Evolution for Dummies and Christians

I personally own about 10 Bibles, but that says nothing about how I regard it. For me it is one of the foundations of western Christian culture, and that's why I believe familiarity with it is important. To not know the Bible is to not know where we came from culturally.One of the original questions for Karl was how he knew that God had spoken the words attributed to him in Genesis, and he replied that it is history. But it is not history, for the very definition of historic periods, as opposed to prehistoric, is that written records were kept. Since Genesis wasn't written down until about the 6th century BC, the six days of Creation are a part of the prehistoric period.Of course, that is just a picky, technical answer based upon using the proper definitions of words. Just because an event is prehistoric doesn't mean it didn't happen, but it *does* mean that the evidence cannot come from contemporary sources.In the case of the events in chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis, indeed in much of Genesis, particularly Noah's flood, there is no evidence that the stories aren't mythic, and much evidence that they are scientifically not possible.--Percy

ksc writes:

---

Everyone understand that miracles were performed to create the world. Adam was create from the dust, a miracle, Eve was created from his rib, another miracle. The creation fiat in itself was a miracle. That is not the argument. I can't prove nor disprove a miracle.

---

My interest in the debate stems primarily from concern about the Creationist threat to science education. If the above quote is an accurate statement of your position then it doesn't bother me at all. It is an honest and legitimate religious viewpoint on origins that is not a threat to science education, since not even the Kansas Board of Education would advocate teaching miracles as science.--Percy

ksc writes:

---

The concept of Scientific Creation theorizes that the earth is young, or around six (6) to ten (10) thousand years old. This theory is based upon empirical evidences collected...

---

What evidences? All the evidence indicates an ancient earth and universe, and there is an absence of evidence for a world-wide flood. You should talk to wmscott (his thread is Solving the Mystery of the Biblical Flood), who's written a book claiming the world-wide flood happened, but that it was so brief as to leave virtually no evidence, including no geological evidence.--Percy

TC writes:

---

I would disagree with saying that the earth's 'ancient' history is as ancient as you say. As well as your notion that there is no evidence of a global flood. I have seen that there are mounds of evidences for the catastrophy. However as I discover at times, there is (according to my current understanding) evidence against it, which I continue to play with and try to reach a higher understanding.

---

We're all already pretty familiar with your opinions, and I don't think it's necessary to keep repeating them unless they're accompanied by some actual supporting evidence and/or reasoned argumentation. For instance, you don't agree that there is no evidence of a global flood. That's not new news. What would be new is if you actually presented some evidence or argument.--Percy