There have been books added since the book of Genesis (which is over 2000 years old at the least), yes; but the following books, have they been consistent with what Genesis states about God? Or have they contradicted, or found inaccurate, what Genesis states? Please give an example of any part of the text of the book of Genesis in the Bible that is different from our understanding of God today.
And how does Darwin’s theory in “On the Origin of Species” do as to consistency with new findings? Do you think that new findings in evolution compliment or contradict, or even find Darwin to be inaccurate? There have been books on the theory of evolution since “On the Origin of Species”, yes; but have these books been consistent with what “On the Origin of Species”states about evolution? Or have they contradicted, or found inaccurate, what Darwin wrote?
”All of a sudden God wasn't just the holy and transcendent Creator God, he was also (and more primarily) a Father who was prepared to sacrifice His Son for the sins of mankind.”
I see a compliment here, where is the contradiction?
”Our understanding of God, even the basic form of todays Bible, has taken, at a bare MINIMUM, at least 1,500 years of thought, debate and councils to take shape. Our understanding of evolution has only been in play for 1/10th of that amount of time.”
Do you equate the changes of our understanding of God with what has been written in the text? I see a difference between understanding and what has been written. Our understanding is nothing more than what we see at our vantage point, this can be different from person to person; but the text of Genesis has not changed over the 2000 years to say that God is any different from the God of the rest of the books in the Bible, or vice versa. Can you say that “in 1/10 of the time” the writings of the theory of evolution are no different from the theory of evolution’s genensis in the text of “On the Origin of Species?”
“Scientists (and the general population) are not abandoning evolution. Over time, even as our understanding of the process becomes more complex, the opposite is happening.”
I believe your right about the opposite is happening, but could it be because more and more scientist are trying to come up with a new theory to combat the vacuous holes in the theory of evolution?
When the enlightenment comes you will understand it isn’t time that moves back. I have 10,000 year old coins in my possession that reminds me. What moves back is still a mystery to me but it happens. I am not at liberty.
This isn't specific to Genesis, but the entire New Testament radically modifies not only people's understanding of the Old Testament, but people's understanding of God. People are "no longer under the Law."
And yes, this is understood as a modification of the way people relate to God, and not a contradiction. I get that.
But new discoveries in the field of evolution are also a modification of our understanding of the original basic concept.
Incidentally, the New Testament itself outlines how radically different Jesus' teaching was from what the Jewish people (and their leaders) were expecting. Why do you think they railroaded him and handed him over to be crucified?
There are also a couple other problems here.
1) There were many ancient stories of origins that could've been incorporated into the Bible, and there were many books that could have been selected from to make up the canon. It is therefore no surprise that the Bible is not made up of a bunch of contradictory books.
If they had been contradictory, they never would've been selected to be included in the first place.
2) While Darwin's theory is actually falsifiable (which also means that it is subject to the scientific method), the book of Genesis is NOT falsifiable. Darwin's theory can be TESTED. The book of Genesis CAN'T.
Now that doesn't necessarily mean that the Genesis account (however you interpret it) is either untrue or inaccurate. But it does mean that it is simply not subject to any known scientific-type test of its proof.
Or, to put it another way: Genesis talks about WHO did something. Evolution talks about HOW a natural process happens over time.
One can be tested. The other can't.
Again, I'm not alleging contradiction between the old and new testaments. But the New Testament CERTAINLY MODIFIED people's understanding of God.
I believe your right about the opposite is happening, but could it be because more and more scientist are trying to come up with a new theory to combat the vacuous holes in the theory of evolution?
Given that Darwin's basic idea continues to gain acceptance, I think you're incorrect about their being "vacuous holes." You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I believe you're incorrect.
Sorry. I should've underlined that rather than italicizing. By italicizing it looked like a quote. I meant to emphasize.