Response To https://twitter.com/MissMingLee92/status/727566889942134784

Some seem to categorize consequences as rewards and punishments, based upon whether the consequences are considered desirable and incentive for repeating the behavior, or undesirable and incentive for avoiding the behavior considered to have resulted in a consequence. That categorization seems somewhat generally considered one of the attributes that separates higher life forms from lower life forms and the apparently so-called inanimate.

Response To https://twitter.com/moinedeisme/status/727481892774146048

Perhaps incorrectly, I don't seem to recall Genesis 1 suggesting that God created everything from nothing, but rather that the earth was without form and void, and that certain aspects of the earth-relevant system existed subsequent to God "suggesting" their existence.

The conservation of energy and mass, and mass-energy equivalence concepts seem to suggest that physical items are transformations of energy. Perhaps, therefore, Genesis 1:2 refers to a point at which the energy that was to become Earth was in somewhat of an unformed state.

To me, the apparent suggestion that God "called" things into existence doesn't necessarily suggest much detail regarding the mechanics thereof, perhaps similarly to the phrase "I drove here" might not detail all of the processes that comprised that hypothetical eventuality.

To me, God doesn't seem clearly Biblically-suggested to have human vocal cords, so God "saying" something doesn't seem to necessarily equate to the phenomenon of human "saying". The phrase "And God said 'Let there be light'", might simply be the closest humanly-relatable phenomenon to that which occurred, and might have been implemented to convey the general concept and move onward.

I welcome reasoned response.

Validity Of Genesis 3

The SIDP doesn't seem to suggest that positive evidence exists for the Genesis 3 serpent's existence, nor does the SIDP seem to insist that the Genesis 3 account is historical fact. The SIDP seems to propose science's findings that seem to preclude categorizing the account as necessarily or even likely fiction. The relevant portion of the website essay presents science's findings that seem to suggest the potential for the apparently Biblically-suggested serpent to have existed, and presents apparently reasonable, potential conditions under which such an apparently potentially-existent being might leave no relatively contemporarily discovered or identified evidence.

Validity Of Adam And Eve As Humanity's Starting Point

I seem to respectfully abstain from that debate since, to me, the Bible seems reasonably interpreted as suggesting that Adam and Eve might have been the first two in the lineage of Israel, since the Old Testament seems reasonably suggested to be about the God/human relationship within the context of a sample group selected for the purpose of helping all humans better understand the nature of the human experience and its apparent dependence upon the God/human relationship.

Defining "Closed System" For The Laws Of Conservation

per my fallible understanding, the sole difference between a closed and open system is that an open system is considered to include a surrounding context to and from which system components can transfer. A closed system seems to be a context to and from which system components cannot transfer to surrounding context. Logic seems to suggest that a closed system can therefore apply to either a sealed subset context or the superset since, in the former, no system components can transfer to or from the subset context, and in the latter, since a superset refers to "all that exists" there exists no surrounding context for system component exchange.

The Reasoning For God As Wielder Of Energy

to me, energy seems not to have those attributes, which seems to me to suggest that there must exist a point of reference with those attributes, not solely because the Bible suggests so (although that seems to me to be the source of my exposure to the concept), but because the attributes seem most logically suggested to be intrinsic to the source of the remainder of reality, as the SIDP Attributes essay seems to demonstrate.

Response To https://twitter.com/creationwrong/status/726866202895736836

skipping over the unsubstantiated assertion "it doesn't", re: energy as God, that does not seem to be the SIDP suggestion, but rather, that science seems to attribute to energy the infinitely-existent sourcing of all other aspects of observed reality that the Bible attributes to God.