On 5/12/2026 6:43 PM, sticks wrote:https://steveschramm.com/the-story-of-everything-helpful-or-hurtful-for-christians/I did take mom to go see the movie today. I enjoyed it and thought they did a good job of getting the point across. Like the books, it was mainly just looking at the scientific evidence and the different interpretations, and how we've learned so much more in the last 100 years. I also like the fact that they concentrate on the exact same 3 things I do in deciding how to move forward interpreting scientific evidence. The Origin of the Universe, the Fine Tuning problem, and the Origin of Life. Everything else is just noise.Why did you enjoy the film? You can search the Web and YEC are warning against being "confused" about the issue if they go see the movie. They do not want Christians to understand that the Big Bang means that the creation has been evolving for billions of years. Part of the fine tuning argument is that it took 8 billion years to create the element that our solar system is made of in our star poor portion of the Galaxy to insure that all the elements needed for life were present during the creation of the earth. The elements needed for life were created by dying stars that lived out their life cycles or collided with each other.
>
>
I have not read the book, but Meyer claimed that he got around the anti- Biblical issues by treating the gaps as independent entities, and he only discussed the gaps and not how they related to each other. I asked google and google claims that Meyer does not give a Big Bang creation time line in his book. He instead dealt with the science that went into supporting the Big Bang, and not the particulars of the Big Bang itself. Meyer just produced something to fool the rubes, and did not deal with how the god that filled each individual gap was not the Biblical god.
You claim that you are some type of YEC. How were you fooled by the Movie?
An honest representation of the Big Bang (#1 of the Top Six), fine tuning (#2 of the Top Six) and the origin of life (#3 of the Top Six) could never support YEC Biblical creationism. If you have looked into the Reason to Believe's old earth Biblical creation model you should understand that they can't make them fit into their literal interpretation without adding things to the Bible. They even have to rewrite the 4th day scenario to try to make it consistent with the Big Bang and fine tuning gaps. The YEC scientific creationists used to use the same gap denial arguments (Big Bang, fine tuning, and origin of life) but they only used them as denial arguments to fool the rubes, just like the ID perps. They only present them as independent bits of denial, and the rubes are supposed to forget about one before being lied to about the next one. The YEC rubes are never supposed to understand how the gaps fit into reality. The ID perps killed the ID scam on TO because they presented the Top Six "in the order in which they must have occurred in this universe." MarkE continues to run from the Top Six because that order is not Biblical.
MarkE understands that he needs to wallow in the denial and he can't deal honestly with the fact that the god that fills his gaps is not the god described in the Bible. Why would anyone enjoy wallowing in denial of reality?
Ron Okimoto
This is a link that I found that warns YEC Christians about the ID perp's scam movie. As crazy as it may be there are YEC that understand that an honest presentation is not what creationists want to deal with. The author's solution is for creationists to wallow in the denial, and that they should not try to deal with the context of the gaps. He believes that if they can ignore reality that they can use the gaps as independent bits of god-did-it denial and benefit from it.
How tragically lame are YEC IDiots? This guys solution is the same one that MarkE has decided on.
Nature is not Biblical. No science whether it is called creation science or not is ever going to support literal Biblical creationism.
Ron Okimoto
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.