Scientific words and the definitions

In order to discuss scientific topics with me, you must utilize the same scientific language that is required in order to understand what is being talked about. As well, to prevent raising the bar, etc.… so you must be pedantic and use the correct terminology, and definitions of the words while accepting that’s what they mean when said. If you cannot, then you can’t say I, or science is wrong, only the strawman you created is and argue against is

Evolution

Any change in the frequency of alleles within a gene pool of a population from one generation to the next.

Micro evolution

See Evolution

Macro evolution

Macroevolution involves variation of allele frequencies at or above the level of a species.

Abiogenesis

How life began from chemicals.

Evidence (Scientific evidence)

Evidence is a body of objectively verifiable facts that are positively indicative of and or exclusively conductive one available position over any other.

Proof

Proofs is something that exist with alcohol, as well in mathematics and logic, not in science. Mathematics and logic are both self-contained systems of propositions. When it comes to science, science is empirical and deals with nature as it exists.

cladogenesis

See Macro evolution

Human

A member of the primate genus Homo, especially a member of the species Homo sapiens, distinguished from other apes by a large brain and the capacity for speech.

Paleontology

The study of the forms of life existing in prehistoric or geologic times, as represented by the fossils of plants, animals, and other organisms (Evolution from a historic perspective).

Theory

A theory is a framework of an explanation that explains observed facts. What this means is that the theory of evolution is that which explains the observed phenomenon known as evolution. Just as gravity theory explains the observed phenomenon known as gravity.

Kinds, it’s useless in a scientific discussion.

Whenever discussing evolution it is not uncommon for an anti-evolution, Young Earth Creationist (YEC) to bring up a word “kind” or “kinds” as a form of classification of organisms. Often arguing that one kind cannot become another kind, sometimes worded like, “A dog will always be a dog, as one kind cannot become another kind.” ignoring the fact that this shows their lack of understanding of what evolution is, this begs the question. What is a kind?

Very few YEC who bring up the idea of kind, Ever make any attempt to define what a kind is. This may be because they either do not know what kind is themselves, or they wish to have the ability to move the goalposts later on.

There is, however, a very small minority of YEC that do, and they do not tend to agree with what the Bible says. For some, they say it is akin to the scientific taxonomic classification of speciation. Though they tend to abandon this definition when it is revealed that speciation has been observed and therefore what they believed was impossible was actually something observed to have happened. So they moved the goalpost up ever-so-slightly demonstrating they don’t actually wish to accept evolution, despite the overwhelming evidence give them to them.

Then you have those that will try to define kinds as one animal, that can only reproduce after its kind. The idea being that a dog will only produce dogs. This however reveals a multitude of different problems. Not problems for what they think evolution is, but for the YEC.

For one, how does that definition apply to organisms that do not reproduce with others of the same species, but instead reproduce asexually, species that say…. replicate through mitosis or binary fusion? this means there must be multiple different definitions for one word. So, we will have no clue what they’re talking about when they say kinds unless each and every time they will say which definition they’re using.

Another problem is, to accept such a definition for kinds means you must reject what the Bible says and more importantly, what it does not say.

You see, the Bible never says or even implies that an Animal can only reproduce after its kind, despite how many of my fellow Christians actually believe it does. However, if you search the Bible you will never find it say that. Never will you even find both animals and reproduce in the same sentence. Don’t believe me, good, read the Bible and find out for yourself.

You will notice a complete absence of the Bible ever saying “Animals reproduce after their kind.” Nor do we find the Bible say, “animals bring forth animals after their kind”

If the Bible said such things, then sure, YEC would have a biblical case for it. Yet, the Bible does not say that. Never has anyone ever presented me with such a passage, where we find the subject ‘animal’ is next to the verb ‘brings forth’. It’s just not in there. instead we find God instructing the Earth to bring forth. one might ask themselves how does the Earth bring forth many diffrent ‘kinds.’ What this means is that the Bible does not rule out evolution. To claim otherwise is dishonest.

When the Bible mentions various ‘kinds’, it’s not talking about or implying anything about its reproductive limitations or abilities. It’s just saying the earth brought them forth. Again, I must ask that question how does the Earth bring forth things?

When the Bible commands the earth to produce plants and trees…. that bear fruit… according to their various kinds. It’s not telling us that fruit could only reproduce fruit after their kind. It’s just simply saying the earth/land is to create various kinds of fruit. It doesn’t even say how the Earth was or was not to do this. To claim the Bible does when it does not is dishonest.

To quote Glenn R. Morton on this,

If I send you to the grocery store to “get fruits after their kind”, do you think I have told you something about the reproductive potential of fruit trees? Of course, I haven’t. I have told you to get various kinds of fruits from the store. This is the same thing that Genesis 1:11 is saying. God created various kinds of fruits.

When we look at how the Bible uses the word ‘kinds’, we can quickly find that the Bible Clumps all sorts of organisms together. That has nothing to do with their reproductive capabilities.

For example, it is often claimed the Bible is wrong because the Bible says bats are bird’s in Leviticus 11:13-19 when Moses tells us about the birds (listing off different birds when one such bird listed is not a bird by any modern classification) is a bat. So did the bible get it wrong? Of course not, but why would we find that the Bible lists bats as bird?

In response, it is very common for Christians to point out that the Bible is not using modern classification. Instead of classifying organisms based upon what they are, it classifying organisms based on what they do. This lets us makes sense of how a bat is seen as a bird. So we have different things that cannot reproduce that still are the same kind, the bird kind. In this case, they are the owph (“owner of a wing.”). Makes one wonder, if bats can be birds, then why do YEC reject the idea birds can be dinosaurs?

To add to this, the Bible also describes bats as Locust too. As if one kind is capable of crossing into different kinds. Consequently, when we have different organisms that are the same kind but can’t reproduce with others of their own kind. It acts as a good indicator that kinds have nothing to do with an organism’s ability to reproduce.

This can further be seen when it comes to birds themselves, according to creationists they are their own kind, a bird kind. The problem for them is there are many types (species) of bird and the Bible describes different birds as different kinds.

So, we have the biblical kind that includes birds, bats, and certain insects known as “owph” as the same ‘kind’. Then we have ‘kinds’ that cross over into other ‘kinds’, then some of those kinds like the bird kind, have their own ‘kind’ of different birds, like the Glede (Deuteronomy 14:13), Kite (Deuteronomy 14:13), Nighthawk (Deuteronomy 14:15), Hawk (Deuteronomy 14:15), Stork (Deuteronomy 14:18), Heron (Deuteronomy 14:18) All of which despite being their own kind can reproduce with other kinds creating hybrids, while at the same time can’t reproduce with all within the bird kind.

Not only does this render the word kinds useless because you don’t know what a ‘kind’ is and on what level of this kind is being referred to when talking about it (are you talking of all “owner of a wing” kind, the birds kind with in that kind or the bats, or a subset of a subset of bird kinds?), as the word kind would consequence have multiple meanings that get confusing. While at the same time, we still have no line to delineate when one kind starts and another one begins. No standard to test when something could or couldnot effectively become another kind. the word ultimately is just too ambiguous to use to mean anything by itself.

It’s that confusion that makes using Biblical ‘kinds’ useless at least when discussing science. and again it only continues to shows that we have no basis to claim kinds is in reference to reproductive abilities/inabilities. So, defining kinds, at least biblically cannot be done in a useful way. Because, kinds in the Bible are classified based upon what they do rather than what they are.

At most, we can say kinds is just simply a laymen recognition. Where If Adam gave it a different name then it’s a different kind. An interesting side note about the names. You ever notice how Adam names some animals in such a way indicates carnivores?

Days of Proclamation, A Literal Reading of Genesis 1

A long time ago, the Bible had been interpreted in such a way to mean that the earth was a stationary object fixed in place. There had even been many attempts to model the universe after this interpretation.

However, when Galileo came along he had revealed that the Earth was revolving around the Sun. Sure, this wasn’t exactly a popular view, and the early church’s response was not exactly the best, but it did reveal that there was a problem with our old interpretations.

Science didn’t change our interpretation it just revealed a problem with an old interpretation. It only resulted in people going back to the Bible and reevaluated how they had been interpreting it. Figuring out what they missed, or added by mistake.

If it had only just been discovered in the last 50 years, chances are Young Earth Creationist (YEC) would probably be making many of the same arguments they are with Evolution and the Earth being old today. From arguing it’s an atheist scientific conspiracy to arguing same evidence different interpretation.

Anybody who has accepted the heliocentric model and is a Christian would probably even be accused of trying to make the Bible fit what science says. As they claim they do with other scientific fields of study they reject today, such as evolution.

The fact is today’s Christians who accept evolution and that the Earth is millions of years old are no different from the early Christians who had been forced to realize there was a problem that was revealed with their interpretation of the Bible due what Galileo presented. Something most Christians today are willing to accept despite how the interpretation changed from the outside (scientific) evidence.

So the criticism is quite hypocritical of the YEC who accepts the heliocentric model (yeah there are a few YEC who reject it). Because Christians re-evaluated how they were interpreting scripture.

Now keep that in mind as I continue if you just simply reject what I say because you don’t like it, or because you’re thinking, I’m trying to make the Bible fit science. I am only recognizing that there is a theological problem with the YEC interpretation that is revealed by science. And because of this, I am simply going back to the Bible to find out what it really says with an open mind. How anyone can find that to be a bad thing, I do not know.

Now many who profess themselves to be YEC often claim they are interpreting the Genesis account found in the Bible literally. I, however, highly disagree with such a claim. When we look at their claim, I don’t see them taking it literally. I often even see them making the Bible say more than it does in order to back up the YEC idea of creation. Which is one reason why I accept the ‘Days of Proclamation’ (DOP) reading of the Bible.

Simply put DOP is just a plain reading of what the Bible says, paying close attention to the grammar of what the Bible says. While, unlike YEC it doesn’t add a bunch of additional variables, which also tend to cause problems, while it solves problems that YEC does not solve, even solving some of the problems that the younger creationist model creates in its explanations.

For example when the Bible says,

“And God said, “Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth”; and it was so.”

One thing you will notice from reading this is the complete absence of it saying it was done instantly. Or anytime time frame was given at all. The YEC position rests upon this idea of it happening instantly. Sure, nothing says God could not have created instantaneously. However, reading it plainly, it is clear what it does not say. And what it does not say is it was done instantly.

Furthermore, YEC will read into this and, say God is taking the action, as in, he is doing the creating. However, when we look at it, we find what God said to be very clear here. He says, “Let the earth bring forth…” The Bible does not say God brought forth the grass and herb, it is saying very clearly, “let the earth.” A YEC may reject this saying God made the grass, but that is not what the Bible clearly says here. To ignore this and claim differently is to reject the literal reading of what scripture says.

With the Earth being the only thing that brought forth something here one must ask, how does the earth bring forth something if not by the scientific explanations of how it’s done?

Additionally, as we continue, looking at the very next thing that was said we find out the result of God’s command.

“And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself”

Notice god is not to be seen in this sentence? What we do see is that it was the Earth, at God’s command is that which has brought forth he grass and Herb yielding seed.

This is what sets DOP and YEC apart. DOP is accepting a plain literal reading of Genesis, while YEC interpretation requires one to think, scripture says it happens instantly. As well, that God did something God told the Earth to do. Where the word Created (the verb) is not being applied to God. Instead, the subject is the earth.

Again, this is just a plain literal reading of what the Bible says. To reject it is to reject what the Bible is clearly saying here. Yet a little reading is how DOP approaches it, it coming from a literal perspective of what the Bible says. Where it is taking a theological approach of accepting what the Bible is actually saying. Not adding to what it says or assuming it says something it does not.

DOP takes into account many things as well, like how Genesis 1 is being written from the narrator’s perspective. Where the narrator tells us that God said something then the narrator tells us in the following sentence, hay look it happened.

Not to mention when we read the Bible we find God tends to work by first saying he will do something then it is fulfilled later. With the Bible full of many different prophecies being fulfilled.

Understanding this and how it does not say, “and God said “Let there be light instantaneously.” We can see God starts off the Bible much the same way we find him doing things all over in the bible. God is making a proclamation and the narrator is effectively saying, Hey, look around it happened. This makes Genesis the pre-planning stage. Where nothing was created yet and the narrator just confirming what happened long after Adam and Eve.

Think about it, when God gave his prophecy about Christ was it something that happened instantaneous?

With this said, let’s look at what the Bible says and break it down into what God said and what the narrator said.

God said: “Let there be light”:

Narrator said: ” and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.”

God said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

Narrator said: “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. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.”

God said, “Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear:”

Narrator said, “and it was so. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

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:”

Narrator said, “and it was so. 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. And the evening and the morning were the third day.”

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. And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth:”

Narrator said “and it was so. 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. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 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. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.”

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.”

Narrator said, “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. And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.”
[Note that the narrator talks of God in the 3rd person ]

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:”

Narrator said, “and it was so. 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.

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.”

Narrator said, So God created man in his own image, in the image of God, created he him; male and female created he them. 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.

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. 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:”

Narrator said, “and it was so. And God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth days.

By reading it this way, we not only no longer have many of the objections atheist make about the Bible like two conflicting creation stories as Genesis 1 vs 2 is as now Genesis 2 is the story about the creation of man a long time after Genesis 1. Or how YEC creates problems with the order in which things are created such as how do you have photosynthesis before the Suns ever created if we accept the YEC interpretation.

Simply put, the plain reading of the Bible is in no way in conflict with what science has discovered such as the Earth be millions of years old and the Universe even older. Even evolution it’s not in conflict with what the Bible says. Again how does the Earth bring forth?

Sure creationist are under a false impression that the Bible says something like, “Animals reproduce after their kind” but nowhere where you ever find the Bible saying such a thing. You won’t even find the word reproduce and animal next to each other.

Instead we find that the Bible tells us that the earth brought forth animals of various kinds, with nothing saying they are limited by some kind of invisible barrier that would prevent evolution.

Explaining to Creationist, What Evolution Really is.

It is kind of odd that I find myself writing with the intent to teach people about evolution. It would seem very few people actually know what evolution is. And there are a lot of reasons for this.

One big reason is that textbooks do a really poor job at explaining evolution, most actually get it wrong. Even the teachers at grade schools and high schools often don’t understand what evolution is. So they end up teaching a faulty version of evolution. Most often, they say it is one animal turning into another. Even the textbooks in schools are often incorrect, mainly because the people writing them don’t know what evolution is let alone how to describe it. Then you even have those who reject evolution writing the textbooks and putting their own false version of it down in print. Only to end up being taught to children.
So what is evolution? In the most simplistic way possible to describe it, it is change. Nothing magical or extraordinary about it.
Nothing actually ends up turning into something else. Instead, it’s just a variation of what it once was, even if it looks vastly different than its ancestor. A good way to think about it is if you take a piece of clay and mold it into something. It’s still clay no matter what shape you make it.
Another example is the termite. The termite simply is a variation of a wood eating cockroach. It’s a social wood eating cockroach. It didn’t stop being a cockroach when it evolved, because it’s still a cockroach, just a variation of them.
Even humans are just variations of our ancestors. All of us are still eukaryote, unikonts and opisthokonts, despite how we look so vastly different. Just as we are still primates and mammals. When we say ‘Homo sapiens’, it is just a name for specific type of variation of our ancestors.
Again, there is nothing magical or special about it. One organism does not turn into another completely different type of organism, that because does not outgrow its ancestry.

Challenging Evan Philips Love of Christ

 Before I start this blog, let me make it clear that I do understand that  NephilimFree (A.K.A Even Philips, AKA: IornOne) may actually be a atheist, or some kind of nonbeliever posing as a Christian and saying and doing the things he does for some laughs. Or that he may be doing this with the intention of making Christians look really ignorant, dishonest, etc.. In order to drive people away from Christ.

Which is not hard to believe when Nephilimfree tells people that he believes that the sun revolves around the earth, as well as his behaviors and actions that seem to go out of the way to be unchristian like. So I am well aware that I could be a victim of POE’s law here. However, even though I recognize this as a possibility, I personally believe that he, at least, believes he is a Christian. I believe this because of my interactions with him and how many years he’s been at this. But why he says the things he does and behaves the way he does. I don’t exactly know. It could very well be that perhaps, there is a psychological condition that could explain it. Something like perhaps the Dunning–Kruger effect.

But him being accused of doing satire or trolling, says a lot about Nephilimfree because, when he is being mistaken as somebody who is not a Christian and is making videos for some laughs. Or with the intent of making fun of Christians by making them look bad and trying to drive a wedge between Christ and the nonbelievers with his videos. Then one would think he would realize what he is saying and doing is not exactly benefiting Christ. Especially when his works are not acting as a light before others (Matthew 5:16) but instead are having the opposite effect.

 Which brings me to why I am challenging his love for Christ. First, I’m not doing it because I feel that Nephilimfree will change reading this, although I would like that to be an outcome. However, from past dealings with him. It seems highly unlikely at this point in time. So I’m doing this for people who may be new in Christ or believers in general, who may unwittingly following and emulating him, not knowing that his works don’t follow that of a person who loves Christ. I am also doing this for the nonbelievers who may look upon Nephilimfrees works and judge Christians based upon that.

1 Peter 2:11-12 tells us to abstain from our sinfulness so that those who speak against us, do so only in slander. Not in truth. Now the Bible also says:

“If you love Me, *Keep My commandments.” John 14:15

However, when we see people such people as Nephilimfree, who seems to be willingly go out of their way to break Christ Commandments. What are we to think? Now being a Christian does not mean one needs to be perfect. We are still sinners. However, a person’s works is a very good indication if they love Christ. Have you ever heard the saying “faith without works is dead”. This comes from James 2:20. Now contrary to what some believe, this saying does not mean your salvation is dependent upon your works. But instead, it is saying that if your faith is real, then it’s going to manifest itself in your works. Simply believing in God is not going to make you saved. Even the devil believes in Christ’s existence. However, this has not saved him. Because, the devil does not trust him, and follow him.

Now the same can even be said about Nephilimfree. Who may, like the devil, believe in Christ. However, just like the devil, he just doesn’t trust him enough to obey him, and make any outwardly shown attempt to keep his commandments.

One great example of this is his dishonesty. Remember earlier I brought up how he believes (or at least said that he believes that) the sun revolves around the earth. Now this goes against how most people today interpret the Bible. Now that is not the problem. Simply interpreting the Bible differently does not mean one is not a Christian nor does it means he does not love Christ. This just means he has a different opinion or interpretation of Scripture than other people happen to have, including myself. And perhaps it is those of us who disagree with the geocentric earth have yet been able to provide a good enough argument to convince him that the Bible does not support such an idea. Or perhaps Nephilimfree feels that his own arguments in the end are some how stronger than the arguments of those of us who believe the earth orbits the sun. So, that is not the issue that would make one believe that he has no love for Christ.

No the issue that shows his lack of love for Christ is what he is doing. See some time after, he lies to a nonbeliever about ever having that position. A position that he has tried to defend in the past (Watch at 2:25 on the time line) with his claimed education in photography.

If Nephilimfree loves Christ, he would not have needed to lie. He could have just said that he changed his position. And no longer holds to the idea that the sun revolves around the Earth. How does he love his neighbor if he can’t even be honest and upfront with them? Let alone, how is he showing that he loves Christ when he cannot keep the commandment to love his neighbor?

Nephilimfree has had plenty of time to come forward, now that he’s been caught red-handed in this lie. And confess not only to the fact that he has changed his position, but to the fact that he lied to a nonbeliever and apologize to them. Showing remorse for what he has done. Yet Nephilimfree has not done that. Again he is not showing love to his neighbor and he’s not showing his love for Christ because, he’s not even keeping his commandment to love his neighbor. Instead he is chosen to continue being dishonest. Shwoing this person disrespect by lying to them and then not even coming forward and confessing and apologizing to them for his actions.

This seems to be very normal for Nephilimfree. As he seems to have an inability to admit that he is wrong. Sure he may sometimes admit he’s wrong on something small like he gave a incorrect web address. However, I have yet to observe him ever admitting that he is wrong on any topic that he takes a stance on. Worse yet, he seems unwilling to even admit to the possibility that he could be wrong on any issue that he has taken a position on.

It is this never admitting that he’s wrong attitude that may somehow be linked to why Nephilimfree misrepresents people and the position that they may take in a discussion. Some time ago when I had my LTB youtube channel and when I was far more arrogant then I am today and only just beginning my own journey of becoming humble, which I still am on. Nephilimfree and myself had some back and forth videos.

During that time, he repeatedly misrepresented my position on geology. He constantly argued that I accept uniformitarianism. And repeatedly, I had corrected him, informing him of the actual position I do take. Which was and remains actualism. Despite this he did not stop misrepresenting my position, and instead attempted to tell me what I believe when it comes to geology. When it was not just the positions I take personally when it comes to this area of science.

He also continuously misrepresented my theological position when it comes to creation. He continuously argued as if I took the position of being a Gap-Theorist or a Day age creationist. Making the argument that a day in the book of Genesis is a day. And no matter how many times I told him that, I agree with him and that’s not where our views differ on creation. He repeatedly argued as if I disagreed with him on how long a day was. I don’t know if he felt that he needed to misrepresent my position in the hopes that I would defend the position I don’t take in order to give him better footing in the discussion. Or if for some reason. He required some website out there to already have a rebuttal to my actual position that I take. And when he could not find one . He felt it best just to misrepresent my actual position. Whatever the reason. He was not showing me any love by doing so.

It was not just that he misrepresents peoples position but he also misrepresents their arguments continuously. For example, in one particular case, I was presenting an argument for how science can take the speed at which the Earth’s Continental plates move today, and use magnetic rocks to calculate the speed at which these plates moved in the past to get a relative age of the earth showing it to be older then that, which Nephilimfree believes it is. And then take that calculation from a completely different area of scientific study. And then compare that to a different area of science to get a concordance of data. Which verified those other areas of science. One of which, was radiometric dating. I never mentioned radiometric dating as part of those calculations.

However, he misrepresented my argument. When I was talking about the magnetic rocks. He was countering that by arguing that the rocks cannot be radiometrically dated. Which clearly I was not making an argument for.

I’m not the only one that Nephilimfree does this to. Nor is this a rarity. As this is a very huge ongoing issue with him. When having a discussion with him, you end up spending more time trying to correct his misrepresentation of you or your argument then you do on the actual topic. And when you repeatedly point this out to him he ignores you and continues doing this. So how is he showing other people love, when he continuously misrepresents the person and their argument? Being dishonest and disrespectful by misrepresenting somebody’s position or argument is not showing them or Christ love. It is the very opposite.

It is not just human beings and our arguments that he is willing to misrepresent but, he seems to be willing to do it to the Bible. From the video we can see, either Nephilimfree either does not read the Bible and just cut and paste what others say what the Bible says, on the some website and does so without ever checking. Or he is the one who misrepresents the Bible. This can be seen when Nephilimfree tries to take a topic about Moses and Israel and applies it to a completely different timeline and subject within the Bible in order to get it to support his interpretation of the Bible of there being a planet flood.

We can see from his works and how his lack of trust in Christ effects the nonbeliever. For one, he verifies the beliefs that many nonbelievers have. Instead of a situation where nonbelievers can only slander believers. His works effectively make it true (At lest with him) when they say the things they say. Emboldening, empowering, and confirming the ideas that nonbelievers may have about us believers. Leaving other Christians, like myself, in the position where we end up calling out others… Others who are calling themselves Christians, whose works go against Christ’s teachings, and hoping we can at least heal some of the damage that is done when people such as Nephilimfree go around calling themselves Christians, and showing no love for their neighbors, let alone Christ.

It is not just his dishonesty and inability to admit that he’s wrong. There are so many other issues when it comes to Nephilimfree. From his, self-righteousness, arrogance, Pride, even how he agonizing the nonbelievers and puts them down. For example, Nephilimfree issued a challenge to debate. He sent out a few conditions for that debate. Others conditions would be put together behind the scenes for the debate to go through. And it was DonExoduse2 who accepted his debate and worked out the conditions for that debate. However, He continuously changed the conditions for that debate, all the while projecting his own actions of changing the conditions for the debate onto DonExodus2. Eventually DonExodus2 became frustrated and tired of dealing with Evan. Then decided not to do the debate and instead use the situation to promote something else. Nepilimfrees response to this, was to say DonExodus2 chickened-out and to boast about it.

So not only was Nephilimfree being dishonest by projecting how he was changing the conditions of the debate. But he was an agonizing and putting down DonExodus2 for walking away from his games, by saying he chickened-out all the while trying to use the situation to boast about himself and creationism. A person who loves his neighbor, as well as Christ. Does not antagonize or boast. But that is what he has done. So what are we to think? Let alone the nonbeliever to think? Especially when he has a goal to shame people.

I think this lack of love for Christ becomes even more evident when we don’t just look at his works, in the sense of his behaviors and actions. But instead, when we look at what appears to be the most important thing to Nephilimfree. And that appears to be creation itself. When one goes to his channel and looks, what they will find is almost all videos on the topic of creation. There is almost no other videos on any other topic, including videos on Christ alone.

Sure Evan mentions Christ here and there in his videos, including his creationist videos. However, if you compare the amount of time and effort that he puts into the topic of creation to that which he talks about Christ, let alone just compared to any other subject within the Bible, we end up seeing what is the most important thing to him.

Creation appears so important to him that, he was not just satisfied with having a YouTube channel to talk about creation. And he needed another avenue to devote more time to discussing creation and created a website about it. The best word to describe a this huge amount of time and energy that he puts in to the subject of creation. Would have to be “obsession”.

The Bible tells us that when we end up devoting ourselves to things that take away from our devotion to God, be it money, an ideology, the search for power, family, etc… It becomes a false idol. The same can also be said, when somebody is obsessed about about creation. So when I see somebody like Nephilimfree, who is so obsessed with creation, I see somebody who is worshiping creation and not the creator. Creation worship… If you will.

This in itself makes it look as though he doesn’t love God, he doesn’t love Christ. Because he so obsessed with creation and not the creator. But when we combined that with Nephilimfree’s works which also acts as evidence for his lack of love for Christ. What are we supposed to think other than Nephilimfree does not love Christ?

Also, his use of censorship in itself is very revealing. Because he’s not just censoring people who are using inappropriate language or trolling his channel. He is censoring people who are presenting good arguments, even evidence for their position. Now if he believed what he was saying was true, then there would be no need to use censorship to silence people with a different opinion. As he would believe the truth would be able to stand up against whatever somebody else was presenting. But apparently, he doesn’t even really believe what he goes around preaching on the Internet because, he’s using intellectual dishonesty to both make it look like his arguments are not challenged as well as preventing himself from acknowledging these arguments.

Now a lot of people are thinking. Nephilimfree doesn’t love Christ. So he’s not a Christian. And I can see how easy it is to jump to that conclusion. I mean, as I mentioned before Evan’s behaviors and actions have made it so people actually think he’s a nonbeliever whose just purposely trying to drive a wedge between nonbelievers and believers. However, I will plead with people not to jump to that conclusion. As Christians we should never judge other people to be Christians or not to be Christians.

Instead, I want to plead with my fellow Christians to accept Nephilimfree as a Christian and be ready to take that responsibility of accepting him as a Christian. See many Christians will say they were Christians are not perfect but, then at the same time, when somebodys behavior and actions are not what we would expect of our fellow Christian and is making us look bad. They end up forgetting that line that we tell people about how we are not perfect. And say they are not a Christian in order to make ourselves as a whole look better. Thus delegating the responsibility for their actions and behaviors to the nonbelievers. And in the end we are not making ourselves look better as we are looking more like people who don’t like to take responsibility.

Think of it this your friend, who you’ve always thought of as a terrific example of a Christian lost a family member and now behaves differently and even is saying that he rejects Christ now. Does this mean he’s not a Christian? Now it could be that he is just having a hard time and has lost his faith and is now becoming disobedient to God. However, this does not mean he hasn’t been saved and it doesn’t mean he won’t come back. It is between God and that persopn as to who is a Christian and who is not. We shouldn’t make that judgment ourselves if he is saved or not. The same goes for Nephilimfree.

When it comes to Nephilimfree. We don’t have the full picture. It could be that he has been saved and has just gotten lost and went down the wrong track at some point. The Bible is full of stories like this where people get off the track and come back. So we should treat him as if he is a Christian, pointing out the things he does wrong, and praising him for the things he does right. In the hopes that God will bring back or use us to help bring him back onto the right track. Because he may have genuinely loved Christ at some point and been saved, but somewhere along his journey with Christ. He just made a wrong turn. And now walks a path where he loves himself, and creation more.

We also don’t know if he really does have a psychological problem, and it’s not just a case of extreme dishonesty and manipulation. And in that case he may still be saved. However, because of the psychological problems that he may have. It may be causing a lot of the things we see today with him. So I want to encourage people not to reject him as a Christian.

However with that said, we still need to be cautious with him because he very well may be a nonbeliever who just wishes to drive a wedge between the nonbelievers and Christ. We also need to make sure that other Christians, especially those who are new and nonbelievers who are on the fence. Understand that they should not follow him, his example or his creation worship version of Christianity. And for that matter, they should probably just stay clear of him until he is back on the correct track.

We also need to use the situation with Nephilimfree to show the nonbelievers that we recognize this kind of behavior from him as unacceptable. And show them that we will confront him because of it. And we will take responsibility for him as a Christian, instead of trying to pawn him off onto them, the nonbelievers by saying he’s not a Christian.

 As it stands however, his works tell us that he does not love God. And I will be praying for him.

By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments. The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him; (1 John 2:3-4)