A reinterpretation of the Creation Account

That is not a 'myth'. It is science. It has evidence for it. It is testable, and can be falsified.Of course, there is this thing known as the 'Theory of Gravity'. It is not as good a theory , or as testable as evolution.You are using the logical fallacy known as 'equivocation' when it comes to the term 'Theory' as in the 'Theory of Evolution'. You are using the
term as 'speculation'. HOwever , a scientific theory has a bit more of a rigorious definition. There also is the definition

quote:

---

A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

---

True, but only up to a point.When you state that TOE doesn't touch the spiritual you are absolutely correct. Yet I have yet to know a practicing christian believer who accepts TOE just as I've never met an athiest or agnostic who doesn't. That should tell you something.The conflict lies not in the message but in the implication. Look around on this forum and you will see that most messages from self confessed athiests will also implicitly accept TOE and and reject Creationism in any and all its forms.Now I'm not saying that there are "christians" who don't accept TOE, what I'm saying is that they are not practicing christians. Christians who practice their faith and are based on the the Bible will inherently reject TOE.So the message may not state the obvious, but any person with eyes can see the implication.

---

We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

I am a practicing Christian. Your hypothesis is falsified.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

But it isn't a proven fact. If it were, we would all have accepted this "fact" long ago. There are many indicators that corroborate the theory but it has not yet achieved the status of undisputable fact.Even then these indicators are continuously modified as different scientists test it.This message has been edited by Jor-el, 03-August-2005 08:19 PM

---

We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Please elaborate on what a practicing christian believes then.

---

We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

I think I smell a "No true Scotsman" fallacy coming...

Well, I believe that the Universe is at least tens of billions of years old.I belive life started as a simple critter and evolved over billions of years to what we see today.I believe that life will continue to evolve and that long after humans are gone and forgotten, other critters will evolve.I believe that GOD created the Universe and the rules that direct it, including the wonderous system called evolution.I believe that evolution is not directed, is random in nature, is filtered though Natural Selection and that those filters will also be random in nature though specific to a given period.If you have other questions, please feel free to ask. If I'm not here it's because if I don't go to the grocery store I won't eat tonight.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Jeez I have this bad habit of not being clear, sorry about that. I was talking in terms of religous beliefs specifically.

---

We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Well, Religious Beliefs covers a very large area, certainly far more than we could cover in a short discussion and would take us way outside the topic.But if you have some specific questions, I have some time before I have to get to the store. I'll make a cup of coffee and you can ask away.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Ok, here goes.What I have to say, I already spoke to you about in the "Is Genesis to be taken literally Part II" Thread Post 47 - 49The essence would be that Jesus, the cornerstone of christian belief would be out of work if the Genesis account is thrown out of the picture and subsituted with evolution.As we all know there are various levels to christian belief but to call ourselves christians we have to accept that Jesus died on the cross for our sins. Now if there was no "fall from grace" as the saying goes, there is implicitely no sin as well. So why the heck did he willingly go to that cross? Was he a sado-masoquist?So by denying the veracity of the creation account we implicitely deny the foundation of christian belief.

---

We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Since the thread was created with purpose of analyzing the Gap theory in relation to the bible and we seem to be talking about everything except that, would anyone care to bring the conversation "on-topic" again?

---

We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

I don't. Nor does that necessarily follow.Why do we need original sin? Aren't we more than capable of sinning afresh? "Enough of this old sin, bring me some new sin", to parapharse Steve Martin from the Jerk.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I have to go to the store now, but my feeling on the Gap revision of the Genesis stories is simply not needed. All that's needed is to understand that they are Creation Myths, told in the idom of the time with the knowledge of the time to an audience of the time.Post any other questions you might have and I'll catch up in an hour or so.It's about Oporto time there, maybe I can join you in one when I get back.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Too true, yet you do see the implication of such an action. There being no sin, I can do what I like. There is no punishment for an illusion (sin) and no need for forgiveness. The whole concept falls through.

---

We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Don't mean to be out of place here, but since Jar went to the store...Jar never said there was NO sin. Just that we don't need ORIGINAL sin. Everybody sins anyway - why do we need Adam's sin to explain it?