Despite objections,why the Gap Theory is true.

[neo-x]

I see Philip discussing you, only as far as referring to you believing in certain things he's disagreeing with.

I see you making the same mistake that BavarianWheels made, when I called him a judaizer.

I don't see any ad hom attacks by Philip. I see him holding your feet to the fire, with your views. You yourself even admit that your brand of evolution, doesn't jive with scripture. And the fact that you find it a personal attack when someone points out the inconsistencies, with your evolution beliefs, and scripture, may be more troubling than the inconsistencies themselves.

I hope you don't pull a Danieltwotwenty on us, and just get offended and walk away. I really respect you, and love you as a brother, even though we do disagree.

Rick, I appreciate your words and love you too as a brother. However this is not the same thing. Putting my views to the test is one thing, I can respect that as long as there is a merit to evaluate my views; show me why I am wrong, however dismissing my arguments because I question scripture, and turning every conversation into a debate about that is another. That is Intellectually dishonest, and poisoning the well. Its not the same thing.

And I am sorry if you see it like how you said above, I can't change what you see, I see it like I have described here.

[Philip]

Neo, you know that what I've attacked is what you believe and assert because it's contradictory - both logically and Biblically. Before, long ago, you were very upset at someone and you had stated you were leaving. And I was one of the few that begged you not to, and affirmed my concern for you. But it is absolutely false that I've attacked you on a personal level. When I asked you how the God of the Bible could have His described attributes and yet what you assert to be true about ANY process or created thing not being perfectly under His control, per His foreknowledge and sovereignty of all outcomes, or how anything could independently happen or even develop that would not be according to His wishes and plans - you've not addressed it. You have every right to your opinion and beliefs, but you should expect the criticism that comes with denying Scripture on a forum that takes it very seriously. And asserting that certain parts of the Bible can't be true as stated is not taking it seriously. You seem much more impressed with the failable knowledge of what man can know than with God's word - and that has to have some very serious implications for how you view God. Because God can't be GOD and there exist ANYTHING that is beyond His perfect control over all outcomes.

As for you, personally, Neo, I have great affection and so appreciate you being part of this forum. I would be very sad if you left - I certainly don't want that. But this forum is about rigorously examining statements and things asserted as truth, and we do so in light of Scripture. If Scripture isn't God-given and reliable - if IT is not our ultimate standard of deciding truth - then all we have are mostly pointless personal opinions and this forum is no more than a good place to argue our individual beliefs. We should ALL expect criticism of our contentions - and without taking it personally. We don't have to agree on our viewpoints to also care about each other. It is sad to me that you don't realize the difference. I would have responded to anyone on the forum in the same manner if they had contended the same sort of things you have. So, YOU have NOT been personally attacked, but I have attacked your assertions - HUGE difference!

[Philip]

Rick: I really respect you, and love you as a brother, even though we do disagree.

Of COURSE we love Neo around here - I sure do!

Perhaps he just needs a break for a bit. Hope he won't leave permanently.

[Byblos]

Im replying out of mutual respect for you Byb. Because of what you said. In very plain words, I haven't given up on theism. I believe in God and I also follow evidence to whatever conclusion it may lead. If that says the universe was not actively designed by God, so be it. I don't know where that puts me in terms of any label. You can read extensive posts I have made in the past or pm me if you have any questions about my position specifically. Happy to explain; but I am done defending myself instead of the argument, just to be attacked again every time I post.

My reason for leaving is how phil discusses me rather than the arguments and has been doing so endlessly. Yet somehow its alright. Just take this thread as an example# instead of refuting my point and showing how you can use the term evolution as in creation, which I contested, it was turned to how I don't believe this or that (again). Seriously? What does it matter what I think, It has zero bearing on the argument itself. If a murderer says murder is wrong do you discredit his argument because he's a murderer? Where is the logic in that?

And he had the audacity to call me thin skinned because I would not put up anymore with his disrespectful and insulting attitude - something I won't expect, of all people, a mod to carry out indefinitely, but here it is.

We can discuss this in private later, I am open to that. In the meantime, I would urge you to reconsider your decision. We can all learn from this and come to an understanding, if not agreement. Besides, you ought to see what Philip does to me when the subject of Mary comes up.

[RickD]

I see Philip discussing you, only as far as referring to you believing in certain things he's disagreeing with.

I see you making the same mistake that BavarianWheels made, when I called him a judaizer.

I don't see any ad hom attacks by Philip. I see him holding your feet to the fire, with your views. You yourself even admit that your brand of evolution, doesn't jive with scripture. And the fact that you find it a personal attack when someone points out the inconsistencies, with your evolution beliefs, and scripture, may be more troubling than the inconsistencies themselves.

I hope you don't pull a Danieltwotwenty on us, and just get offended and walk away. I really respect you, and love you as a brother, even though we do disagree.

Rick, I appreciate your words and love you too as a brother. However this is not the same thing. Putting my views to the test is one thing, I can respect that as long as there is a merit to evaluate my views; show me why I am wrong, however dismissing my arguments because I question scripture, and turning every conversation into a debate about that is another. That is Intellectually dishonest, and poisoning the well. Its not the same thing.

And I am sorry if you see it like how you said above, I can't change what you see, I see it like I have described here.

I just don't see it as anything but an attack on what you are putting forth as your beliefs. Something certainly must be amiss, when even Byblos the heretical catholic* sees something wrong.

I just don't see any personal attacks that you claim are happening.

*Just kidding not really kidding

[Philip]

Byblos: you ought to see what Philip does to me when the subject of Mary comes up.

??? Mary WHO???

Hey, and I love Byblos, too. He would have made a good philosophy and logic professor!

[Byblos]

I just don't see it as anything but an attack on what you are putting forth as your beliefs. Something certainly must be amiss, when even Byblos the heretical catholic* sees something wrong.

Hey, hey, mind your manners and your CAPS please. It's Heretical catholic.

[RickD]

I just don't see it as anything but an attack on what you are putting forth as your beliefs. Something certainly must be amiss, when even Byblos the heretical catholic* sees something wrong.

Hey, hey, mind your manners and your CAPS please. It's Heretical catholic.

My iPhone always capitalizes words that should be capitalized. I even tried to put a capital "C", but my iPhone corrected it back to lowercase. I think my iPhone is Protestant.

[thatkidakayoungguy]

I will say this, ACB. Just to point out, Neanderthal bodies ARE pretty close to some modern people.
Especially if you go Walmart.

[Davy]

Well, I have to commend ACB for trying to teach the Gap idea from God's Word. Some of his wordage might be misleading, but the core is very Biblical.

1. Try and find just when it was when Satan first rebelled against God, coveting His throne. The only Biblical evidence for when that was in parable form. So if the Bible student doesn't even understand that, then they certainly won't understand about the Gap.

2. The KJV translation of "without form, and void" is actually misunderstood. Man's scientific theories are immediately applied to that phrase when in the Hebrew (tohuw = without form) the meaning is most often about something originally in a good state going into ruin. Our Bible teachers jump immediately to man's theories of science, telling us it means God had not yet created the earth at this point, that the earth was formless, a nothingness state, like gaseous ether floating in space, which is how science explains the beginning of the origin of a planet.

3. The Jeremiah 4:23 repeat of the earth being "without form, and void" is disregarded by those against the Gap idea. The Jeremiah 4:23-28 is a version of the Genesis 1:2 event that shows the earth had gone into a waste state, God having destroyed a previous time.

4. In Jeremiah 4:28, God says the earth shall "mourn, and the heavens above be black" because of His destruction upon the earth in that time. He said He would not make a full end though. How does He mean the earth will mourn because of that old destruction?

5. In Romans 8, Apostle Paul explains that the 'creation' was placed in bondage of corruption (rendered "creature" in most of Rom.8, but is same Greek word as "creation" Paul used in a later Rom.8 verse).

Rom 8:19-21
19 For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.
20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,
21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
KJV

So when did God place the creation in bondage to corruption? I thought in the beginning God made a perfect creation that we still see today? That is what we have been taught, and even what the secular world believes, i.e., that today's condition of the earth is the 'original' one. It is not, and Paul showed it there in Rom.8 by revealing how the creation was placed in corruption seeked a release from it:

Rom 8:22
22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.
KJV

There's the connection to Jer.4:28 about the earth mourning, and the heavens above being black. What do black clouds show? They're rain clouds, full of water. Most of our violent storm weather is because the sun heating up the air on the ground and warm air rising to mix with cold air and thus cause the winds, storms, etc. We think that is a natural condition, and that God created the earth's weather system to be that way. He didn't, which is why at the end of Revelation He showed there will be no more sea. Where will all the waters on the earth go, since the oceans make almost 3/5ths of the earth's surface?

The reality is, that today's state of the earth is not... how God originally created it. It is not a perfect creation. Even the difference with carnivorous-like animals no longer attacking each other in His future new heavens and a new earth ought to be an eye opener to how His original perfect creation once was, before He placed the creation in bondage of corruption (Isaiah 11).