[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

The problem when insisting on a single interpretation of scripture about the real world when others are explicitly possible is that you have the sun going around the earth long after that position is no longer tenable and it brings scripture unnecessarily into disrepute.

It is enough to say that every living thing brings forth after its kind, as stated in Genesis, and that is what an unbiased (in favor of naturalism) analysis of the fossil record shows.

[Agamemnon]

The problem when insisting on a single interpretation of scripture about the real world when others are explicitly possible is that you have the sun going around the earth long after that position is no longer tenable and it brings scripture unnecessarily into disrepute.

You should change your screen name to "straw man." If you don't like that one maybe try, "red-herring" on for size. Deflection in any case is not a cogent argument.

What brings Scripture into unnecessary disrepute is when those who claim to be Christians twist the Scripture to say things it clearly does not simply to suit their own purposes.

The biblical account of the history of creation in Genesis 1 intersects with the perfect Law of God as delivered in Exodus 20.

So then tell us: is it "explicitly possible" in your theology to defy the Law of God?

FReegards!