You never did answer the question.
we don’t understand enough about the “source code” of life to know what the trade offs are for not producing our own vitamin C.
The trade off is we get scurvy.
The source code for the vitamin C gene is very well known, and the copy in humans and apes is broken in an identical way. That fits evolution theory, because a critter that eats fruits doesn't need to manufacture vitamin C.
This common defect proves evolution in two ways. First, it demonstrates (along with several thousand other retro-virus genes that have been inserted into the common ape/human genome) that humans and apes are indeed related genetically. The technique is not unlike using DNA to test for parentage, except it requires a much deeper analysis of the sequences. Which has been done.
The second way this demonstrates evolution is what I mentioned above, that humans and apes don't require the gene, so individuals that inherit the defect don't die. Genes that are required for the survival of an individual don't have errors, because when they occur the individual doesn't survive to reproduce. But genes that aren't strictly required can accumulate errors, and so we find them.
I have thalessemia, an inherited blood disorder that won't kill me, but results in my inability to exercise for long time periods, such as distance running. It is known that this disorder occurs in people with a Mediterranean heritage, an area with relatively mild climate, and a history of civilization that could have supported individuals that had the gene. I can guess that it doesn't occur in more extreme climates because the likelihood of someone surviving in those places with this gene is much smaller. Again, in one more way out of millions, the evidence for evolution is in front of our faces.
As for theology, I think it's an insult to claim that God could not have designed evolution. As for a literal Bible, there are innumerable claims (the flood, for one) in the Bible that are not only physically impossible, but if they had happened would have left evidence that just cannot be found, even after Christian scientists spent careers looking for them.
The Bible is not a scientific text. Christians that insist that it is are what prevents me from accepting Jesus as my personal savior. Christians should leave science to scientists, and keep religion in their church, because it damages the faith in ways they will never know when they fail to do this.
The Bible is not a scientific text. Christians that insist that it is are what prevents me from accepting Jesus as my personal savior.
So it’s the Christians that prevent you? If Christians were less flawed according to your views than you would be accepting Christ as your savior? I take it that you are perfectly holy without sin and therefore in no need of a personal savior. Scripture teaches us otherwise. If you don’t understand your sin and God’s Holiness than the necessity of Christ’s crucifixion for salvation will not hold any meaning for you regardless of how perfect the messenger is, even if someone rises from the dead. Luke 16:31. It was true then and it is true now, but don’t take my word for it find out for yourself. You may be amazed at what you find inside, if given the courage to face it. I pray that you are given that courage. You can Freep mail me anytime.
Cheers