Creation scientists

[4WD]

Einstein's theory of Relativity is a theory that can presently be repeatedly tested and demonstrably observed to be correct. The theories we are discussing cannot presently be repeated, tested, observed, and or therefore proved to be correct. We have not, and we do not, observe the kind of evolutionary change the theory claims. Nor of course do we, or can we observe the creation as described in Genesis, regardless of exactly how such was brought about and or manifested.

The Barbarian in reply #2747 showed how and the extent to which the theory can be presently repeated, tested and observed.  But of course, you simply refused to accept that.

To say that Einstein's theory of relativity is observable scientific fact, from within the reality we presently exist in any case, is an accurate statement. To declare that deep time simple to complex evolution as the mechanism of our existence is in the same category of proved science as Einstein's theory of Relativity, is a blatantly false declaration. We have not, do not, and cannot observe any such thing.

Einstein's theory of Relativity together with the work of Edwin Hubble to show the expanding universe establishes the theory of deep time even if we are able to go back in time to observe it.

Even if some day, someone in some lab, creates the perfect conditions for any such thing to take place, such would not prove evolution as the mechanism of our existence. But only that scientists with exact purpose and intent, after a very great many failures, finally produced the right environment and procedures unto demonstrable simple to complex evolutionary processes. Not that such were the actual mechanisms of our existence. So likewise with the claims of Creationism, which are admittedly based upon faith in a literal historic interpretation of what Genesis simply and plainly states.

The evolutionists I am talking about are teaching students all over this nation in every science or biology class. Just like I was taught. Evolution is not presented as just one theory among others in these classrooms, but rather scientific fact supported by the majority of scientists. The following quote from the link above it states part of the problem -

https://crev.info/2026/05/rf-evolution-in-public-schools/

The real problem here is that you do not have a scientific alternative; rather you have a religious alternative which you want to present as science.

I think this attitude is far more prevalent than you suggest. I am constantly subjected to the theory of evolution stated simply as fact in one documentary about science, space, nature, geology, and what have you seemingly anywhere it may be squeezed into the context.

That is because nearly all theories, once they become generally accepted by the scientific community, are presented as fact even if they are not actually fact.

Well here we are, surely one so knowledgable as yourself who can easily identify a scientific know nothing such as myself, can easily supply a nice summary of exactly what the function of scientific endeavor is. Can't you? Please do enlighten me. You don't need me to tell you that.  You can look that up for yourself. From a Copilot search:

"A scientific endeavor refers to any attempt to explore, study, or investigate phenomena using scientific methods. It involves collecting data, observing processes, analyzing results, and testing hypotheses to generate knowledge or solve problems "

And therein lies the entire problem. I believe what the word of God simply and plainly states in the creation and flood accounts, and you claim that is my interpretation, which is wrong. I do not need to explain an interpretation, as I believe what Holy Scripture plainly and simply states concerning these issues. No interpretation implied or supplied. I believe it as written. My interpretation therefore, is that it means what it plainly and simply states.

That is not the problem.  The problem is you want your religious views taught in schools as science.  Moreover, you want your own interpretation of religious views taught as science.

Now, what is your interpretation? It cannot be to be the same as mine, as you state that my "interpretation" is wrong.

I don't think I have said that your "interpretation" is wrong.  I think I have said, or at least my intent was, that I disagree with your interpretation.

Therefore, what is simply stated in the Genesis creation and flood accounts is wrong as well, since that is what I believe. So what does your interpretation of the Genesis creation and flood accounts entail, and why please? What do the scriptures really mean when they state that God created the world in six days, and that the flood was over the entire planet? This cannot be what you believe, since it is what I believe, which is what scripture plainly and simply states. Which you testify you do not agree with at all. So what do you think these words of scripture really mean or represent?

Again, it is your interpretation that I disagree with. It is not up to me to tell you what to believe.  I can only tell you what I believe and why I believe it.

Do you believe the following statement of scripture?

Psa 33:6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. 7 He gathereth the waters of the sea together as an heap: he layeth up the depth in storehouses. 8 Let all the earth fear the LORD: let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him. 9 For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.

Of course, I believe it. Do I believe your interpretation of that scripture. Probably not.

Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

Do you believe the above commandment of God? How long do you think the days referred to in the commandment were? How long therefore also, do  you reckon a seventh day sabbath is. How do you interpret the days in the above commandment and creation account?

Again of course I believe it.  And again, I do not hold to your interpretation of it.

I have shown you before how it is possible, given Einstein's theory of relativity, that from God's view looking forward the day can be literally a 24-hour period of time and simultaneously, from our view looking back, the day can be billions of years.  But you can't accept that.

[Amo]

The Barbarian in reply #2747 showed how and the extent to which the theory can be presently repeated, tested and observed.  But of course, you simply refused to accept that.

That reply once again addresses simply the ability of already existing life to change or adapt, which neither Creationists nor evolutionists deny. It most certainly does not demonstrate the kind of net gain of information and or functionality necessary to the deep time simple to complex development the theory of evolution purports. If I am wrong, please do direct me to the evidence that those changes resulted in the kind of positive net gains necessary for simple to complex evolution. If you can, then I will perhaps begin to concede that very minute evolutionary type changes can take place on very rare occasions, when brought about with exact purpose and intent in a lab of scientists seeking to bring this very thing about. Which of course would never amount to accepting that such a rarity is actually the main mechanism of our existence. Which I state once again, would have to have happened an uncountable amount of times to arrive where we are today. This of course making the evolutionary scenario, an exponentially impossible scenario to have occurred by random chance at each and every stage of development.

Einstein's theory of Relativity together with the work of Edwin Hubble to show the expanding universe establishes the theory of deep time even if we are able to go back in time to observe it.

It establishes nothing but by presumption. The presumption that God Himself needs deep time scenarios in order to bring about complex systems, as though He could not do such rapidly as the creation account and other scriptures simply and plainly state. It demonstrates the hubris of fallen humanity attempting to bring God down to their own level of understanding and ability. Apart from this, the James Webb Telescope has observed some major problems concerning our best deep time theories of late. Long before which I had already been pointing out the unending trend of recent scientific discovery among differing scientific disciplines, continually finding greater and greater complexity further and further back in time. Which unquestionably leans the evidence further and further toward highly complex model from the beginning, as in the creation account of Holy scripture, though you deny the same. Unbiased  scientists would take note of such, as actual evidence at least, of something other than deep development. Nevertheless, we both know that our differing views and therefore endeavors regarding science, are faith based from the beginning. Though you will not admit this about your own faith. We simply seek to establish that which we have already chosen to believe regarding the subject at hand.

The real problem here is that you do not have a scientific alternative; rather you have a religious alternative which you want to present as science.

To the contrary, and as I have stated many times over, you are the one who will not admit of their faith in the religion of their choice, not me. Darwin and the like, are the prophets you place your faith in above the plain and simple testimony of Holy Scripture. Even though they are proved wrong even by their own selves over and over again. Always leaning upon the crutch that such is the natural course of scientific investigation. Which cannot be completely denied as holding to some truth. Yet, one erroneous posit after another over and again does actually speak rather loudly against a theory, and not for it. Nevertheless, I understand well how the faith you have in your chosen religion keeps you riveted upon proving such, as I also have such faith in my chosen religion. So be it.

That is because nearly all theories, once they become generally accepted by the scientific community, are presented as fact even if they are not actually fact.

Thank you for admitting of the problem. Which would not be a problem, if this truth would be admitted as an act of faith in their chosen theory, by those promulgating it. But it is not, nor will you admit of it, will you?

"A scientific endeavor refers to any attempt to explore, study, or investigate phenomena using scientific methods. It involves collecting data, observing processes, analyzing results, and testing hypotheses to generate knowledge or solve problems "

Yes it is. We both agree upon this. Though you insist that such is beyond my understanding or comprehension, it is not. Your faith is in the theory of evolution as espoused by your chosen prophets of the theory of evolution. As such, they and you seek to make use of the scientific method to prove your theory correct. My faith and that of Creationists is in the plain and simple to understand testimony of the prophets of Holy scripture, and we determine to use scientific methods to prove that faith. Disagreeing with your chosen theory by the faith you have in it, does not amount to total ignorance concerning what science is, or its purpose. It is simply using it just as evolutionists do to prove that which they already have faith in. Creationists are just a lot more willing to admit of this than evolutionists and or yourself, apparently are. So be it.

That is not the problem.  The problem is you want your religious views taught in schools as science.  Moreover, you want your own interpretation of religious views taught as science.

This accusation coming from the man whose own religious views are in fact taught in schools as science. What are you accusing me of, but wanting exactly what you already have, as a devout "Christian" evolutionist. According to your own testimony you believe the word of according to an interpretation you will not or cannot actually explain, but which incorporates the theory of evolution as a main tenet. So that as a matter of fact, you are the very one guilty of your own accusation against me and others who simply have a different interpretation of God's word, according to your questionable reasoning regarding the matter. It is your interpretation of Holy Scripture that is mandated in public schools to the exclusion of all others. These are the plain and simple facts of the matter. I therefore do rightly, cast  your own accusation right back upon you. Yes, I do want students to have the choice to learn scientifically supported creation theory as well as scientifically supported atheistic or "Christian" incorporated evolutionist theory. As such is only right, since as a matter of blatant fact, these theories are just that. All of which are based and or founded upon faith in one of three differing religions or religious views pertaining to our origins that we are discussing. The religions of either Secular Humanism whose faith is in the observations of humanity alone apart from the concept of a creator, historically established biblical and Christian faith in the acceptance of what Holy Scripture simply and plainly states regarding the creation account being a literal historical description of what took place, or more modern adaptions of faith in the amalgamation of these two views according to a thus far incoherent interpretation of the Holy Scriptures in regards to such.

I don't think I have said that your "interpretation" is wrong.  I think I have said, or at least my intent was, that I disagree with your interpretation.

Why would anyone disagree with something they did not think was wrong?

Again, it is your interpretation that I disagree with. It is not up to me to tell you what to believe.  I can only tell you what I believe and why I believe it.

Do you believe the many different translations of the bible are actually different interpretations of the bible? Even if this was so, all the translations I know of, stick pretty close to the same story line, and time line of six days, and a global flood. The plain and simple testimony of which I believe as stated. Why do you consider that an interpretation? How is accepting a statement just as it is written, equal an interpretation?

The biblical creation and flood accounts are already given as interpretation or explanation of these events. To change what they simply state as such, is to add personal interpretation on top of them. As they already simply state what the mean.

Gen 1:1  In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth......................
Gen 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. 2  And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. 3  And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.

The creation account of Genesis 1 is the translation or explanation of creation, according to which the heavens and the earth were finished. As stated in verses one though three of chapter 2.

Psa 33:6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. 7 He gathereth the waters of the sea together as an heap: he layeth up the depth in storehouses. 8 Let all the earth fear the LORD: let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him. 9 For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.

Of course, I believe it. Do I believe your interpretation of that scripture. Probably not.

Again, I am not interpreting the above scriptures, I take what they simply state as the interpretation or explanation of what happened. For which purpose they have been written. Without adding anything of my own to it. You are the one who must do this, because you do not believe what it simply states, from within the time frame given in the Genesis account and fourth commandment of God.

Again of course I believe it.  And again, I do not hold to your interpretation of it.

I have shown you before how it is possible, given Einstein's theory of relativity, that from God's view looking forward the day can be literally a 24-hour period of time and simultaneously, from our view looking back, the day can be billions of years.  But you can't accept that.

It is as I have said, you are adding interpretation to the word of God according to your understanding of Einstein's theory of relativity, in order to allow for the theory of evolution as you understand it as well. You are interpreting the word of God in accordance with fallen humanities theories of what is and how it came about, rather than taking the word of God for what it simply states. As though He or His word were or are bound by the faulty observations of humanity regarding our origins. According to what can only be the hubris of fallen humanity.

1Co 3:18 Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. 20 And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.

What, do you think now, that the world has become so wise that it's wisdom is no longer foolishness with God? That God's word is now to be interpreted according to the supposed scientific wisdom of this world, which is no longer not only foolishness with God, but that by which His word must be interpreted? The word of God subject to interpretation in accordance with the theories of humanity? Is this not the very kind of vanity addressed in the scriptures above?

Heb 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. 2 For by it the elders obtained a good report. 3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

What is the theory of evolution but the development of one thing from another which did appear, exist, or occur before it?

Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

No sir. The wisdom of humanity is still foolishness with God. His word is not to be interpreted according to such wisdom, but by that which Holy Scripture itself has determined.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

There were not endless cycles of life, death, and slow evolutionary development over billions of years. Death came as a result of sin. Sin committed by our earthly parents in the prime of human perfection after they were created in the image of God. Not pond scum to upright primate through endless cycles of life, death, and evolutionary development. Which theory itself completely undermines the very foundational events recorded in Holy Scripture, and the gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Rev 14:6  And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, 7 Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.

[4WD]

Do you believe the many different translations of the bible are actually different interpretations of the bible? Even if this was so, all the translations I know of, stick pretty close to the same story line, and time line of six days, and a global flood. The plain and simple testimony of which I believe as stated. Why do you consider that an interpretation? How is accepting a statement just as it is written, equal an interpretation?

In a very real sense, each translation from the available manuscripts is an interpretation. It inherently embodies the thinking of the translator.

But more to the point, as I have said so many times in the past, every statement that anyone, including me, makes concerning the meaning of any passage in the Bible beyond a direct quotation is an interpretation.  Thus, when you say that the word "day" in Genesis 1:5 actually means a 24-hour period of time, it is an interpretation. And when I say that word "day" actually means many billions of years it is an interpretation.

The critique then is really why the two different interpretations. For me, my interpretation is the only one that makes any sense at all in view of what God has given us as His natural law governing the functioning of the universe He created.

[The Barbarian]

That reply once again addresses simply the ability of already existing life to change or adapt, which neither Creationists nor evolutionists deny. It most certainly does not demonstrate the kind of net gain of information and or functionality necessary to the deep time simple to complex development the theory of evolution purports. 

Actually, all new mutations add information to the population genome.   Would you like me to show you the math for a simple case?

If I am wrong, please do direct me to the evidence that those changes resulted in the kind of positive net gains necessary for simple to complex evolution.

I don't think you have it clear in your mind to have a definable difference between simple and complex evolution.    Maybe you should start by giving us testable definitions of each.

[Amo]

In a very real sense, each translation from the available manuscripts is an interpretation. It inherently embodies the thinking of the translator.

But more to the point, as I have said so many times in the past, every statement that anyone, including me, makes concerning the meaning of any passage in the Bible beyond a direct quotation is an interpretation.  Thus, when you say that the word "day" in Genesis 1:5 actually means a 24-hour period of time, it is an interpretation. And when I say that word "day" actually means many billions of years it is an interpretation.

The critique then is really why the two different interpretations. For me, my interpretation is the only one that makes any sense at all in view of what God has given us as His natural law governing the functioning of the universe He created.

Is this not a confession, that you interpret the scriptures according to extra biblical observations of fallen humanity? Limiting even God Himself, to humanities best guesses concerning that which they can presently observe? Which all admit has and does greatly change over time, as more information changes such perceptions? Which is the main point of our contentions.

I place confidence in Holy Scripture before the fickle observations of humanity regarding what they can presently observe, which they extrapolate and apply to the past as well. While you interpret Holy Scripture according to those very observations. Is this not the case?

[Amo]

Actually, all new mutations add information to the population genome.   Would you like me to show you the math for a simple case?

I don't think you have it clear in your mind to have a definable difference between simple and complex evolution.    Maybe you should start by giving us testable definitions of each.

Seems like we have already been through this before. I'll go back when time allows, and see how far we got last time, before going through it again. Just off the top of my head though, since almost all if not all mutations have been found to represent a loss of information rather than any gains, multiple mutations among populations should of course end up representing the same. Unless something gets twisted around in an explanation, which would not of course be surprising.

[4WD]

I place confidence in Holy Scripture before the fickle observations of humanity regarding what they can presently observe, which they extrapolate and apply to the past as well. While you interpret Holy Scripture according to those very observations. Is this not the case?

You place confidence in your interpretation of Holy Scripture. And in doing so, it is no less fickle than any other.

I am about halfway through a new book by Hugh Ross, Noah's Flood Revisited.  You should get it and read it.  I think you might find it interesting.  He presents the arguments from both sides from which you can then decide which makes more sense.

[Amo]

You place confidence in your interpretation of Holy Scripture. And in doing so, it is no less fickle than any other.

I am about halfway through a new book by Hugh Ross, Noah's Flood Revisited.  You should get it and read it.  I think you might find it interesting.  He presents the arguments from both sides from which you can then decide which makes more sense.

Once again I must point out, that every translation of the scriptures that I know of, simply states exactly what I believe regarding the creation account and the account of the global flood. No interpretation needed, as it simply and clearly states them just as I believe them. Not one translation anywhere at any time, as far as I know, simply states what you believe in either of those accounts. Let alone anywhere in Holy Scripture at all. 

It is simply necessary for you to broaden the horizons of interpretation to anywhere between six days or countless billions of years, for what you have chosen to believe to be true by which you interpret Holy Scripture. Thereby opening all of scripture up to such broadened possibility of interpretation, as to render it all nothing more than one's personal preferences regarding any matter it might address. Reducing the declared Word of God, to the personal preferences of the vain imaginings of fallen humanity. As though such could be regarded as the universal standard of belief regarding truth, which the Holy Scriptures declare themselves to be.

2Ti 3:10 But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience,11 Persecutions, afflictions, which came unto me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra; what persecutions I endured: but out of them all the Lord delivered me. 12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. 13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. 14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; 15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2026/entries/evolution-before-darwin/#SpecPermChanAnti

Following quotes below are from the links provided above them. Emphasis is mine.

Evolutionary Thought Before Darwin

1. Species Permanence and Change in Antiquity
1.1 Classical Discussions
In many respects, the general idea of species change in Western thought is an ancient concept. The reflections of Empedocles (ca. 495–35 BCE) and the views of the Greek Atomists among the Presocratic nature philosophers formed a Classical heritage on which later speculations could be developed (Kirby 2013). These Presocratic speculations combined naturalistic accounts of origins with reflections on the workings of chance-like processes to create existing forms of life (see the entry ancient atomism). Particularly as the Presocratic Atomist speculations were restated by the Roman poet Titus Lucretius (ca. 99–50 BCE) in book five of his On the Nature of Things (Lucretius [RN]), a source was available in Antiquity and recovered in the Latin West in 1417. This set out a speculative account of the gradual origin of living beings from an initial atomic chaos. Through an undirected process, the best adapted forms are sorted out and those not suited to their conditions are eliminated.

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Anaximander

Anaximander (born 610 BCE, Miletus [now in Turkey]—died 546 BCE) was a Greek philosopher who was the first to develop a cosmology, or systematic philosophical view of the world.

Only a short fragment of Anaximander's work survives, so reconstructions of his philosophy and astronomy must be based on summaries by later Greek writers, such as the 1st- or 2nd-century CE compiler of philosophical opinions Aëtius, the 3rd-century theologian and antipope Hippolytus, and the 6th-century Neoplatonist philosopher Simplicius..............

Anaximander held an evolutionary view of living things. The first creatures originated from the moist element by evaporation. Man originated from some other kind of animal, such as fish, since man needs a long period of nurture and could not have survived if he had always been what he is now. Anaximander also discussed the causes of meteorological phenomena, such as wind, rain, and lightning.

https://ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/ancient.html#Empedocles

Evolution and Paleontology in the Ancient World

...........................
In the 6th century B.C.E. Xenophanes of Colophon (died ca. 490 B.C.E.), who was a disciple of Anaximander, developed Anaximander's theories further. He observed fossil fishes and shells, and concluded that the land where they were found had been underwater at some time. Xenophanes taught that the world formed from the condensation of water and "primordial mud;" he was the first person known to have used fossils as evidence for a theory of the history of the Earth.

The Greek historian Herodotus (484-425 B.C.E.) also observed fossil shells in Egypt, and cited them as evidence that Egypt had once been underwater. He also described a valley in Arabia, in the Mokattam mountains, where he saw "the backbones and ribs of such serpents as it is impossible to describe: of the ribs there were a multitude of heaps....

Empedocles of Acragas

Another Greek philosopher, the fifth-century materialist Empedocles of Acragas (in Sicily), postulated that the universe was composed of four basic elements -- earth, air, fire, and water. These elements were stirred by two fundamental forces, which Empedocles called Love and Strife. ("Attraction" and "repulsion" might be better modern terms for what Empedocles actually meant.) The constant interplay of these elements, alternately attracting and repelling each other, had formed the universe. Empedocles claimed that the Earth had given birth to living creatures, but that the first creatures had been disembodied organs. These organs finally joined into whole organisms, through the force of Love, but some of these organisms, being monstrous and unfit for life, had died out.

The theory seems a bit bizarre today, but Empedocles had come up with a sort of evolutionary theory: past natural selection is responsible for the forms we see today. Empedocles also ascribed the origin of the life of today to the interplay of impersonal forces, in which chance, not the gods, played the major role. There are, however, major differences between Empedocles's ideas and natural selection in the modern sense: Empedocles conceived of his "natural selection" as a past event, not as an ongoing process. Once again, we do not know whether Empedocles had actually found supporting evidence for his theories. He may have been influenced by existing accounts of mythological creatures that seemed to be "put together" out of the parts of different animals, such as centaurs, sphinxes, and chimeras. But perhaps he had also seen deformed animals, or examined "monstrous-looking" fossil bones.

Lucretius

Much later, the Roman poet and philosopher Titus Lucretius Carus (99-55 B.C.E.) wrote his long philosophical poem De Rerum Natura ("On the Nature of Things"). In this poem Lucretius proposed, among other things, an "evolutionary" theory similar to that of Empedocles (which is ironic, because he attacks Empedocles rather vehemently in other parts of the poem). Here again, species were born out of the Earth, formed by the chance combination of elements. Natural selection led to the extinction of once-living "monstrous" organisms. Those organisms that survived either survived because of their strength, speed, or cunning, or because of their usefulness to people. But Lucretius did not believe in the production of new species from previously existing ones, the "other side of the coin" of true evolutionary theories. He denied that land-dwelling animals could ever have evolved from marine animals. Like Empedocles, he taught that plants and animals had been born from the Earth, and that the formation of new species was finished:

Wherefore, again, again, how merited
Is that adopted name of Earth - The Mother! -
Since she herself begat the human race,
And at one well-nigh fixed time brought forth
Each beast that ranges raving round about
Upon the mighty mountains, and all birds
Aerial with many a varied shape.
But, lo, because her bearing years must end,
She ceased, like to a woman worn. . . And what
She bore of old, she now can bear no longer. . .

Lucretius's poem is an exposition of Epicurean philosophy, and is notable for its insistence on the senses as the only way to obtain knowledge. "For whither shall we make appeal? for what / More certain than our senses can there be / Whereby to mark asunder error and truth?" It is also notable for its long explication of atomism -- the doctrine that everything in the universe is made up of atoms. Lucretius did not originate this theory -- it goes back to the Greek philosopher Democritus of Abdera (fifth century B.C.E) -- but his explanation of it influenced many writers and thinkers of the Middle Ages and Renaissance, despite opposition from the Church.

Holy scripture adequately addresses the above ancient views of basically evolutionary processes believed by some no doubt in Paul's day as well.

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. 24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. 28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; 29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

[4WD]

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. 24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. 28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; 29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

It is a real shame that you reject what you just posted there, specifically, verse 20. God has provided two revelations to mankind.  One is the special revelation that is God's direct, specific communication through apostles and prophets by the power of the Holy Spirit, the Bible.

The second is general or natural revelation of the knowledge of the things of God that is accessible to all people through the natural world, through history, and human conscience. It is universal and available to everyone, regardless of religious background.

It is the general revelation that you ignore through unawareness and ignorance and that you reject whenever it disagrees with your own personal interpretation of the Bible.

[Amo]

It is a real shame that you reject what you just posted there, specifically, verse 20. God has provided two revelations to mankind.  One is the special revelation that is God's direct, specific communication through apostles and prophets by the power of the Holy Spirit, the Bible.

The second is general or natural revelation of the knowledge of the things of God that is accessible to all people through the natural world, through history, and human conscience. It is universal and available to everyone, regardless of religious background.

It is the general revelation that you ignore through unawareness and ignorance and that you reject whenever it disagrees with your own personal interpretation of the Bible.

Same argument as always, built upon the faulty premise that Holy Scripture was written to be privately interpreted by each and every individual as they please. While God Himself does presently allow all the freedom to do so, He has also made it crystal clear that the day is coming, in which all will be judged in exact accordance with their handling and or rejection of His Holy Scriptures. Which is exactly what the following warnings from Holy Scripture are all about. 

2Ti 3:10 But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience,11 Persecutions, afflictions, which came unto me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra; what persecutions I endured: but out of them all the Lord delivered me. 12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. 13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. 14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; 15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Jhn 12:46 I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness. 47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. 48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. 49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. 50 And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.

2Pe 1:16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount. 19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

2Pe 3:14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless. 15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. 17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness. 18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.

Rev 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. 15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie. 16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star. 17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely. 18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

It is a dangerous thing to add or take away from the words of God, given to us through His chosen prophets and apostles, and with finality by the Son of God and man Christ Jesus our Lord. The theory of deep time evolution is completely extra biblical, and therefore can only represent fallen humanities attempt to add testimony to the Holy Scriptures which is simply not found anywhere within them at all. It also directly contradicts the historical testimonies of the Genesis account of creation, and the fourth commandment of God by way of this addition. Make no mistake about it, we will all be held accountable for the way we choose to handle the law and the testimony, which are the Holy Scriptures of God. We are not free to make the Holy Scriptures say or teach whatever we wish of them.

Rev 19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. 12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. 13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. 14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. 15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. 16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS. 17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God; 18 That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great. 19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army. 20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone. 21 And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

How can all humanity or even one person, be judged by the word of God, if that very word is in fact left open to all to interpret simply as they wish? By what standard then, could they be judged? Or are you one of those of the opinion, that all will be saved in the end? No real resurrection of damnation which our Lord spoke of?

Jhn 5:19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. 20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel. 21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will. 22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son: 23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him. 24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. 25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live. 26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; 27 And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man. 28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Disagreement with the false claims of deep time evolutionary theory of course, does not represent ignorance in any way shape or form. But perhaps by those alone, who would claim such nonsense regarding such an unproven, unstable, continuously changing, theory which has proved its own self wrong time and again already. The series of videos I will place a link to in the next post, are very enlightening regarding all of the same.

[Amo]

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLW0NarHyjVwi-W9f16il0wDWPSqHqR-x7

The above link is to The Shadow League series brought to us once again by Answers In Genesis Canada. Very eye opening.

[4WD]

Same argument as always, built upon the faulty premise that Holy Scripture was written to be privately interpreted by each and every individual as they please.

Good grief Amo. Do you really think you are any different that anyone else.  As I have said here more than once, any time that anyone comments on a verse or a passage of scripture beyond directly quoting the verse or the passage, that constitutes a private interpretation.  That is fundamental.

And that includes the comment concerning whether the verse or passage is to be taken literally or figuratively.

[Amo]

Good grief Amo. Do you really think you are any different that anyone else.  As I have said here more than once, any time that anyone comments on a verse or a passage of scripture beyond directly quoting the verse or the passage, that constitutes a private interpretation.  That is fundamental.

And that includes the comment concerning whether the verse or passage is to be taken literally or figuratively.

OK, let's zero in a little closer upon the contested scriptures being interpreted. Then examine the reasons for our different interpretations. Emphasis in the following quoted scriptures is mine, for the purposes to be addressed.

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. 6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. 9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. 11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. 12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 13 And the evening and the morning were the third day. 14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. 20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. 21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. 23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. 24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. 28 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. 29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. 30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so. 31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

In the above very foundation of all Holy Scripture, we are introduced to the creation of at the very least I would say, our galaxy if not the entire universe. The very first act of creation described in the creation of heaven and earth, is the creation of light in apparent darkness, for the very apparent reason of creating a division between light and darkness. Which division was immediately thereafter defined as day and night, immediately followed by identifying them as evening and morning, of which a day therefore exists. As we therefore rightly continue to know and understand such to this very day. These being some of the very first words and or revelations, explanations, definitions, and what have you in Holy Scripture, they could not yet be considered symbolically of anything yet to be revealed in later revelations. It therefore remains yet to be seen in the rest of the revelations of Holy Scripture, if they were meant to be taken symbolically or metaphorically rather than literally. Which we can address as the issue being debated continues and broadens respectfully as more Holy Scripture in relation to the creation account is examined.

The rest of the defined days of creation, are also structured or confined  to or by an evening and morning. For this reason, without adding or taking away from that which Holy Scripture has plainly stated and or defined, do I take these days to be literal days consisting exactly of an evening and a morning. As we all do observe throughout our entire lives, and always have. Saving those instances recorded in Holy Scripture, when God Himself directly intervened to supernaturally change this continuous process.

Apart from the above testimony is the fourth commandment of God, spoken by His own mouth to the entire nation of Israel, and written with His own finger in tables of stone as well. Which commandment concisely backs up the logical observation and conclusion that the days of creation were meant to be taken as literal days. As the commandment itself would be impossible to observe if the days involved were of an unknown length of time, and certainly impossible to observe if they represented apparently billions of years. This is just basic common sense being applied to the testimony we have.

Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

Apart from the common sense already addressed, there is the issue of God actually punishing the Israelites for breaking His fourth commandment. Why would God punish people for not observing a seventh day every week, if in fact He really meant millions or billions of years for each day of that very week exactly in relation to the creation account? What kind of God would do such. That is, deceive His own people cornering the real amount of time He took in creating the world, and then also punishing them if they did not celebrate such according to said deception? Talk about creating confusion.

1Co 14:32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. 33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

I will present one more testimony of Holy Scripture which I believe also states very clearly, that the creation of the heavens and earth were not a long drawn out deep time evolutionary or any other process. After which I will allow you the opportunity to please expound upon the biblical reasons you believe the days of creation represent very long and or indefinite periods of time.

Psa 33:4 For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth. 5 He loveth righteousness and judgment: the earth is full of the goodness of the LORD. 6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. 7 He gathereth the waters of the sea together as an heap: he layeth up the depth in storehouses. 8 Let all the earth fear the LORD: let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him. 9 For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.

As is obvious, the above testimony is not describing a long drawn out process in the creation of the heavens and earth. If anything it would suggest instant creation, not a daily process as described in the genesis account. Were it not for that account, the fourth commandment, and others of course. Please do now expound upon the reasons for your own views or as you suggest, interpretation of these scriptures addressed above, and or others you see as supportive of your own views. 

[4WD]

OK, let's zero in a little closer upon the contested scriptures being interpreted. Then examine the reasons for our different interpretations. Emphasis in the following quoted scriptures is mine, for the purposes to be addressed.

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. 6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. 9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. 11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. 12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 13 And the evening and the morning were the third day. 14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. 20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. 21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. 23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. 24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. 28 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. 29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. 30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so. 31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

In the above very foundation of all Holy Scripture, we are introduced to the creation of at the very least I would say, our galaxy if not the entire universe. The very first act of creation described in the creation of heaven and earth, is the creation of light in apparent darkness, for the very apparent reason of creating a division between light and darkness.

What is light in that first day according to your commonsense interpretation of things if the "lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night" didn't show up until the fourth day (v.19)?

Which division was immediately thereafter defined as day and night, immediately followed by identifying them as evening and morning, of which a day therefore exists.

And in truth, what is day and night on that first day according to your simplest straightforward interpretation if "the two great lights--the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night--and the stars" didn't show up until the fourth day?

Let's start there.