Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="cotjones" data-source="post: 7666174" data-attributes="member: 573988">Agreed, No ill will. I do have a little confusion though.Do you or do you not agree that while the Bible may provide a symbolic myth explaining the origin of the universe, it&#039;s not an effective scientific description and thus useless in the goal of discrediting evolution?Even assuming no specific meaning in the word &quot;day&quot; and thus assuming no time scale in the creation account. You are most definitely dealing with a description that plants existed before the sun, true?Now you could come to all sorts of conclusions as to try to rationalize this, but is not the most likely explanation that the people who wrote the Bible did not understand the connection between daylight and sunlight. You ever think that maybe God never told a man how he created us and the record was just oral tradition and myth added in? Evidence suggests that Genesis is basically a poem. Not a text book.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="cotjones, post: 7666174, member: 573988"] Agreed, No ill will. I do have a little confusion though. Do you or do you not agree that while the Bible may provide a symbolic myth explaining the origin of the universe, it's not an effective scientific description and thus useless in the goal of discrediting evolution? Even assuming no specific meaning in the word "day" and thus assuming no time scale in the creation account. You are most definitely dealing with a description that plants existed before the sun, true? Now you could come to all sorts of conclusions as to try to rationalize this, but is not the most likely explanation that the people who wrote the Bible did not understand the connection between daylight and sunlight. You ever think that maybe God never told a man how he created us and the record was just oral tradition and myth added in? Evidence suggests that Genesis is basically a poem. Not a text book. [/QUOTE]

Verification