Mr. Nice Guy's Corner

Stick Around For A While

Posts Tagged ‘science’

Creation Or Re-Creation?

Posted by Mr. Nice Guy on July 24, 2009

I’ve been pondering, debating, and presenting this point of view for a while now. I’m a Christian, but I don’t hold to the view that the earth is less than 7,000 years old.  I believe that mankind may only be 7,000 years old, but this planet has been here for a very long time.  I also hold the view that humans were not the first intelligent race that God created on this planet.  Maybe angels lived on the planet before we did, but that’s all speculation.

What We Know From A Biblical Perspective

According to the Bible water was not created on any of the first seven days. Its already there in Genesis 1:2. We also know that Lucifer is already a fallen angel when we reach Genesis 3. My assumption based on those 2 fact are that whatever happened, happened sometime before verse 2 of Genesis. Most people call it the Gap Theory.

What Does The Ancient Hebrew Say?

Genesis 1:2 – Tohu Va Bohu – Means waste and desolate, ruined and uninhabitable. We translate it, “without form and void”.

There is another translation problem: “Was” should actually be translated “became”. So it should read, “The earth became ruined and uninhabitable.”

I’m not the type of guy that just goes about making claims about the Bible without any scripture to back up my claim.

What Else Does The Bible Say About It?

One thing we have to remember, is that the Bible didn’t have periods, commas, chapters, and verses. It was written almost like one continuous though.

I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light. I beheld the mountains, and, lo, they trembled, and all the hills moved lightly. I beheld, and, lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the heavens were fled. I beheld, and, lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the LORD, and by his fierce anger. For thus hath the LORD said, The whole land shall be desolate; yet will I not make a full end. For this shall the earth mourn, and the heavens above be black; because I have spoken it, I have purposed it, and will not repent, neither will I turn back from it.” – Jeremiah 4:23-28

One can make the argument that God is specifically talking to Israel or mankind in general here. There are problems with that theory though. This has never happened in the Bible except in Genesis 1:2. Even at the “end of the age” the world is never completely destroyed. This should also raise the question of “why was darkness upon the face of the deep and the Spirit of God hovering over the water in Genesis?”

What Did God Mean By This?

There is another passage that seems almost out of context when you read it.

“For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.” – Isaiah 45:18

Why would God say that he didn’t create it in vain? Another word for vain is useless, without a purpose. In Genesis, in the Hebrew, we find that the world is uninhabitable, rendering it useless, but in Isaiah, God says He didn’t create it that way.

Does Solomon Know Something About This?

“Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men.” – Proverbs 8:31

Wisdom is speaking in this chapter, and you will notice that Wisdom claims to be the first of God’s creation, before the earth or anything else.  What did Wisdom/Solomon mean when he said the “habitable part of His earth?” That clearly implies that some portion was uninhabitable for some reason.  The only problem we have here is that Wisdom rejoiced with the sons of men. Its a problem unless you know that for some reason, angels always appear as men, they are referred to as the sons of God in Genesis 6, Job 1,2, and 38:7.

The Greeks and a few other cultures have a few interesting stories involving multiple creations of mankind. Maybe early mankind recorded their history somehow or it was relayed to these ancient cultures by some means. As far fetched as the theory sounds, there is historical evidence, as far as writing goes, to support the theory.

What Did Adam and Noah Have In Common?

“And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.” Genesis 1:28

“And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.” Genesis 9:1

That’s pretty interesting that God would tell them the same exact thing. If my theory on Genesis 1:2 is correct, God told Adam this after a great judgment was passed on the earth.  Noah was also told this after the judgment of the Flood had just destroyed the earth.

The evidence seems to point to something far greater than most of us want to or care to imagine. I think science and religion can be unified if both sides were to open their hearts and minds to what could have been and what may be to come.

What do you think?

Posted in Science and Religion | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 11 Comments »

Evolution – Science or Religion?

Posted by Mr. Nice Guy on July 24, 2009

This is a response to a question that was posed to me on another topic, so here it is… The FACTS about evolution.

Lets define a few things:

Faith – Believing in something even though you can’t directly observe it with your natural senses.

Science – Observing, forming a hypothesis, recording data, testing data, re-testing data, producing a theory.

Evolution can’t be directly observed by a single person in 1 life span.  You can’t test or restest the data, so how can it even be considered a theory?

The next problem with evolution is defining what kind of evolution people are referring to. There is micro and macro evolution.

Micro Evolution deals with small alleel changes that we can’t observe without special equipment.

Macro evolution, also called speciation is what most people are referring to when they speak of evolution.  Speciation is when one species, such as an ape become another species such as man. Lets look at a few problems with macro evolution.

1. Speciation has NEVER been observed and it can’t be tested.

2. The fossil record is far from complete. Just try to google actual pictures of fossils in the human “evolutionary” process and you will find drawings and lots of nice pictures, but not much when it comes to actual bones.

3. Science is losing ground and credibility with evolution.  It is widely taught to be fact, but the FACTS show otherwise.
Lets look at a few FACTS:

1. Haeckel, famous for the theory that Ontogeny Recapitulates Phylogeny. Basically, he made a model that showed how embryos go through each stage in evolution before fully developing.  Long story short, it was a FRAUD, and proved to be so in the late 1800s, but is still used in some text books to teach evolution.

2. Nebraska Man – This skeleton was reconstructed from a tooth, and it turned out to be the tooth of an exstinct pig, not a primate.

3. Piltdown Man – Turned out to be made of mixed parts from an orangutan and a modern human.

4. Orce Man – Found in 1982, turned out to be a 4 month old donkey skull.

5. Neanderthal – Recent evidence shows that Neaderthals were very much human and not a seperate race as taught in classes and on t.v.

6. Archaeoraptor – Was supposed to be the missing link between dinosaurs and birds, but just another fake.

Most people would ask the question, if there is so much “evidence” then why are so many scientists going out of their way to fake fossil findings? It should be laying all over the ground, if macro evolution is an ongoing process.

I’ll post a few quotes too:

“To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.” – Charles Darwin

“I am quite conscious that my speculations run quite beyond the bounds of true science.” – From a letter to Asa Gray, Harvard biology professor, cited in Charles Darwin and the Problem of Creation, N.C. Gillespie, p.2)

“The case at present (problems presented by the fossil record) must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained.” – The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, Penguins Books, New York, Edition 6, p. 310.

“Long before having arrived at this part of my work, a crowd of difficulties will have occurred to my reader. Some of them are so grave that to this day I can never reflect on them without being staggered . . .” – Charles Darwin (ed. J. W. Burrow), The Origin of Species (Baltimore, MD: Penguin Books, 1974.), p. 205.

But, as by this theory, innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?” (Origin of Species, 1859).

“When we descend to details we can prove that no one species has changed (i.e., we cannot prove that a single species has changed): nor can we prove that the supposed changes are beneficial, which is the groundwork of the theory. Nor can we explain why some species have changed and others have not. The latter case seems to me hardly more difficult to understand precisely and in detail than the former case of supposed change” – Darwin, 1863.

I could go on pulling up info, hell, there have been entire books written on the subject, but here are a few links if you want to follow the “rabbit hole” and see where it goes.

Posted in Science and Religion | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »