And they went into the ark to Noah, two by two, of all flesh in which is the breath of life. So those that entered, male and female of all flesh, went in as God had commanded him; and the Lord shut him in.(Genesis 7:15-16) NKJV
There’s a current argument in Creationism, it’s being called a schism. The word schism must mean that “both side are wrong but they don’t care, they just like to argue.”
Creation scientists who accept the validity of plate motion (catastrophic plate tectonics) have been accused of ‘naturalism’ and have been labelled as ‘remodellers’.
For those that do not accept CPT as a mechanism, a different approach to creating a biblical geologic framework has been suggested. These creation scientists claim to be able to ‘reconstruct’ geologic history based solely “on an outline derived from the Bible”, thereby liberating biblical history from geologic history, including the secular timescale and biostratigraphy.– Empirical data support seafloor spreading and catastrophic plate tectonics. CREATION.com
There’s a lot of confusion here which is the result of trying to hammer the square peg of Biblical history into the round hole of the popular science paradigm (SciPop). There’s a tacit acceptance that “geologic history” and the “secular timescale” are the same thing. They aren’t.
- Geologic history (the stratigraphic column)
- is a primary source of evidence.
- The secular timescale is an inductive rationalization of evidence to fit the SciPop narrative,
- a secondary source of evidence.
They’re treating the induced narrative of SciPop as if it’s a primary source of evidence and then haggling over details. There’s no reason to do that. I’d like to ask the reconstructers and remodelers a simple question: where’s hell?
Christians argue about doctrine. Creationists argue about science. Matty harmonizes doctrine with science in such a sublime way that may take a generation or two before people understand it.
House of Serenity
Health and Wellness