Excellent. and thank you. That was one of the big worries I had when I
was a YEC. Geology just added more and more, like acid in the waters, mud
that would choke the fish, the fact that sediments contain burrows from top
to bottom and digging a burrow requires at least a few minutes time. Given
a 36,000 foot column, that is a lot of burrows and a lot of time.
Lest you forget,
>incidentally, I apologized publicly when I misinterpreted your motives.
I remember and appreciated that. But that was not a scientific problem for
your view and as a former young-earther, I know that it was really hard for
me to admit any problem my position had, especially if I had to admit it
before people who didn't share my faith in a young earth or in Christ. It
takes more guts to do that than to merely be silent when a problem is raised.
I appreciate your willingness above to mention a scientific problem for
your view. All christians, both liberal, conservative, evolutionist
anti-evolutionist struggle with the data and admitting our problems is an
important step in finding solutions.
So, in honor of your honesty, I will mention the biggest problem with my
theistic evolutionist views. The major histocompatibility complex, the
part of your genome that runs the immune system has so much variability
that given the observed mutation rates, it would take 65 million years to
have convergence. This means that there is so much variability that it is
hard to explain how humans could have come from a single mating pair
within the past 65 million years. In other words no Adam and Eve. This is
a problem for almost all views, and I struggle with how to answer that
question as you struggle to figure out where the human skeletons from the
flood are.
>Also, you have made me alter my ideas about death and I thank you for it.
My pleasure. Struggling with these very deep issues is both difficult and
personally painful, I know that well. I am not ashamed to admit that I
have, over the years, shed a few tears trying to find a workable answer
that maintains Biblical historicity.
>However, nothing presented so far sways me from the fact that God did not
>use macroevolutionism to create and promote life. I would not be truthful
>if I did. There is just too much evidence otherwise. You seem to take the
>word of atheistic evolutionists over the word of creation scientists,
>seemingly not realizing their agenda is the promotion of atheism and that,
>my friend and brother in Christ, alarms me.
You forget one thing. I was one of those creation scientists. I published
with them, I went to conferences with them. I know those people and I
won't take their word for anything. They, unlike you, are totally unwilling
to admit ANY problem with their view publically. And the more famous the
individual, the less likely it is that they will admit that they might have
written something that was wrong. To me, that is arrogance on their part.
All positions have trouble and the only way I have of determining whether
one is truly engaged in a search for truth is by seeing if they will admit
even a single problem. Congratulations, you have passed the test. Bill
Payne, also has passed the test several times. You would be surprised how
many of the creationist biggies won't do even what you did.
>
>If I could be convinced, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that macroevolution
>did indeed occur, my faith in 'God created...' would be just as strong. HE
>just used a means other than what I traditionally believe, to accomplish
>HIS purpose.
So why do you think that MY faith in 'God created...' isn't as strong as
yours? I do beleive that God created this entire wonderful universe. He
did! But he didn't do it the way you think He did it. So, please rest
assured that I firmly believe that God is behind and indeed planned
evolution. That is why Genesis 1:20 says "And God said, 'Let the waters
bring forth life...'" The waters brought forth the life, God commanded
something else to bring about life. That is why Genesis 1:24 says "And God
said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature..."
The earth was what brought forth the living creature directly. God
remained in the background.
Its the same idea to me of the Mt. Ararat sightings of the
>Ark. Whether its found or not is immaterial to me, and does not alter my
>belief in the flood as described in the Bible just because it has not been
>found.
Yes, but like it or not, my scenario for the Flood also matches exactly
what the Bible says. Which view is correct?
glenn
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm