Replies

The gaps between family groups are too big to be crossed the once every 434 years the evidence suggests it would have to be, should evolution be responsible.

It's kind of hard to know if there were new families created 434 years ago, or even 217 years ago. In fact, there could be a new family in your back yard right now that you don't even know about.

I look at the Creationist/Evolution battle from two viewpoints. There are two conflicts which do not need to exhist.

Point 1: The 'missing link' of modern man is perplexing and frustrating the Evolutionists. The most volitile aspect of the creation/evolution aspect is: Did we or did we not evolve from some slime in the sea? That elusive 'missing link', time and again, is proven to be one hoax or mistake after another. It's counfounding everyone. We can link the evolution of all manner of life forms, but not of modern man. Modern man, according to many scientists over the past several decades, seemed to appear from nohwere and rapidly dominate the earth. That coincides with the Bible. Adam was created. He and Eve were cast out of Eden and rapidly took dominion over the the earth.

Point 2: Look at the Bible. Page 1: The sun is created on the second day. Huh? Second day? Doesn't that surprise anyone? The days of Genisis were not solar days. They could be anything. Days of Heavan? Phases of the Universe? God only knows.

I'm no great scientist, so maybe I need correcting. But in the first day, what I think is really kool, the light was separated from the darkness. Sounds like an explosion to me. The Big Bang, perhaps? And the Bible fortells that the stars will roll up like a scroll. The side view of a scroll rolling up looks exactly the same as a ball of stars being drawn back together, which will ultimately happen when the big bang energy is weaker than the gravitational pull of the stars.

Conclusion: Science is beginning to catch up with the Bible. But those who interpret with a reactionist perspective fail to see it. So far, Christianity remains highly compatible with science when compared with other religions. But there is always room for improvement. Seek the Truth, and the Truth will set you free. FReegards....

May I add to your argument about the flexibility the Biblical account of creation has? The meaning of a word, no matter how many times it appears in the Bible, is determined by its immediate context -- not a majority vote. In the case of Genesis, if we are to conclude that a 24 hour day (yom) represents a full rotation of the earth about its axis relative to the sun, then there is an apparent problem: God didn't create the sun until "day" 4. This detail opens the possibility of alternative interpretations of the word yom, which may or may not demand a literal 24 hr period. Secondly, to be strictly literal, the phrase "evening and morning" does not necessarily encompass a 24 hour period, but something considerably less, like the hours between late afternoon to early morning. Perhaps the phrase could be taken figuratively, expressing the concept of the beginning and ending of period of time (or labor). Additionally, if the phrase "evening to morning-the first day" is to be taken only as a literal 24 hours, why is it absent on the 7th day? In fact, this is the point in which God rested and has not ceased even until now, since Hebrews 4 informs us that he is still in that Sabbath rest into which he entered after he created. Therefore, if the 7th day includes all of world history to date, and to God "a 1,000 years is a day and a day is 1,000 years," isn't it at least possible the universe is extremely old, perhaps even older than modern science has even begun to imagine? Regards

Thanks for your input. I'm an old earth creationist myself, so I agree with your post. To clarify- I meant new families, not newly discovered families that have been around and leaving fossils for eons. I agree there could be a newly DISCOVERD family, but that is not the same as the families we know of changing enough so that so members of it are reclassed as new families within written history.