Science for a pre-sin world

[Interplanner]

That type of compromise is why young people are rejecting the gospel. They start applying that reasoning to all scripture. An extreme example is one fellow who wrote that people don't need to believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus, because the story is only meant to convey some truths (Such as being happy in adverse situations)


Context provides the meaning. The Hebrew is clear



What compromise? Your extreme example fails for completely different reasons unrelated to how Moses wrote. You have no explanation for formless and void that makes sense, and you have no explanation for Job 38 that makes sense.


The earth was formless for the first day...it was all water. The earth was void of life but God finished creating and filling on the 6th day

The way Moses wrote this allows for a time period of formless and void, about which we know very little, but in other places it is more than a day, just as 4:3 is more than a day about that context. yes, the context answers it, but not your mentality about that context. You are way too worried about other activity going on, which there was.

 

[Interplanner]

That type of compromise is why young people are rejecting the gospel. They start applying that reasoning to all scripture. An extreme example is one fellow who wrote that people don't need to believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus, because the story is only meant to convey some truths (Such as being happy in adverse situations)


Context provides the meaning. The Hebrew is clear


The earth was formless for the first day...it was all water. The earth was void of life but God finished creating and filling on the 6th day

I don't know what you mean by compromise, but you make it sound like something sexual has been done wrong. I don't just accept your Hebrew skill because you have the ability to post here at TOL.
You never seem to look at the examples of Moses in literary style. I don't know even one remark you have made that shows you have compared them.
You have no reason why formless and void is just a day, when 4:3 is obviously more than just a day, as one example.
You have no answer about Job 38 and God purging evil away before laying the foundations.
You have no answer about tartarus as used by Peter and its corresponding timeframe.

 

[Interplanner]

That type of compromise is why young people are rejecting the gospel. They start applying that reasoning to all scripture. An extreme example is one fellow who wrote that people don't need to believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus, because the story is only meant to convey some truths (Such as being happy in adverse situations)


Context provides the meaning. The Hebrew is clear


The earth was formless for the first day...it was all water. The earth was void of life but God finished creating and filling on the 6th day

Your extreme example fall apart for reasons unrelated to how Moses wrote. I'm very aware of that kind of thinking, which Dr. Schaeffer called neo-orthodox. It's worthless, and it is not what I was doing.

 

[Stripe]

Many of the creationists here at TOL adamantly voice their opinions that science is in clear unity with the scriptures. That would include scientific support for a world before the advent of sin. My question is simple: if creationism is truly what the scientific evidence points to, where and what is the evidence for a pre-sin, pre-death world where every creature got along, ate plants, and never died?

Nothing I can think of provides a direct evidential link to the time before the fall; most everything we have was deposited by the flood.

Side question: if nothing ever died, were new baby animals still born? Did the population keep increasing indefinitely? And if so, how about some science for that, too?

Science for what? :AMR:

 

[Interplanner]

Nothing I can think of provides a direct evidential link to the time before the fall; most everything we have was deposited by the flood.


Science for what? :AMR:

There would be geologic evidence: the bedrock under a rapid sedimentary deposit would be one. But it won't have evidence about life forms.

 

[Stripe]

There would be geologic evidence: the bedrock under a rapid sedimentary deposit would be one. But it won't have evidence about life forms.

Ah, of course.

Granite. :up:

 

[Stripe]

Continental Material under Ocean Floor. Some granitic, or continental, rock is found under the floors of the western Pacific and southern Indian Oceans. Basalt, not granite, lies below sediments that continually fall onto the floors of the Pacific and Indian Oceans. The basalt, recovered by deep-sea drilling, is not oceanic crust, but once flowed as a liquid up onto the ocean floor. What remains of the 50-mile-thick granite crust after it broke up (and partially melted) must lie a few miles under the lava coating the western Pacific floor. This has not yet been verified, because drilling into the Pacific and Indian Ocean floors seldom exceeds a mile in depth. Current drilling, typically only 0.11 miles deep, penetrates primarily ooze and other sediments that have settled onto the ocean floor in the last several thousand years. Nevertheless, some continental material has been discovered, to the surprise of most geologists. Geologists refer to a line running down the west-central Pacific as the “andesite line.” It has this name because eruptive rocks west of it are primarily andesite, whereas rocks to the east are primarily basalt. Andesite contains minerals, such as hornblende and biotite, that are present in granite, but not in basalt. These minerals came from melted granite. The andesite line “has been viewed as the dividing line between oceanic and continental crusts.” PREDICTION 9: Fragments of a 60-mile-thick granite layer (a hydroplate) will be found a few miles under the Pacific floor and inside the Ring of Fire.

— source

 

[Nick M]

My question is simple: if creationism is truly what the scientific evidence points to, where and what is the evidence for a pre-sin, pre-death world where every creature got along, ate plants, and never died?

Where does the Bible say this?

And the pre-flood world was destroyed. He doesn't want us looking back on it although I always wonder about its nature and appearance.

 

[Interplanner]

Where does the Bible say this?

And the pre-flood world was destroyed. He doesn't want us looking back on it although I always wonder about its nature and appearance.

He's asking about before Adam sinned.

 

[MrDeets]

can you think of a reasonable explanation that would include everyone?

Honestly I cannot. I think there is no ultimate or objective(for lack of a better term) "reason" we are here. I choose to make my family my reason. If that's what you're asking. If not, explain differently, and I'll respond accordingly.

Sorry if I didn't catch your drift... my brain is running more slowly than usual. Work has been rough, as of late.

 

[Nick M]

Honestly I cannot. I think there is no ultimate or objective(for lack of a better term) "reason" we are here.

Do you believe in logic or random accidents?

 

[MrDeets]

Do you believe in logic or random accidents?

:e4e: Nick!

It depends on the situation. I think there are logical occurrences, and random accidents. IF that's what you're asking.

 

[Interplanner]

The chief end of man is glorify God. It's great to glorify God through care for your family, but merely caring for merely your family can slow to a halt. It is a good thing because it gets us 'outside' ourselves, but if getting 'outside' is good, then so is glorifying God through worship, knowing his works, and caring for those around us.

 

[6days]

I think there are logical occurrences, and random accidents.

Its logical that something has existed throughout eternity caused our universe to begin. (Random accidents always have a cause).
The evidence of design in the universe points to an omnipotent omniscient Creator.
(Or, we could use Dawkins phrase "appearance of design", to say that a logical conclusion would be that there is a Designer)

 

[MrDeets]

Its logical that something has existed throughout eternity caused our universe to begin. (Random accidents always have a cause).
The evidence of design in the universe points to an omnipotent omniscient Creator.
(Or, we could use Dawkins phrase "appearance of design", to say that a logical conclusion would be that there is a Designer)

I really hope you're not going straight to special pleading... if our universe requires a designer, then that designer must have a designer OR, you step outside of logic by saying he's always existed.

 

[User Name]

Nothing I can think of provides a direct evidential link to the time before the fall; most everything we have was deposited by the flood.

When do you estimate the Step Pyramid in Egypt was constructed?

https://youtu.be/XPI-6okYdX0?t=4m29s

 

[6days]

I really hope you're not going straight to special pleading... if our universe requires a designer, then that designer must have a designer OR, you step outside of logic by saying he's always existed.

It isn't special pleading... It is simple logic, which atheists deny.
Anything which has ever begun has a cause.
The ONLY logical explanation is that there is something uncaused which has existed throughout all eternity, caused everything.

 

[MrDeets]

It isn't special pleading... It is simple logic, which atheists deny.
Anything which has ever begun has a cause.
The ONLY logical explanation is that there is something uncaused which has existed throughout all eternity, caused everything.

LOL. Roger that. The only logical explanation for everything that must follow logic is an illogical being. "Anything which has ever begun has a cause"<-- except the thing that has no cause. I'll keep that in mind. lain:

 

[Interplanner]

I really hope you're not going straight to special pleading... if our universe requires a designer, then that designer must have a designer OR, you step outside of logic by saying he's always existed.

You don't step outside of it, Deets. No logical step ever defined what a person was like. If that person is "from everlasting to everlasting" he doesn't need a designer. "The Christian answer to the metaphysical problem Sartre arrived at was that there is not a problem; God was already there." --Dr. Schaeffer, HE IS THERE AND HE IS NOT SILENT.

Schaeffer or Christianity did not put it there as an extension of someone's logical breakthrough. That's not what the source reveals about God. He already was there, and among other things he has done, he made the earth to enjoy fellowship with mankind. He called them his children. He gives many things to enjoy, to "gladden the hearts of man" Acts 17, but He doesn't want things to be enjoyed while He is neglected. Paul quoted a Greek poet who said it this way: "In Him (God), we live and move and have our being." Perhaps the poet had realized the place is a pretty bleak prospect if that's not true.

 

[6days]

LOL. Roger that. The only logical explanation for everything that must follow logic is an illogical being. "Anything which has ever begun has a cause"<-- except the thing that has no cause. I'll keep that in mind. lain:

You are not being logical.
You are unable to think of anything that has begun, that doesn't have a cause. Yet, you are seemingly willing to believe that nothing caused everything.