Ok you appear to agree with radiometric dating methods. So why would using radiometric dating of the spreading sea floor agree with the measurements based on GPS if only the GPS method is flawed? You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
And if the earth is expanding there should be the same magnetic reversals recorded at all of the plate edges, but they are only seen where the plates are moving apart, not together. Why is that?
Most militant atheists would agree that science and religion are incompatible.
All measurements are relative.
No physics constants are visible in cosmic history (which we see as it happened). The ones physicist claim are based on the medieval, Catholic notion that matter is NOT changing with age.
We can tell which seafloor is older, but there is no way to date it.
Why no magnetic reversals at the margins of the abyssal depths? According to our Early ancestors, the Earth periodically had a “great year” when cataclysmic events happened during close planet encounters. It was during those cataclysms that the mountains chains arose. Indeed, two great circles of mountain ranges circle the Earth (the mountain arcs have the their centers on the great circles). This suggests many of Earth mountains formed during the cataclysms. Other evidence are bone brecias packed with millions of broken bones from all kinds of marine and terrestrial animals in drainage valleys or caves. The early Greeks described what we might call tidal tsunamis during those close encounters.
The plates do not move together or dive under Each other. There are no scarps, volcanic vents, scrapped off sea mounts whether the plates are said to subduct. Millions of cubic kilometers of scrapped off sea oozes are missing where a plate allegedly dives under another one into molten interior of the Earth without a shred of visible evidence. Why can’t scientists simply accept the visible evidence that the Earth keeps growing (which agrees with the biblical text).
Their entire scientific system, even their physics definitions, even their mathematical methods and operationally defined measuring units were contrived on the assumption that the properties of matter are fixed, not emerging. Yet we can see the past. Not a single ancient galaxy clocks the frequencies of modern atoms. The father away, the more the matter is different from modern matter. Even yesterdays atomic clocks, when compared to their own reflections through the transponders of four spinning spacecraft also accelerate their clocks in the same way as the atoms in hundreds of billions of galaxies. Change and science are fundamentally different worldviews.
Victor
Both YEC and OEC try to understand creation and Earth history with Western science. Changing Earth Creation (CEC) is not against the evidence for a very ancient Earth and universe. (The bible contains about 500 eon words, both in Greek and Hebrew. Many of these words refer to the Old Testament era. ZFor eample, Jesus came at the terminus of the plural eons. God commanded the plural eons to passively form as lights appeared from things not seen etc).
The problem is the medieval metaphysic that matter is not changing itself with age. In a universe where everything is changing in an orderly together way (see the Greek text for Romans 8:19-22) even days and years keep changing their durations.
How? 1. Visibly, the properties of all matter shift their fundamental properties throughout cosmic history.
2. Since the orbits visibly accelerate outwards (in violation of every principle and law of physics) we can surmise that gravity is what emerges from matter as it keeps shifting its clock frequencies.
3. Since the Sun pulls more on the dawn than the sunset (gravity has an aberration) this steadily accelerates days and years together throughout Earth history. This is why Job lived for vast geological ages in few days as he grew thick Neanderthal brows before he died (see Job 14). It also pushes all planets into logarithmically space orbits, orbits that never close but gradually open outwards. Indeed, solar planets, major moons, exoplanets and the arms of spiral galaxies have logarithmic spacings, evidence for continual incremental changes, not constants.
You might say, if our orbit moves away from the Sun, we would freeze. The early Sun was infrared and small. We orbited and rotated slowly close to this ancient Sun. Today’s Sun is bigger and UV. What changes? Everything changes. Friar Thomas was wrong. The properties of matter are emergent.
A God who manages a changing universe, (with laws of physics that regulate fundamental change) while preserving life on our planet, is vastly greater than the Catholic God who made everything fixed, even time.
Victor
But the spectrum of star light that was emitted 13 billion years ago is just the same as the spectrum of sun light that was emitted 8 seconds ago. The spectrum is determined by the fundamental laws of nature which you say are constantly changing. Oh wait, I forgot, you say the speed of light is infinite as opposed to being the constant 186,000 miles / sec which is the same yesterday and today (and I suppose tomorrow).
Oh really? The ring of volcanos that mark the major subduction zoness are not really there? Ever hear of “the ring of fire?” Talk about not being willing to see the evidence that is right before your face.
I don’t know which two you are referring to, but given that there are an infinite number of possible great circles it wouldn’t be surprising that you could find a mountain range that appears to lie on one. Of course given a line has zero width you have a lot of latitude when you go to match a rather large mountain range to the zero width line. In fact my office chair is located exactly on two (or more) great circles. So what does that mean?
And yet that system seems to work very well. Except for disagreeing with your interpretation of Genesis you have yet to give any proof that ALL, and I do mean ALL of science is wrong. And yet I bet you live your life every day using the assumption that science has got it right.
The spectra of ancient starlight is NEVER the same as the spectra of local atoms. In general, the farther the galaxy, the slower the spectral frequencies. The earliest atoms shine at much less than 10% of the frequencies of modern atoms. Even local atomic clocks, when compared to their own reflections from yesterday, also show a frequency shift in the same direction and ~“distance rate” as the atoms in countless galaxies.
However, science was founded on a metaphysical assumption. What assumption? The one the Bible predicted for the last days: that all things remain the same (2 Peter 3:3-6). Since starlight from long ago always violates their fundamentalist premise, scientists adjust the evidence to fit their assumptions. This is not a minor data tweak. The vacuum of space time (something never detected in any experiment) stretches passing light (something also never observed in any experiment) to prevent what is visible from being so. Scientists are fulfilling Peter’s prophesy. They must obfuscate because they have a law like first principle, upon which science was constructed.
How do we know that scientific stories of beginnings are false? We can see cosmic history at many ranges in billions of examples. Galaxies grew from things not seen (see Hebrew 11:3). Stars became spreading things, exactly as God commanded them beginning on day four. Matter’s volume is observed to increase, its atomic clocks also increase as the star streams accelerate outward . Hosts of stars grew into spreading things (Hebrew noun raqiya) exactly as in the biblical creation account.
By the way, the “ring of fire” is hundreds of miles from the supposed subduction zones. The geologist S. Warren Carey refutes the theory of subduction with simple visible evidence.
Changing Earth Creation is not like Young Earth or Old Earth creation. We try to interpret the biblical creation texts with grammar, instead of science. We also try to use the changing worldview of the biblical authors instead of the Western system. Change and science are fundamentally different worldviews.
Victor
Mountains can uplift in many places. For example, the longest range of mountains runs for 70,000 kilometers along the global expansion seam that runs through every ocean. The expansion seam divides into triple joints to split off into different oceans. Thousands of independent seamounts exist in the Pacific basin that are not connected in belts. However, look up orogenic belts on google. Two orogenic belts exist on the Earth. The Alpine-Himalayan belt starts in Europe and runs all the way to New Zealand. The Circum-Pacific orogenic belt starts at the tip of South America and runs up to Alaska and down through China where it intersects with the Alpine-Himalayan belt. The mountains on these orogenic belts lie on arcs whose centers are great circles. The ancient Greeks mentioned that mountains uplifted during close planet encounters and list kings who reigned when these happened.
Science works locally and in nearby times BECAUSE it has a first principle. Almost everything physicists measure were contrived with the Dominican idea that matter is not changing itself. A first principle is the basis for the entire structure.
However, the same principle that works so well locally results in nonsense when it comes to Earth and cosmic history. Why? The properties of matter are always observed to shift throughout cosmic history. The clocks accelerate along with the outward accelerating orbits. Since that is a violation fo the scientific first principle, which they learn by implication (doing practice problems) they must adjust the whole universe.
A tiny bit of vacuum exploded and created everything out of nothing. The big bang is a myth invented to protect their basic creed. Stars and planets gravitated together from the dust of the explosion. That is a myth. Six times as much invisible matter exists as the natural kind. That is a myth needed because no galactic orbit follows the laws of physics. 70% of all processes in the universe involve the vacuum of space time pulling more invisible energy out of the vacuum to accelerate the stretching of the vacuum. Even their laws of physics cannot explain how stars can gravitate from dust without invoking magic. Why do they invent such incredible myths? Because they were trained since children in Western schools to follow Friar Thomas’ metaphysics.
Only the literal Creation text explains the visible way billions of galaxies formed. This is why you can be sure that the Creator will triumph over science with his words.
Victor
You have a reference for that? It is news to me.
In context 2 Peter 3:3-6 is talking about the scoffers who were saying the Lord was not going to return. Tack on verse 7 and see what you get. How do you go from “Where is the promise of his coming?” to matter is constantly changing?
Please don’t use “atomic clocks” again if you are going to continue to refuse to define what that term means.
Hundreds of miles compared to the thousands of miles that define the ring. That is pretty much spot on for a planetary wide system.
You mean like this quote, “Formation of an orogen is accomplished in part by the tectonic processes of subduction (where a continent rides forcefully over an oceanic plate (noncollisional orogens)) or convergence of two or more continents (collisional orogens).” Kind of goes against what you are saying about subduction not existing.
I am not seeing the arcs. The Himalayans are in a sort of arc shape, but the Alps are shaped like a fishhook, the Andes are serpentine and the New Zealand mountains are pretty much a straight line. Can you give me the lat/longs for all of these arcs? BTW, Google Earth is your friend.
So gravity is now “magic?”
You need to read up on the big bang. It wasn’t vacuum that exploded. It was space/time that was created, just like it says in Genesis 1:1.
Peter says the first thing to know, the most important, is that mockers will come. They ask where is the promise of his coming, so clearly they do not believe in Jesus or in creation. The phrase arche ktisis is mistranslated. In the context it means a first law.Jesus said that the arche ktisis was that a man should leave his mother and father and cling to his wife. At that point their were no children or mothers and fathers. the context is about laws, not the beginning of creation. He is talking about the first law of reasoning in the last days.
The idea is panta houtos diamenei: that all things remain the same. This prophesy has come true. Western science was built on this assumption, that matter is not changing itself in an orderly together way. Paul used two orderly arrangement verbs in Romans 8:19 - 22 and two together verbs to describe how the creation is enslaved to change. Origen, who was a native Greek speaker, interpreted this as matter changing qualitatively. Peter wrote that gold is reflexively corrupting itself (1 Peter 1:7). The first law of the last days is this notion that matter today is intrinsically the same as it was yesterday. Every atomic light clock in the universe runs at a different speed than modern atoms clock. What is visible violates the first law of the last days.
Notice the two areas where the mockers obfuscate the evidence. He uses the phrase ouranoi ek palai, the plural heavens came out long ago. Indeed, we observe in billions of examples how the galaxies formed as streams of stars emerge and spread out from primordial matter in the core of galaxies. Why is this anathema to a scientist? Because their empiricism and mathematical methods depend on the notion that matter is not changing itself, changing relationally, changing as it ages.
Then Peter explains the water history of our planet. The waters used to stand with the land. In Genesis we read of a single land with rivers that divided and flowed around the land. We read of multiple seas that were gathered into one place. How can you gather multiple seas into one place? Evidently the surface waters seeped underground into the tehom, the subcrustal seas, so that the dry appeared. Indeed, the continents fit together on a minuscule globe without any of the modern oceans, one land, no rain. Later, in Noah’s 600’s years the waters that stood with the land, collapsed (the tehom of the great deep). This is the water that destroyed the ancient world. Then the modern seas began to spread out to accept the surface waters in Noah’s 601st years (see Psalm 104).
Both of the things Peter warned about are happening today. Scientists talk about how stars accreted and galaxies collided. The opposite is visible. They spread out from tiny clumps of primordial matter. Galaxies gradually become spreading things (noun raqiya) as we read of beginning on day four.
We find hundreds of feet of chalk and limestone, made of the bodies of sea creatures, on the continents, not in the modern oceans. Over these calk layers, we often find surface rocks with terrestrial fossils. What happened? The seas that stood with the land collapsed during the cataclysm. Later the modern oceans keep forming as the Earth keeps growing, exactly as the text tells us.
When I was a child, I was taught to think like a philosopher. My Christian teachers Westernized me. My little mind did not know how to think like a biblical prophet. Philosophy and the elementary principles of the World had taken me captive (Col 2:8). It tried to fit the Creation account into the western concepts of time and immutable matter. It was not until I sought to interpret the text with grammar and the ancient world view that I became a changing Earth creationist. This is not some new idea. It is just thinking like the ancients did, before the philosophers tried to invent science.
Victor
You have me very confused. You say the current continents have always existed as they are. It is the oceans that grow as the earth expands. Is that correct? If that is the case then when were the continents under the oceans for the extremely long periods of time needed to generate these chalk and limestone layers? After these layers formed they must have been raised to above sea level to be covered with terrestrial fossils. How were they raised if the continents don’t move? And if you look at the Grand Canyon you can see clear evidence that that area has been under and above the ocean several times. Where does this fit? I mentioned the Nile River Canyon which you ignored. How do you fit that into your earth history?
In the discussion of Dialogue vs Debate we need to add a third category, Monologue. As this is clearly all Victor wishes to do I am going to drop this.
This is pretty much the observation that i made earlier in this thread. While he has made a bit of a token gesture towards addressing it, he still seems to be talking at us rather than with us. He needs to try and be more succinct and to the point in his answers, and to ask questions of his own, if nothing else to ascertain whether we have understood him.
However, there is something else that I’ve noticed here that I think is causing some confusion. I get the impression that some people think that Victor is preaching some flavour of common or garden YEC here – certainly, some of the answers to him that I’ve seen read as if he were. However, this doesn’t seem to me to be his position. While he is denying science as the YECs do, the bits of science that he’s denying are recognisably different, as too are the theories that he’s proposing in their place.
@godsriddle Victor, to clear this one up, how old do you believe the earth to be? And what is your take on evolution and common ancestry? And to what extent have you been influenced by Answers in Genesis, the Institute for Creation Research, creation.com, Henry Morris’s writings etc?
I do not interpret geology with Henry Morris’ system, that fossils were laid down mostly in the flood. There is no common ancestry. There is only change within the kinds. God commanded ALL the animals to change with a passive continuing in unbroken continuity curse (Genesis 3). I do not fully agree with the Bible exegesis or geological / fossil interpretation of any of the creation groups. Yet I do count the age of the Earth with biblical genealogies and my count is in thousands of years not billions
How can this be? I try to understand the universe with the grammar and worldview of the biblical prophets: change instead of time. All who try to understand creation and Earth history are fundamentalists. They define what they imagine is evidence and interpret it with elementary principles. You cannot understand how to interpret evidence with a contrary principle unless: (1) You first confront your own first principle and its historical importance to the western way of thinking. (2) You must, at least temporarily, put yourself in the shoes of the ancient person, looking at the world from their worldview. A Moses contemporary would not have understood Genesis 1 with the assumptions of a scientists (e.g. interpreting the text with time ideas). If one starts with change, instead of the Dominican idea that matter is NOT changing itself, you will find yourself in the shoes of a contemporary of the prophets.
The Bible plainly and repeatedly states that the world is ancient. Not one verse in the Bible states that it is young. Jesus made (aorist unspecified when or for how long) the plural eons (Hebrews 1:2). Since this verse does not fit the Catholic notion of time, translators substitute “world” instead of the Greek word for eons. He commanded the plural eons to form as lights appeared from things not seen (Hebrew 11:3). Jesus came at the terminus of the eons, so evidently the Old Testament era is the eons. Habakukkuk 3:6 says the mountains are (ad) ancient and the hills are (olam) eons old. Jacob called the hills olam, so they were evidently already ancient about 4,000 years ago. There were no mountains when Adam met Eve ~6,000 years ago. Genesis 2 says dessert plants (grasses of the field) did not exist in that era. Why? Water came out of the ground and watered the face of the Earth without rain. Isaiah 44:24 says God actively continues in unbroken continuity to: (1) make all things (2) to stretch out the plural heavens (3) to spread out the earth. Isaiah 40:22 says he actively and in unbroken continuity continues to spread out the plural heavens like a tent. (Notice he is not stretching out the singular vacuum of space. He uses the plural word for heavens.) We confirm the words of the bible in the visible history of how the galaxies formed. They started out tiny, without starry arms. Trillions of globs, packed densely with tiny stars, came out from the unformed state of matter in the core of billions of ancient galaxies. The star globs spread out, often into local, dusty growth spirals. Clearly and visibly, the universe is very ancient, exactly as the Bible states.
From the Western perspective it makes no sense to say that mountains or galaxies are ancient yet the world is less than 6,000 years old. Why is this? Our language focuses on time. Almost every sentence mentions time in the form of verb tenses. Biblical Hebrew HAD NO VERB TENSES OR WORDS FOR TIME. They only used timing words like new moon or eons. Even Koine Greek was an aspectual language where verbs explain how things change without referencing time, per se. Catholic philosophers theologians taught the concept of time in Europe for over a thousand years, so it has become part of our worldview. At least in the last 300 years, time is said to be linear, that orbits are fixed and clock-like.
Orbits visibly accelerate in cosmic history, which we see (as it happened) to the creation era. The star streams do not close on themselves like a Keplerian orbit. Instead they spread out, open out, accelerate out. (The optical parallax to the Sun and planets has decreased for 2,000 years, even since the they defined the AU canonically with clocks and radar). That makes no sense to a scientists who tries to understand everything with the Thomasian notion that matter is not changing itself. This is why they tell incredible stories about black holes, invisible matter, accretion, colliding galaxies etc. Only the LITERAL biblical creation is visible. God continues to command the lights in the plural heavens to become spreading things (noun raqiya).
The Earth has only circled the Sun about 6,000 times. Yet we are as old as the galaxies. Ancient years endured vast geological changes, as Job describes, as their faces grew Neanderthal features from age. Before Noah’s 600th year, the Earth had rings of ice around it (Proverbs 8:28). Days and years continually accelerate (Genesis 47:9). An forest would mature and die forming layers of coal in one year. (The Ruhr valley in Germany has hundreds of coal beds thousands of meters deep, separated by sandy layers with water fossils). However, we were a smaller planet and orbited slowly around an infrared Sun at close range. Remember that the ancients painted the sky tan (not blue) and the Sun red as they walked around without hats or shirts in the blazing sun.
To embrace the biblical concept that everything is changing (Romans 8:19-22) is like taking the biggest slice with Occam’s razor. The scientific stories of beginnings evaporate into untenable myths once you recognize that everything is changing in an orderly together (relational) way. Relational change is real, unlike relativity which is only one’s perspective.
Victor
http://godsriddle.com/
@godsriddle, Victor:
You are the only person I know who really deserves my “5th Dynasty of Egyptian Pharoahs” discussion.
Most YEC’s estimate of the time of the Great Flood puts the flood after the 1st Dynasty of Egypt. And there is zero, nada, nothing in the Egyptian writings about a great flood that wiped out their entire culture.
Your view of the Bible chronology is impossible.
Now you’re really confusing me. You’re the first person I’ve come across who is both a young-earth creationist and an old-earth creationist at the same time.
Or are you saying that the age of the earth is another example of Schrödinger’s Cat?
Change is the principle, not time. I advocate the position of Changing Earth Creationists, not Young or Old Earthers. There is no such thing as time. Look on the way orbits accelerate throughout the vast history of the universe. The earliest galaxies are tiny and without star stream arms. At closer ranges we observe how the arms of galaxies spiral out, accelerate out in defiance of Kepler and Newton. Visibly, the orbits and the light clocks accelerate together. This is why, just a few thousand years ago, the Earth orbited an infrared sun and the planets sometimes passed disastrously close to Earth. Our ancestors, in that era, lived for geological ages as thew grew thick Neanderthal brows during the dinosaur era (see Job 14). Every thing in the whole universe is observed to change, just like the Apostle Paul explained. Change and time are diametrically opposite ways of understanding nature.
Victor
The Egyptians were descendants of Noah’s son Ham. Modern biblical chronologists try to interpret the genealogies and king lists with the concept of linear years. For example they try to align a particular observation of SIrus on some date with modern mathematical ephemeris. These never work because orbits are always accelerating. We can see the past at many ranges. Galactic orbits incrementally accelerate outwards as the galaxy intrinsically grows into a huge, growth spiral. The optical parallax to the Sun and planets has continued to decrease over the last 2000 + years.
Both the Egyptians and the Babylonians told stories of the great watery planet that shattered evidently in a collision with a moon of Jupiter. The Bible also mentions at least two close passages and the planet shattering four times. These could not happen if Kepler and Newton are right.
The Early Egyptians, like the Babylonians, looked back with longing on their early ancestors, who they believed lived for eons. The Sumerian king lists estimate what that meant relative to later years. The first of their kings supposedly reigned for 30,000 + years. Like Jacob in the Bible,(Genesis 47:9), they thought days and years keep getting shorter for later generations. They did not imagine a year was linear or it was a measurement of time. A year was adjusted to fit the changes observed in nature.
As you well know, the Egyptians did eventually develop a calendar with fixed number of days but it was not for measuring time. The seasons cycled through this calendar. However, it was useful for counting the number of days between eclipse observations. Claudius Ptolemy used it in the Almagest for this purpose. If he had tried to determine the number of days between two eclipses with a Babylonian calendar, he would have had to read hundreds of astronomical diaries and keep a running sum of the number of days in each month to find the average number of days in a lunation. The Egyptians used other variable calendars tied to nature’s changes, such as the heliacle rise of Sothis that happened when the river flooded.
Victor
I have to save this one to the folder in which I’m collecting “bizarre claims made on the internet”. It has become like a zoo of interesting species. Soon I will be able to make a multi-million-dollar enterprise in which people receive a tour through the most extraordinary views expressed on the internet:
“Now, if we look to the right, we see a very rare view called “Changing Earth Creationism”. Proponents are difficult to find in the wild, but some say you can lure them to your web page using blog posts on the book of Genesis.”
Sorry for the satire Victor, I trust you can handle a joke 
.
Bizarre means strange or unusual, unconventional, unorthodox. Biblical creation is unusual and unconventional. In our day, Creation is doubly unusual because most scientists claim there is no evidence.
My claim stands.
We Christians should interpret the literal creation account with grammar instead of longstanding Catholic traditions.
We must use the evidence the biblical God points to in Isaiah: this is the evidence for what I do. He commands us in the imperative to lift up our eyes and see what he does in unbroken continuity, calling the stars to continually come out. Trillions of star streams emerged and spread out from point-like galactic cores which violates every definition and law of Western science.
If we interpret this simple, non mathematical evidences with the worldview of the biblical authors, change instead of science, we find overwhelming visible support for the creation. We also see how God will triumph over the wise of this age, as he predicts that he will (I Corinthians 1).
Why would God want to defeat Western science? What is in it for him? Glory! The praise and honor of those simple folk who believed his word and put their faith in Jesus’ death for our sins. The last will be first and the first will be last. He is taking the wise of this age (1 Cor 3:18-20) with their skills. He warns us to accept foolishness rather than the wisdom of this age so that we do not deceive ourselves. Notice that he is not a deceiver. He made the universe exactly like he said. It is science that using the medieval assumptions upon which it was contrived: time and immutable matter to measure synthetic unreal things.
How will the Bible triumph over science? Bigger and more sensitive telescopes are coming on line every year. Statistical evidence from the XHUDF (Wide Field Camera 3 that observes from near infrared to near UV) suggest that a minimum of 5 trillion galaxies exist.
Scientists, however try to interpret this with their mathematical empiricism, rather than optics. This has resulted in the greatest mythology in human history: scientific ad hoc stories about how the universe began. Only the LITERAL biblical text supports the visible creation of the universe.
Victor
What does the biblical text actually say about animals changing?
(1) In Genesis 3 he cursed all the animals with a passive (continuing in unbroken continuity) curse. All the animals are to passively change. Previously, he commanded them to reproduce after their kinds. Animals don’t change into other kinds. Change happens to all animals, the serpent more than the others. However, God did not cause the changes since the curse is passive voice. In a similar manner, God cursed the ground with a passive continuing in unbroken continuity curse. He did not create the thorns and thistles, they passively sprang out of the ground because of Adam’s disobedience. All animals change passively for the worse. This is the opposite of evolution since it is degenerative.
(2) God himself continues to change nature as he explains in Job 38 - 40. He is loving to all he made. For example, in Job he talks of the mountain goat. Mountain goats have special adaptations for climbing up almost vertical cliffs. God gave them these since creation because there were no mountains in the early Earth (Genesis 2). God says he feeds the lions and the ravens, carnivores and omnivores. (Job 38). Yet these animals were fruit eaters in the garden phase. Countless genetic and lifestyle changes are needed to change a herbivore into a carnivore. God claims it was He who did these. In Job 38-41, God claims He changes many things in the world of physics and among the animals, since creation. Change that preserves life we should ascribe to God, not to random mutations that degrade all living things. (By the way, carnivores were needed when the world was no longer covered with thick vegetation. Now the herbivore eat the vegetation and the carnivores eat the herbivores and this allows for twice as much life as plants alone could support).
By the way, Job 14 is one of the best places in the Bible to understand how our ancestors lived long ago. Job says man who is born of woman is of few days. A tree can die, its roots parched in the ground. However, at the scent of water it sends up shoots and lives again. But man, when he dies will not rise until the resurrection. Job says I will wait until my change comes. You will call and I will answer. He expects that with his own eyes he will see his redeemer.
Then Job lists what it was like when dinosaurs wallowed in the Jordan river. He uses the dried Mediterranean sea (Hebrew word west) as one of his markers for a lifetime. Indeed, drill cores show that the Med dried repeatedly leaving thick layers of plankton oozes sandwiched between layers of salt and gypsum. (Scientists claim the last Med drying was five million years ago. Biblical Job was a distant descendant of Noah. Another of Job’s lifetime markers was that water wears away stones and washes away the dust of the Earth. Near Job’s home, the Nile river wore a canyon into granite deeper than the Grand Canyon. Evidently the water was rushing down to the mostly evaporated Mediterranean. (A channel at Gibraltar shows how the Med refilled from the young Atlantic). Job also states that water washes away the dust of the Earth. The Nile completely filled up its canyon and covered it with a great delta after the Med filled up again. Job ends his poem on the brevity of life by claiming their faces intensely changed in unbroken continuity before they died (verse 20). If you lived long enough to watch the Mediterranean dry, to watch vast, slow geological changes, you would grow thick Neanderthal brows from vast age. (The skull is the only part of our skeleton that gradually changes as we age.) Neanderthal child skulls look like modern children, clear evidence that Neanderthals grew their features from old age. They were not precursors to humans. Their genetics was probably purer than ours, since they lived for vast geological ages in few days, as Job explained.
Victor
The Bible has the answers you are looking for, not someone knowledgeable in the theory of evolution. Please notice the three biblical passages I focused on. They plainly explain the issue that evolutions argue.
First all animals and plants change, as God commanded them to with a passive continuing in unbroken continuity. Yet he also commanded them to only reproduce after their kinds. A fish does not change into a land animal by means of reproduction.
Please look at the passage where God claims to feed the lions. All animals were herbivores in the garden phase. For a herbivore to change into a carnivore is not a gradual, genetic mutation process. All the changes must happen in parallel, suddenly. Lions have different digestive systems, different teeth and different dispositions from herbivores. Since God claims to feed the lions, who according to the Bible were originally herbivores, then Christians should take him at his word.
When mutations happen they reduce the animal’s quality of life.
When God changes animals since the creation, it is not a one off thing. You will find that he changes several species so that they have long range relationships.
Change is not contrary to the scriptures. It is animals having a common ancestor that is contrary to the scriptures.
Victor
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.