geocreationism.com

I found an interesting article on “How the Bible and Evolution Conflict“.  It explains quite well why Darwinian Evolution cannot be true.  So, because it has much in common with Geocreationism, it looked like a good opportunity to clarify some things.  My comments below are meant to be read side by side with the list on How the Bible and Evolution Conflict.

Geocreationism agrees with Creationism on this point.
Geocreationism agrees with Creationism on this point.  Believing that God sometimes evolved life directly, and other times let it alone does not contradict that.
Geocreationism agrees that God exercised biblical providence over evolution.
Geocreationism agrees that God is judge over all life, its evolution notwithstanding.
Geocreationism believes that God added soul to man, making him …

Our final installment on the “Plant Evolution Tour” brings us to God’s stated purpose for Day 3… the development of seeded plants.  This includes grass and trees.
…it was during the late Devonian between 395-286Ma that seeds developed (to replace spores).  This was a major evolutionary advance, because it eliminated the requirement for external sources of water for sexual reproduction of plants. It also provided better protection and a nutrient source for the developing embryo. This process of development is thought to have started with the conversion of plants from producing spores of one size (homospory) to producing spores of two sizes (heterospory). It is thought that the larger spores were precursors for ovules, and the smaller ovules precursors for pollen. – …

My beloved Christian brethren, with whom I agree on most every aspect of the bible (the gospel, original sin, the rapture, Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection, God’s love, etc.), largely hold one view that I cannot… that the earth is young.  I do not believe in a young earth because I believe the earth itself contains ample evidence that it is old, and the universe contains ample evidence that it is even older.

Scientific arguments with those who believe the earth is young tend not to yield much fruit.  One reason is because the unavoidable human frailty that is manifested throughout the scientific discovery process is taken as proof that scientific discovery itself is no less frail.  However, discounting scientific discovery on such grounds …

In my post, Genesis 1:5b - What is a Day?, I explain how a day in Genesis 1 is defined by when Jesus (at Creation) intentionally experienced evenings and mornings.  However, I have received numerous responses of the following form: that “yom”, the word for day, always means 24-hour days, because its use in other scriptures are always meant to be treated as 24-hour days.  Therefore, the argument goes, creation days, which use the same word “yom”, must by necessity be 24-hour days.  In conclusion, I am twisting scripture to mean something it does not.  Naturally, I disagree.

Following are the scriptures people primarily use to argue for a meaning of 24-hours …

Consider the following argument:

The Theory of Evolution is a natural process
If God used it, then He kicked it off and left it alone
Life forms were created at random (according to Evolution), meaning the accidents survived to reproduce, and hence God was not involved in their actual creation
Genesis records the intentional creation of life, meaning He was involved in their creation
Given this contradiction, as Christians, we must reject Evolution, and accept the Bible, that God creation life, and did it on purpose.  God is no slave to natural processes.

I see this argument frequently.  My Christian brethren who use it also believe in 24-hour creation days. To them, I suggest they consider the following argument:

The rotation of the earth every 24-hours is …