Genesis: is it to be taken literally?

I had a hard time taking in literaly until I actualy read the bible from front to back. reading every aspect of the old testiment and seing how it all fits together opened my eyes to how it all worked out. It took that kind of effort for me to understand. I must admit, it did also take an open mind. now I feel as though I see clearly.This site: http://evolution.no-ip.net also educated me that that belief was not unfounded.I have put this link in many of my posts. I am beginning to feel like a walking commercial for it. Sorry guys, it is that sugnificant. with the many hours of answers to these questions, just about every conversation I have entered easily points to it. Sorry.

ok. thanks.
Interesting how Hovind stirs so much up in this forum. I will try not to cite the site.

I can respect your point of view. I will keep researching.
When I saw him speak at a university near me things seemed quite solid. He debated with the audience quite well. It seems to me evolution has just as firm a ground to stand on as creationism. that is my own personal oppinion.How does one explain "the conservation of angular momentum" not having adverse effects on the evolution theory? why do entire solar systems spin in reverse if there was a big bag?That kind of thinking began to make me think.I will read the link in the second last note. Hovind readily admited he was a hichshool teacher (if I remember correctly). It is not my position to defend him and in fact it is not my desire.
I am here for conversation and debate. I will however read the link once I get time

interesting. so where did matter come from?

The site quite effectively tears appart the thesis Hovind made. I do not follow every area of his life and timelines of what he said and I will not defend his position.
No to excuse kent in anyway, I do know that I am educated as a primary healthcare practitioner. I am always learning. I am also a businessman. As me 10 years ago to write a paper on either health or business and it would look quite flawed and different than if I wrote one today. We are always leaning, our views are always changing. At one time we "knew" that there was nothing smaller than an attom. Then we found the electron. Now we learn that there are elements that create magnitism.
I do not intend to defend hovind in any way but I will say I would hate to be judged by something I did many moons ago. He may be flawed. Some of his theories may be flawed. I am still learning and am glad I have found this forum.

What of his arguments that are not flawed? I am sure there are some.
His take is that he has debated with many proffessors and many refuse to debate him.
one the site are 4 debates with profs. is that not the kind of debate you are speaking or are there different types of debates. I am a little ignorant here.

Interesting.
I have emailed them. I would love to hear what they have to say about it.This is a great conversation. Also paulk i am not a scientist so I would be hard pressed to "prove" even the evolution theory. I am enjoying learning from your posts.