I'm concious of this not becomeing a pile-on.. but just wanted to respond.
faith writes:
Only with respect to the EVOLUTIONIST ASPECTS OF THOSE subjects, which are delineated in the OP. I still say that doesn't appreciably affect workaday science
with all due respect, I think this point is being diproved as people post more.. for example Subbies post on radioactive dating.
faith writes:
There are no definitive tests or verifications possible, it's mostly speculation,
Yet every new find seems to back up the theory. How can this be?
faith writes:
I trust in the collected wisdom of the church over the millennia and I know I'm in accord with a majority of traditionalist interpreters from a variety of denominations
You trust in the collected fallen wisdom of HUMANS... fallible humans. who are subject to the inability to think straight that the fall brought about. I see no reason why you should trust in these ancient people over and above Scientists who work hard to investigate, challenge, debunk, and verify their own and each other theories.
faith writes:
It's not that theoretically I couldn't be misreading it somehow
I glad you accept this as apossibility at least.
faith writes:
it's that I have considered and reconsidered it and I do not see that I am misreading it
yet you seem to believe that the scientific community are either too stupid or to 'arrogant' to do the same. The entire scientific community meaning all particle physicists, all geologists, all paleantologists. etc. I see no justification for this
faith writes:
It reads quite straightforwardly it seems to me.
as do most books I'm sure. But not all books are history or fact. Why is it you consider the bible to be fact? why is it you consider it to be the word of God above all others?
faith writes:
Those who inject billions of years into it seem to me to be forcing it to fit their own preconceptions.
The opposite is true... rather than someone deciding the world is billions of years old and making things fit... they observed the evidence all around them, and
concluded that the world was old. since then, all new evidence found, all things learned concurr.
faith writes:
Those who turn it into a parable have not a shred of justification that I can see.
Where is the justification to suggest it is anything more than a parable? why is it any more 'true' than the latest airport novel? or any other ancient text?
faith writes:
I believe what I believe because I'm convinced it's true and based on good reason too.
I would love to know this reason. I have not yet come across 'good' reason to suggest the bible is complete truth and historical fact.
faith writes:
Not according to the Bible.
is that your good reason? the bible is true because the bible says so? It amazes me that you cannot see the flaw here..
You are a fallen human, yet YOU judge that what was written by other FALLEN HUMANS, (who are by your own definition of fallen, untrustworthy and misguided), thousands of years ago, to be the absolute truth. It seems to me that if genesis is to be believed, no uman could ever trust their own judgement. Even if God speaks to you.. how do you know it is God? you are fallen, your judgement is flawed, it might very well be the devil fooling you.
I'm aware that this discussion is fruitless, but I find it facinating to try to see where YECers are coming from, how they can possibly be comfortable with what they believe when 'creation' screams and old earth scenario. And the biblical definition of the fall requires that humans do not even try to discern what is going on cos we will never understand.(that is inclusive of understanding the bible in my view)