GAP Creationism VS YEC & OEC Creationism

[Wiccan_Child]

I already explained that God repopulates the earth with a remenant of what was here before. That could be as few as 10% but there are scriptures where God brings one third through the fire and two thirds are cut off or destroyed.

So when the Bible says God created this or that on a particular day, what actually happened was that God created these things on an earlier day? When, exactly, where fruit-bearing trees created?

Did you read the article by Schroeder at: Age of the Universe He can explain it all a lot better then I can.

To summarise that article: Genesis is to be read metaphorically and with extensive exegesis, and that the time-line of Genesis is from the perspective of someone on the lip of an enormous gravitational well, at the bottom of which is our universe. There are further grandiose claims, such as multiplying six days by one million million, and positing that as the age of the universe.

"When you add up the Six Days, you get the age of the universe at 15 and 3/4 billion years. The same as modern cosmology. Is it by chance?" - No, because the numbers are skewed and twisted to fit science. Despite the premise of not bending the Bible to science, that's exactly what he's done.

An interesting article, but hardly convincing evidence that the Hebrew Bible had accurate data on the age of the universe in its grammar.

 

[Split Rock]

You want to know WHY I reject Evolution? Because it is anti God.

Science is agnostic toward God, it is not anti-God.

Well, let me put it this way. There is a lot of truth and error mixed together. So I reject the error, even though there is truth there.

Unfortunately, you are in no position to determine which parts are truth and which parts are error. You just think you are. Just like you think you understand genetics, when you clearly do not.

It's simple. When Science contradicts the Bible then Science is wrong, it is as simple as that. When Science Supports what the Bible says, then Science finally got it right.

Sounds a lot like AVET's "Boolean Standards." Nice to see you at least are honest enough to bring it out in front in center of your argument like he does. However, you fail to appreciate that what you are really saying is: "When Science contradicts my interpretation of the Bible then Science is wrong, it is as simple as that. When Science Supports what my interpretation of the Bible says, then Science finally got it right." AVET does the same thing.

Was it not science that give us modern warfare? Do you think it is good that man uses science to kill all those people. Even children and babies with their arms and legs blown off? So clearly Science can be just as evil as they are good. At times they can mix truth and error, good and evil together into one.

Science is not good or evil. It can be used by people for either purpose, however. That is irrelevent, however, to whether it is correct or not.

Right now Science can not contradict or falisify anything in the Bible. There is lot and lots and lots in the Bible that Science can prove to be true. So that is the way it is right now.

Science can contradict or falsify certain interpretations of scripture that make falsifiable claims. Standard YEC, for example, is rife with them.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Oh how convienent. Men are going to be men, so it does not matter that Science can up the anti and give them the ability to wipe out the whole world with the push of a button. How about if we have this conversation in about 20 years after the bombs have been droped to see how you feel about it then.

When the bombs are dropepd in God's name, how will you feel?

Science gives men the ability to kill each other; religion -- specifically the arrogant belief that "my god is better than yours" -- has always given the desire.

 

[Split Rock]

so you have no literal evolution of genera to show? If species can evolve into another species then one genus should evolve into another genus no problem so show me.

Here you go:

Triticale Triticale - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For the most part, evolution of genera (as with all higher taxa) is inferred by the physical evidence, and occurs via speciation, rather than a jump from an old genera directly to a new genera. All this is "literal" enough, however.

 

[createdtoworship]

Here you go:

Triticale Triticale - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For the most part, evolution of genera (as with all higher taxa) is inferred by the physical evidence, and occurs via speciation, rather than a jump from an old genera directly to a new genera. All this is "literal" enough, however.

you can graft all kinds of different genus together with other genus' but thats not evolution thats man made.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

you can graft all kinds of different genus together with other genus' but thats not evolution thats man made.

The point is that the hybrid has evolved so much that it's not just a new species, it's a genera of species. Species X that speciates into X1, X2, X3, etc, no longer exists: there is no Species X, but rather Genus X. It's advanced up the taxonomic ladder.

 

[Split Rock]

you can graft all kinds of different genus together with other genus' but thats not evolution thats man made.

So, we can do it, but nature cannot? I thought it was that God can do it but Man cannot? Can you explain Triticale then? How is it that man can do what you guys have always claimed only God can do? Is it possible for nature to do the same?

 

[TheReasoner]

you can graft all kinds of different genus together with other genus' but thats not evolution thats man made.

Umm. Sorry, but there are various ways which can lead to DNA from one species being taken up - and expressed - by another. Viri, transfection, cunjugation... We just take the methods nature already uses and apply them for our own purposes.

So.. Sorry. You're wrong.

 

[Jazer]

So when the Bible says God created this or that on a particular day, what actually happened was that God created these things on an earlier day? When, exactly, where fruit-bearing trees created?

I saw a little video once of what happened at the end of the last ice age. As the ice & snow melted the level of the ocean went up 300 feet. So you had land appearing and land disappearing all at the same time. We know from the theory of evolution that God uses a seed from what was here before to repopulate the ruined earth. Yet this was a time of mass extinction because a lot of the large animals did not make the adjustment and they did not survive. Yet some of the life on plant earth remained to repopulate the earth.

 

[Jazer]

When the bombs are dropepd in God's name, how will you feel?

I do not like war. I hate it. How do you feel about wars and people killing each other? Did you go to war? Did you fight your battles or get involved in some way?

Science gives men the ability to kill each other; religion -- specifically the arrogant belief that "my god is better than yours" -- has always given the desire. [/quote]You think that it is because of religion that mankind is going to destory itself? This is brother against brother in the middle east. These people have identical DNA. This is Cain and Able all over again.

 

[roach]

We know from the theory of evolution that God uses a seed from what was here before to repopulate the ruined earth. Yet this was a time of mass extinction because a lot of the large animals did not make the adjustment and they did not survive. Yet some of the life on plant earth remained to repopulate the earth.

I don't see where evolution says or implies "god used a seed" anywhere.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I saw a little video once of what happened at the end of the last ice age. As the ice & snow melted the level of the ocean went up 300 feet. So you had land appearing and land disappearing all at the same time. We know from the theory of evolution that God uses a seed from what was here before to repopulate the ruined earth. Yet this was a time of mass extinction because a lot of the large animals did not make the adjustment and they did not survive. Yet some of the life on plant earth remained to repopulate the earth.

That doesn't answer my question. When, exactly, were fruit-bearing trees created? Where, in Genesis 1, is there any indication that God is restoring? It explicitly states that all winged fowl were created on the Fifth Day (~9,000 years ago, give or take) - is Genesis is wrong when it says 'created'? Nothing fantastically interesting happens in the avian fossil record 9,000 years ago (give or take), there is no genetic bottleneck, so there is no evidence that birds were 'restored' - there's nothing in either science or the Bible that suggests birds were reconstructed.

Your assertion was that Genesis and GAP are consistent with science, but I've seen nothing in your analysis that corroborates this. Your chronology does not square with science at all.

 

[Nathan Poe]

I do not like war. I hate it. How do you feel about wars and people killing each other?

Read the Old Testament sometime -- war is God's favorite hobby.

You think that it is because of religion that mankind is going to destory itself? This is brother against brother in the middle east. These people have identical DNA. This is Cain and Able all over again.

Thank you for proving my point with a religious metaphor -- as you may or may not recall, Cain killed Abel because of religious jealousy; God accepted Abel's offering, but not Cain's.

Interesting how even in your own mythology, the very first murder was done to get closer to God.

 

[Jazer]

Cain killed Abel because of religious jealousy; God accepted Abel's offering, but not Cain's.

So what about the people that do not believe in religion but believe in having a relationship with God. I believe the atonement was two fold. Jesus died to reconcile us with the father, but also to reconcile us with each other.

 

[Jazer]

Cain killed Abel because of religious jealousy; God accepted Abel's offering, but not Cain's.

So what about the people that do not believe in religion but believe in having a relationship with God. I believe the atonement was two fold. Jesus died to reconcile us with the father, but also to reconcile us with each other.

 

[AV1611VET]

God accepted Abel's offering, but not Cain's.

You might want to go back and read that again, professor; hang the Arab phone up first, though.

 

[Jazer]

I don't see where evolution says or implies "god used a seed" anywhere.

That is how it works. The tree makes seeds and the wind blows the seeds to a new location.
How do you think trees grow where there use to be ice?

 

[createdtoworship]

Umm. Sorry, but there are various ways which can lead to DNA from one species being taken up - and expressed - by another. Viri, transfection, cunjugation... We just take the methods nature already uses and apply them for our own purposes.

So.. Sorry. You're wrong.

we need examples of this in nature without the affect of man. AND that is not sterile

 

[Jazer]

I don't see where evolution says or implies "god used a seed" anywhere.

So what do you think it means to repopulate the earth?

 

[roach]

That is how it works. The tree makes seeds and the wind blows the seeds to a new location.
How do you think trees grow where there use to be ice?

Are you being serious? Seriously. I can't tell... am I supposed to be offended?

I'm pointing out that your interpretation of the theory of evolution is incorrect, and that evolution does not posit anything supernatural, and you talk about trees growing where ice USED to be? Really?

If you are serious, you really need to explain how god fits into your understanding of evolution much more succinctly. Otherwise, your efforts to have your opinions and ideas be understood by others will always result in inane arguments such as this one.