pauluc: “Gap theorist to me are neither fish nor fowl.They …

Comment on Scientists and the Temptation to Bias Results by Bob Helm.


“Gap theorist to me are neither fish nor fowl.They are stuck between acknowledging old ages for some of the creation because of the science and incredibility of all geology being recent but affirming a recent creation of life and sustaining it all by a slippery biblical literalism that is not faithful to the Fundamentals.”

First of all, young life creationism does not necessarily require a gap. Some expositors take Gen 1:1 as a dependent clause, in which case, there is no gap. For example, the New Revised Standard Version renders Gen 1:1-2 as follows:

“In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth, the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.”

I have no desire to debate whether Gen 1:1 is an independent or dependent clause. I am simply observing that if it is an independent clause, there is a gap in verse 2, but if it is a dependent clause, the gap disappears. With that said, why should a gap be viewed negatively if it really exists in the text?

Furthermore, why should it be considered strange that some natural phenomena are old, while others are young? And how is this unfaithful to the Fundamentals, whatever they are? The YLC position is not based on some contrived eisegesis. It is derived from the most straightforward reading of the Biblical text. If you doubt me, I encourage you to read the commentaries on Gen 1. Most commentators, both liberal and conservation, see God as beginning with something that was already sterile and chaotic, and molding it so that it can sustain habitation.

Bob Helm Also Commented

Scientists and the Temptation to Bias Results
@Sharon: I don’t completely agree Sharon. The faith of the fideist is still saving faith that lays hold of Jesus as a personal Savior. And it is possible to have this kind of faith even without believing in a recent creation. Remember – Jesus said that even faith the size of a mustard seed counts. The problem is that Christianity loses its appeal when the rug of evidence is pulled out from under it. For the fideist and the theistic evolutionist, evangelizing intelligent, thinking people is a hopeless task. Without apologetics, evangelism is dead. It is interesting that every denomination that has bought into neo-orthodoxy (fideism) and/or theistic evolution is dying. It cannot be otherwise!

Scientists and the Temptation to Bias Results
@Sean Pitman: I agree. Scientific revolutions have often occurred because one person or a small group of people doubted the consensus of the scientific community and set out to falsify it.

Scientists and the Temptation to Bias Results
@pauluc: A few more points. Be aware that not all the rocks visible at the Grand Canyon were laid down by the flood. I believe that the Precambrian rocks in the inner canyon, below the Great Unconformity, are pre-flood and probably pre-creation week. I also believe that the Great Unconformity marks the onset of the flood.

Recent Comments by Bob Helm

Dr. Walter Veith and the anti-vaccine arguments of Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche
I believe in good medicine and am thankful to God for the Moderna vaccine. Walter Veith deserves to be ignored, and not just on this issue.

Complex Organisms are Degenerating – Rapidly
@Carlos: Far from being outdated, I would say that Sean’s arguments are cutting edge. As for the assertion that scientists don’t use Darwin’s model for evolution, that is correct – because Darwin had no knowledge of Mendelian genetics. The original Darwinian model was replaced by the Neo-darwinian Synthesis about 1940, which claims that evolution takes place as natural selection acts on random mutations. Although this model still dominates biology today, it is facing increasingly serious problems, which Sean has touched on.

Complex Organisms are Degenerating – Rapidly
@Sean Pitman: OK, I see it now. Sorry – I missed it earlier.

Complex Organisms are Degenerating – Rapidly
Sean, Dr. John Sanford, who was an important contributor to the development of GMOs, has written a book on this issue entitled, “Genetic Entropy.” I don’t see him quoted anywhere in your article, and I’m wondering if you are familiar with his work. It is noteworthy that Dr. Sanford has abandoned Darwinism and adopted creationism/intelligent design, not originally for religious reasons, but because of this problem.

Evolution from Space?
Sean, once again I urge you to publish your material in book form, preferably with a non-Adventist publisher. You have such wonderful material, but the Educate Truth audience is so small.