Changes

:::  Thank you all for taking the time to discuss this.

:::  Thank you all for taking the time to discuss this.

:::“''I don't believe at all that creationists are doing that. But I would add, as DavidR has mentioned, DO NOT reject the clear things that God has told us. He clearly told us that He created the world in six days (among other things that He said that contradict evolution). How about "doing Him justice" by taking Him at His Word? It would be blasphemy to deny what He clearly said''” God has not clearly said anything to me, has He told you in person?  What is in the Bible is many thousands of years old and has been endlessly translated from one language to another.  It is quite conceivable that much of the original meaning is lost in these translations.  For example, it is widely accepted that Roman historical records prove the existence of Jesus at roughly the same time as we base our calendar around.  Therefore, from studying similar Roman records from a later date, it should be considered that some time later, as is historically recorded, Roman scholars may well have changed the Bible to make it more compatible with the Pagan beliefs that many of their subjects held.  Therefore – for me – it is very difficult to be sure exactly what God told us.

:::“''I don't believe at all that creationists are doing that. But I would add, as DavidR has mentioned, DO NOT reject the clear things that God has told us. He clearly told us that He created the world in six days (among other things that He said that contradict evolution). How about "doing Him justice" by taking Him at His Word? It would be blasphemy to deny what He clearly said''” God has not clearly said anything to me, has He told you in person?  What is in the Bible is many thousands of years old and has been endlessly translated from one language to another.  It is quite conceivable that much of the original meaning is lost in these translations.  For example, it is widely accepted that Roman historical records prove the existence of Jesus at roughly the same time as we base our calendar around.  Therefore, from studying similar Roman records from a later date, it should be considered that some time later, as is historically recorded, Roman scholars may well have changed the Bible to make it more compatible with the Pagan beliefs that many of their subjects held.  Therefore – for me – it is very difficult to be sure exactly what God told us. Please also see below.

:::“''We are accepting what God has clearly said about the history of this world over man-made theories by scientists trying to give us an alternative history. They are not only therefore fallible men contradicting God, but they are speaking outside their area of expertise (e.g. biologists talking about history).” '' I’m sorry but that is accepting what other Men have interpreted God as having said, not what God has directly said to you (unless he has?).  The Bible is apparently divided between the literal and metaphorical.  I find it very difficult to differentiate between the two sometimes, especially when some manipulate these religious texts so that they can only mean one thing, and then deny that another text implies something else because 'it is not the literal meaning’.  In this case, I have always thought the story of creation was metaphorical, not a popular view here I imagine but that is my understanding of it.  For me that means the six days of creation could represent anything from a literal six-day working week to a massive time scale over billions of years, representing levels of development and culminating in our evolution.  With regards to your second point, because you’re religious, does that qualify you over a scientist to discuss multiple fields?  You may argue that Religion covers all aspects of life, but a Physicist will probable tell you that so does Physics, and I would argue that so does Philosophy.

:::“''We are accepting what God has clearly said about the history of this world over man-made theories by scientists trying to give us an alternative history. They are not only therefore fallible men contradicting God, but they are speaking outside their area of expertise (e.g. biologists talking about history).” '' I’m sorry but that is accepting what other Men have interpreted God as having said, not what God has directly said to you (unless he has?).  The Bible is apparently divided between the literal and metaphorical.  I find it very difficult to differentiate between the two sometimes, especially when some manipulate these religious texts so that they can only mean one thing, and then deny that another text implies something else because 'it is not the literal meaning’.  In this case, I have always thought the story of creation was metaphorical, not a popular view here I imagine but that is my understanding of it.  For me that means the six days of creation could represent anything from a literal six-day working week to a massive time scale over billions of years, representing levels of development and culminating in our evolution.  With regards to your second point, because you’re religious, does that qualify you over a scientist to discuss multiple fields?  You may argue that Religion covers all aspects of life, but a Physicist will probable tell you that so does Physics, and I would argue that so does Philosophy.