The Gap vs. New Creationism Propaganda

[Gr8grace]

although he deserved this,, I pray we can start over, and actually discuss it..

Nah, He didn't deserve it.My apologies to my brother.

 

[Dino246]

Like I said, you're attempt to turn this subject into a scientific argument shows you're not interested in learning what the Gap idea is actually about from God's Holy Writ. I don't play games of 'chicken' either (like "If you are unable to answer...").

No more than your avoidance of my question shows your unwillingness to consider sound scientific evidence or alternate interpretations of Scripture. How about you stop assuming my motivations, and I will stop assuming yours. Deal?

 

[Dino246]

please don't confuse what Darwin taught as being the end all understanding of how life evolves like I said deny humans evolve in the womb of a woman. That we go from being some kind of thing with a tail living in water in a shell to a full grown air breathing human that is evolution plain and simple it's creation. Just because Darwin had a idea of the origin of species doesn't mean it's true it was simply his idea and has nothing to do with the word evolution period in my view.

This sounds an awful lot like Ernst Haeckel's thoroughly-debunked recapitulation theory. While the definition of 'evolution' is simply 'change with respect to time', that is not the sense in which the word is used normally in any discussion of evolution vs. creation. To assume, or argue, that it is, is to commit the fallacy of equivocation.

 

[Tintin]

So Satan and 1/3 of God's angels rebelled while God was creating this world? Hardly.

All these verses signify Satan's rebellion was before the foundation of this present world:

Matt 25:34
34 Then shall the King say unto them on His right hand, Come, ye blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
KJV

Eph 1:4-5
4 According as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love:
5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will,
KJV

1 Peter 1:19-20
19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:
20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,
KJV

Rev 13:8
8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
KJV

Rev 17:8
8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.
KJV

Do you really have that difficult a problem with comprehension? I said, "Sometime between God declaring creation as "very good" and the serpent (Satan) tempting Eve in the garden of Eden." God only declared creation as "very good" once He had created Adam and Eve and creation was complete. So sometime between the completion of creation and Satan tempting Eve in the garden, Satan and his ilk fell from God's grace.

 

[Gr8grace]

No more than your avoidance of my question shows your unwillingness to consider sound scientific evidence or alternate interpretations of Scripture. How about you stop assuming my motivations, and I will stop assuming yours. Deal?

What is your question? It kinda all gets lost in the mix of everything.

 

[Tintin]

it depends on what you mean by 'old earth mythology'. If you mean older than 6,000 years you are wrong. Nowhere does the Bible teach that the earth is 6,000 year old.


Furthermore why should the death of animals (painless in itself) not occur because of Adam's sin.?

The death of animals is not painless and it did occur because of Adam's sin. So I'm not sure where you're getting that from. All of creation was cursed by Adam's sin.

 

[Gr8grace]

Do you really have that difficult a problem with comprehension? I said, "Sometime between God declaring creation as "very good" and the serpent (Satan) tempting Eve in the garden of Eden." God only declared creation as "very good" once He had created Adam and Eve and creation was complete. So sometime between the completion of creation and Satan tempting Eve in the garden, Satan and his ilk fell from God's grace.

Why didn't He declare it as Perfect?

 

[Tintin]

Why didn't He declare it as Perfect?

'Very good' means the same thing as 'perfect'. If creation was always affected by sin and its consequences, a good and holy and perfect God would not call it 'very good' or even 'good'. God doesn't mince words. He tells it like it is.

 

[Dino246]

What is your question? It kinda all gets lost in the mix of everything.

My question, post #3, was in response to part of the OP:

... Most likely its the Young Earth Creationists that are putting out that propaganda. Young Earth Creationism has some fanatical factions that proposes a theory that dinosaurs are still roaming the earth today. Why can't they just admit the fossil record evidence that God left us to know about instead of trying to create a false theory that God's creation is relatively new?

This was my question:

How does DNA, which by scientific study is estimated to last no longer than about 10,000 years, still exist in T.rex soft tissues which, according to oec and evolutionary propaganda, are about 65 million years old?

Although I believe DP's intent was to separate the gap theory from evolutionary theory (a valid distinction), he did so by attacking the young-earth creation view and asserting that its holders are purveying propaganda. My intent was to respond to his attack with a simple piece of scientific evidence. He has accused me more than once of trying to avoid what Scripture says and focus on science. I contest that he needs to deal with my question, given that it was posted before any of the scriptural content he has posted in support of his view.

 

[Gr8grace]

'Very good' means the same thing as 'perfect'. If creation was always affected by sin and its consequences, a good and holy and perfect God would not call it 'very good' or even 'good'. God doesn't mince words. He tells it like it is.

Can you show from scripture that "very good" means "perfect?"

It seem's the Hebrew language makes a distinction.

Gen 1:1 is the Qal perfect of created and Gen 1:7 is the Qal IMperfect of made or fashioned. Same with Vs 16.

Sure seems to indicate a distinction from "perfect" and "very good."

Maybe God refashioning something that was perfect at some point in time.

 

[Gr8grace]

My question, post #3, was in response to part of the OP:



This was my question:


Although I believe DP's intent was to separate the gap theory from evolutionary theory (a valid distinction), he did so by attacking the young-earth creation view and asserting that its holders are purveying propaganda. My intent was to respond to his attack with a simple piece of scientific evidence. He has accused me more than once of trying to avoid what Scripture says and focus on science. I contest that he needs to deal with my question, given that it was posted before any of the scriptural content he has posted in support of his view.

Mans science? I don't trust it. Scientific evidence says that Dinos are 65 million years old, yet the science saying that DNA only lasts 10,000 years is absolutely true?

 

[Tintin]

Can you show from scripture that "very good" means "perfect?"

It seem's the Hebrew language makes a distinction.

Gen 1:1 is the Qal perfect of created and Gen 1:7 is the Qal IMperfect of made or fashioned. Same with Vs 16.

Sure seems to indicate a distinction from "perfect" and "very good."

Maybe God refashioning something that was perfect at some point in time.

I've explained it elsewhere on CC, but it may just be easier to copy these two pages from a great book I've read about early Genesis, regarding this very subject.

"The Genesis Account" by Dr. Jonathan Sarfati. p.79-80

 

[Tintin]

And the second page.

 

[DP]

Scofield was an abuser of alcohol, emotional abuser to his wife and his own kids. He was a cheat and forger and spent time in federal prison for cheating, tax evasion and many other things. He was also a male chauvinist of his times.

It puzzles me that you hold to a theory and have no knowledge of where it came from....Start digging and you will find out how Chalmers and others used Jeremiah 4 and Psalm 104 and many other scriptures to deceive millions....

GAP Theory gives a theological frosting to the cake of natural science, so the carnal mind of a Christian can be appeased.

All of this is course but 'opinion', as you'll notice folks, eph610 does not address the Scriptures covered in this thread, but instead tries to attack using political agendas and smear tactics. It's truly funny too, since there's not even a small attempt to address the parts in God's Word that reveals Satan's rebellion was of old, which is when God destroyed the old world.

 

[DP]

Ok. Now I have heard of Scofield, and have read some of his stuff. But not much. I have been tempted to read more of Scofield, He gets such a bad rap he must of been pretty close to the truth.

How did Chalmers take Psalm 104 out of context?

Scofield was a protege of John Darby's Pre-tribulational Rapture theory, an idea that is nowhere written in God's Word.

But the Gap idea is written of in God's Word as I have shown. Folks like eph610 are blind; leave them alone and let the blind follow the blind.

 

[BeyondET]

This sounds an awful lot like Ernst Haeckel's thoroughly-debunked recapitulation theory. While the definition of 'evolution' is simply 'change with respect to time', that is not the sense in which the word is used normally in any discussion of evolution vs. creation. To assume, or argue, that it is, is to commit the fallacy of equivocation.

Sorry to bust your bubble but I'm not Ernst Haeckel and my words/post you high lighted are my own.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

From my studies EG, I don't see how the GAP idea can eliminate those scenerios? The GAP idea could go right along with both of those conclusions.

They could..I would not deny this, We may never know until we see Jesus and ask him..lol

That was not my point, Many of the things which required the "gap" are answered by the flood theory.. Thus Gap is no longer required. We are then free to study, and find out, Should genesis 1 be taken literally. Or should it be strewn out over millions of years..

Many in science claim the earth is billions of years old..

Why?

It would take that long for it to form, For the processes to take place. For the land to move from the "one continent" to the many continents we have today. For the fossil record to be what it is,, and it is proven by carbon dating which is based on the fact that

"all things are as they have been since the beginning" ie, the rate of decay is the same today as it was when the earth was first formed. because if the rate of decay is different in any aspect. the data is off..

and they use this "data" to prove there is no God.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

The death of animals is not painless and it did occur because of Adam's sin. So I'm not sure where you're getting that from. All of creation was cursed by Adam's sin.

wow I did not catch that,, Nice catch,

death of an animal is painless. To who? Maybe you and me,, Ever see a dogs eyes, and a dog scream in pain because of an injury or cancer..

They do not have a soul. But they do have pain..

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Why didn't He declare it as Perfect?

So we want to think God made anything that was not perfect?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Can you show from scripture that "very good" means "perfect?"

It seem's the Hebrew language makes a distinction.

Gen 1:1 is the Qal perfect of created and Gen 1:7 is the Qal IMperfect of made or fashioned. Same with Vs 16.

Sure seems to indicate a distinction from "perfect" and "very good."

Maybe God refashioning something that was perfect at some point in time.

I see it a different way.

Gen 1: 1, Is the completed action. God created the heavens and the earth.

The rest of the passage is a detailed vision or view of what God did to create those heavens and earth and all which is in them. So each things which God created was good, but was just a part of the whole.. yet was not the "whole" itself.

We actually have examples of this type declaration/explanation writting all through-out written history. so it shoud not come as a surprise God did it here..

this is what I did (declare) this is how I did it (explain)