theory to the Original Post.

From the Original Post

It feels like there is so much evidence against the world-wide flood and a before flood world.

One of the issues the OP is struggling with is the apparent conflict between Scripture and Science regarding a Global Flood.

The YEC Tradition asserts that Noah's Flood was global in scope, which comes into direct conflict with the scientific geological evidence that there has never been a flood that covered and destroyed the whole planet.
This is why I directed the OP to the article:
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... flood.html
which demonstrates that Scripture does not claim that Noah's flood was global in scope.
This alleviates the alleged conflict the OP sees between Scripture and Science.

The Gap Theory has a similar problem.
Geological science contradicts the Tradition that Noah's Flood was global in scope.
Geological science also contradicts a Tradition of any pre-Adamic flood that was global in scope.

Even though geological science comes into direct conflict with any tradition that asserts a global flood.
Geology does agree with the statement of Peter in 2 Peter 3:5
"the earth was formed out of water and by water"
Geology tells us that the earth was originally covered with water and the continental land masses started appearing around 2.5 billion years ago.
This is consistent with what Peter says in 2 Peter 3. And it is also consistent with Genesis 1:9 in the Genesis Creation narrative.
"Then God said, “Let the waters below the heavens be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear”; and it was so."

2 Peter 3:6 tells us that "the world at that time" was destroyed by the flood. This is not a reference to the whole planet. This is a reference to the known world at the time of Noah... which was the land of Mesopotamia.

The bottom line is this. Traditions that assert a global flood may come into conflict with the findings of the geological sciences, but Scripture itself does not make any claims about a global flood.

In Christ

The earth was formed out of water in Genesis 1 as you seem to have acknowledged and not Noah's flood like others overlook to claim this is talking about Noah's flood and it was formed out of the waters that caused the former world to perish,look at verse 6 therefore it is still pointing us to Genesis 1 when the earth was formed out of water.

I understand the position of a local flood for Noah's flood and a case can be made for it.However if on the other hand you interpret Noah's flood to be global it matters how you teach it happened and there are much better ways of explaining a global flood than has been done. Perhaps this is why people came up with the idea of a local flood,because based on how it has been taught I can understand the lack of evidence. I am tempted to go along with a local flood based on how Noah's flood has been taught to happen based on a global flood.

If there was a former world that perished in a flood I would expect to find evidence of death and exctinction and fossils that show the kinds of life that existed in it and we have this evidence in the earth. And since God made(asah) the firmament in this water and divided the waters on day 2 and placed water both above and below the firmament it might be hard to find evidence of a flood of the universe but we do know Mars used to have water on its surface,as a matter of fact it was atleast rivers of water that was once on Mars.So that when God divided the waters he removed water off of Mars also and we now see the evidence.However it still matters what God's word says regardless if we have evidence right now.

We know based on the evidence,the former world had totally different life in it,both plant life and animal life. It had for example trilobites from the Cambrian,had dinosaurs,Wooly Mammoths,Hominids and Neanderthals,etc. We can look at and examine the fossils and actually see the kinds of life that once lived in the former world.And we are taught today in these last days that all things have continued as they were since the beginning of the creation and so alot of people have bought into this, but I don't based on scripture,yet scoffers claim it has.

It is all how we interpret the evidence in the earth and we either go by evolution science or God's word. The evidence in the earth has been looked at all wrong and it has caused alot of us to believe all things have gone on continually for billions of years or even 6-10,000 years and it is because they believe life evolves and so life must always survive the exctinction events we hear about in science,but God's word says all things have not gone on continually since the beginning of the creation and when we see that Peter is referring us to Genesis 1 when the earth was formed out of the water that caused the former heavens(cosmos)and the earth to be flooded we know we must start from Genesis 1:2 because the earth is covered with waters,so we must start from there as we read the bible.

abelcainsbrother wrote: The earth was formed out of water in Genesis 1 as you seem to have acknowledged and not Noah's flood like others overlook to claim this is talking about Noah's flood and it was formed out of the waters that caused the former world to perish,look at verse 6 therefore it is still pointing us to Genesis 1 when the earth was formed out of water.

There are two Scriptural problems with denying that 2 Peter 3:6 is a reference to Noah's Flood.

1. The first is pretty straightforward. Peter is referring to the book of Genesis in 2 Peter 3:5-6. In 2 Peter 3:6 Peter refers to a flood that destroyed "the world at that time". There is only one flood mentioned in Genesis (or anywhere else in Scripture for that matter) that destroyed "the world at that time" and that is Noah's Flood described in Genesis 6-9.

The continuity between 2 Peter 3:5 and 6 is not the earth/world. We can tell this because two different words are used to describe the context. In 2 Peter 3:5 Peter uses the word 'ge' to describe the earth that was created "out of water" in Genesis 1:9. In 2 Peter 3:6 Peter uses the word 'kosmos' to describe the "world at that time" that was destroyed by Noah's Flood in Genesis 6-9. Two different words... two different contexts.

The continuity between between verses 5 and 6 is the water. In verse 5 the earth is formed out of water, and according to verse 6 "the world at the time" of Noah was destroyed by water as well.

2. There is a second Scriptural reason that we know that 2 Peter 3:6 is referring to Noah's Flood. In the larger scope of 2 Peter 3:3-9, Peter is drawing a correlation between the time of Noah's Flood and The Return of Jesus.

Jesus draws this same correlation between the time of Noah and the time of his return in Matthew 24:37-39. Peter isn't creating new doctrine here. Peter is passing on the teaching that he received from his Lord and master Jesus regarding Jesus' return and it's correlation to the time of Noah's Flood.

So... Peter's references to the book of Genesis and the teachings of Jesus both demonstrate the the flood that destroyed "the world at that time" in 2 Peter 3:6 is a reference to Noah's Flood.

In Christ

DBowling wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote: The earth was formed out of water in Genesis 1 as you seem to have acknowledged and not Noah's flood like others overlook to claim this is talking about Noah's flood and it was formed out of the waters that caused the former world to perish,look at verse 6 therefore it is still pointing us to Genesis 1 when the earth was formed out of water.

There are two Scriptural problems with denying that 2 Peter 3:6 is a reference to Noah's Flood.

1. The first is pretty straightforward. Peter is referring to the book of Genesis in 2 Peter 3:5-6. In 2 Peter 3:6 Peter refers to a flood that destroyed "world at that time". There is only one flood mentioned in Genesis (or anywhere else in Scripture for that matter) that destroyed "the world at that time" and that is Noah's Flood described in Genesis 6-9.

The continuity between 2 Peter 3:5 and 6 is not the earth/world. We can tell this because two different words are used to describe the context. In 2 Peter 3:5 Peter uses the word 'ge' to describe the earth that was created "out of water" in Genesis 1:9. In 2 Peter 3:6 Peter uses the word 'kosmos' to describe the "world at that time" that was destroyed by Noah's Flood in Genesis 6-9. Two different words... two different contexts.

The continuity between between verses 5 and 6 is the water. In verse 5 the earth is formed out of water, and according to verse 6 "the world at the time" of Noah was destroyed by water as well.

2. There is a second Scriptural reason that we know that 2 Peter 3:6 is referring to Noah's Flood. In the larger scope of 2 Peter 3:3-9, Peter is drawing a correlation between the time of Noah's Flood and The Return of Jesus.

Jesus draws this same correlation between the time of Noah and the time of his return in Matthew 24:37-39. Peter isn't creating new doctrine here. Peter is passing on the teaching that he received from his Lord and master Jesus regarding Jesus' return and it's correlation to the time of Noah's Flood.

So... Peter's references to the book of Genesis and the teachings of Jesus both demonstrate the the flood that destroyed "the world at that time" in 2 Peter 3:6 is a reference to Noah's Flood.

In Christ

First off let me say that this not be a reason to divide us as Christians. But I'm trying to understand how you claim 2nd Peter 3:5 is reffering to Genesis 1,then in 2nd Peter 3:6 claim these waters that flooded the heavens(cosmos)and the earth and that the earth was formed out of changes to Noah's flood somehow in verse 6. It might be hard for you to imagine the heavens(cosmos) and the earth was flooded that you seem to think is creating new doctrine.But it clearly tells us that the waters the EARTH was formed out of caused the WORLD at that time to be destroyed,and we know from the word heavens this is referring to the cosmos but also the EARTH.

And yet the earth is flooded in Genesis 1:2 that you think is creating new doctrine? In Genesis 1:2 the earth is covered with waters,then on day 2 God divides the waters and we see the earth is formed out of these waters. So I don't see how you can claim this is creating new doctrine.

This world was not destroyed in Noah's flood,so I don't understand why you claim it was,even if you somehow think that the waters God formed the earth out of in Genesis 1:1 were the waters that eventually flooded the earth in Noah's flood. For one the cosmos was not effected by Noah's flood like it was in the flood Peter describes,the sun was shining the whole time during Noah's flood,the stars also and only the earth was flooded.

It seems to me that because you can't conceive of a flood of the universe and you think there is no evidence then it is creating doctrine,but Peter used the word cosmos for a reason when the word heavens is used,and the heavens existed long ago and the earth also. Then it says in verse 7 "But by his word,the present heavens and earth are being reserved for fire,kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men."

This means there was a former heavens and earth that perished with water but the present heavens and earth will be destroyed by fire and since the heavens and earth were not effected in Noah's flood I don't see how you cannot see it is talking about a former heavens and earth and world that perished in water. I mean we do have a another flood in Genesis 1.

Also no Gap Theorist rejects Noah's flood as a matter of fact they believe it was global and not a local flood and I think they make a better case for it than YEC's have.We believe in Lucifer's flood and Noah's flood.Both floods that happened one totally destroyed the former world and one effected this world but did not destroy it so that Jesus would be born. God spared this world but not the former world Lucifer ruled over until he sinned.

Nessa wrote:Hmmmm, did adam have a belly button?

I don't believe Adam had a belly button because he had not been born.

abelcainsbrother wrote: First off let me say that this not be a reason to divide us as Christians.

Amen!

But I'm trying to understand how you claim 2nd Peter 3:5 is reffering to Genesis 1,then in 2nd Peter 3:6 claim these waters that flooded the heavens(cosmos)and the earth and that the earth was formed out of changes to Noah's flood somehow in verse 6. It might be hard for you to imagine the heavens(cosmos) and the earth was flooded that you seem to think is creating new doctrine.But it clearly tells us that the waters the EARTH was formed out of caused the WORLD at that time to be destroyed,and we know from the word heavens this is referring to the cosmos but also the EARTH.

Let's start by clarifying which Greek word refers to which English word in 2 Peter 3:5-6.

In 2 Peter 3:5
Greek ouranos = English heavens
Greek ge = English earth
In 2 Peter 3:6
Greek kosmos = English world

Neither myself or 2 Peter 3 is claiming that the heavens were flooded.
2 Peter 3:5 tells us 2 things
- By the word of the Lord the heavens (Greek ouranos) existed
- By the word of the Lord the earth (Greek ge) was formed out of water (Peter is referring to Genesis 1:9 here)

2 Peter 3:6 tells us that
- The 'world (Greek kosmos) at that time' was destroyed, being flooded by water (Peter is referring to Genesis 6-9 here and the known world at the time of Noah refers to the land of Mesopotamia)

And yet the earth is flooded in Genesis 1:2 that you think is creating new doctrine? In Genesis 1:2 the earth is covered with waters,then on day 2 God divides the waters and we see the earth is formed out of these waters. So I don't see how you can claim this is creating new doctrine.

The world is covered with water in Genesis 1:2. I think we both agree with that.

The 'new doctrine' I was referring to was the assertion that Peter was referring to a flood other than Noah's Flood in 2 Peter 3:6.
Peter is referring to the flood that is mentioned by the OT Scriptures in Genesis and in the teachings of Jesus.

This world was not destroyed in Noah's flood,so I don't understand why you claim it was

"The world at that time" (ie the land of Mesopotamia) was destroyed by Noah's Flood in Genesis 6-9.

It seems to me that because you can't conceive of a flood of the universe and you think there is no evidence then it is creating doctrine,but Peter used the word cosmos for a reason when the word heavens is used,and the heavens existed long ago and the earth also.

Peter doesn't claim that the heavens (ouranos) were flooded.
The reason I don't think the universe was flooded is because Scripture never claims it was.

Peter used the work kosmos because that is the Greek word for world.
And Peter qualified his use of the word world/cosmos with the phrase "at that time" to indicate that the world that he was talking about was the known world at the time of Noah, which we know today as the land of Mesopotamia.

This means there was a former heavens and earth that perished with water but the present heavens and earth will be destroyed by fire and since the heavens and earth were not effected in Niah's flood I don't see how you cannot see it is talking about a former heavens and earth and world that perished in water.

In 2 Peter 3:3-9 Peter is talking about the same thing that Jesus was talking about in Matthew 24:37-39.
Genesis never says anything about the heavens and earth perishing in water.
Jesus never says anything about the heavens and earth perishing in water.
And nowhere in 2 Peter 3 does Peter claim that the heavens and earth perished by water.

The thing that was destroyed by water in 2 Peter 3:6 was the known world at the time of Noah.

In Christ