RE: [asa] ORIGINS: (Adam or a group of Adams?) pseudogenes are overwhelming evidence for evolution...?

Hi Gordon,

  I'm leaning towards the idea that they copied the flood story from
another culture but changed it to be about judgment for sin.

  If the flood really happened, there would be universal evidence of it,
which seems to be lacking. According to the Biblical story (most
literally), all life was wiped-out except that which was on the ark.
Also according to the Bible, it happened in the recent past (a few
thousand years ago). Biologically, that doesn't sound possible... that
all life forms today came from those on the ark. So there are two
strikes against a Biblical global flood: geology and biology.

  I don't go for the OEC position that it was a local flood, as the NT
writers seem to think it was global. The only reason for thinking it
was local is because they are trying to reconcile it with science. Why
not just go all the way and recognize it as scientifically proven to be
a fictional event? There is still spiritual meaning in it... that God
will judge the world because of sin. It's like referring to the story of
"the boy who cried wolf" to illustrate that lying will mess-up your life
and relationships. Only the ancients thought the story was actually
true (for both the creation story and the flood story).

This can seem dis-heartening... must feel like how those who believed in
a geocentric system were disappointed in the Bible when it was
discovered we actually have a heliocentric position. "The earth is set
on a firm foundation." Really? Spinning 67,000 mph and circling the
sun at 1,000 mph? If science has a position, it has to be considered.
There are two books from God: God's Word and God's work's. I think we
have to choose "God's works" over "God's Word" when there is a
disagreement over science, and there's nothing wrong with that (they are
both from God!). I think God used evolution as a process of design, and
we are trying to discover that from the book of "God's works."

This can turn into an argument over fossils, and carbon dating. That
can get highly technical. That's why I'd say let's shift the argument
to the evidence of evolution from biological pseudogenes. Once that is
acknowledged, then the mind can be prepared to accept the mainstream
scientific interpretation of the fossil record, carbon dating, etc.

Just my opinion... I'm no expert in this stuff. Feel free to set me
straight ;-)

...Bernie
www.sciligion.org

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of gordon brown
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 7:49 PM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: RE: [asa] ORIGINS: (Adam or a group of Adams?) pseudogenes are
overwhelming evidence for evolution...?

On Sun, 4 Nov 2007, Dehler, Bernie wrote:

> I'm leaning to the TE side, and trying to decipher the Adam and Eve
> story in light of it. I hope to have a first draft by the end of the
> year. Yes, I tend to think that if evolution were true, then there is
> no unique Adam and Eve. Evolution works on groups. Also, there was
no
> global flood, but OEC's already have that position... only instead of
> saying it was local, I would say there was no such flood at all. I
> think the reason for the flood and creation in Scripture is to teach a
> spiritual lesson, but they (creation with Adam and eve, and the
flood)
> are not historical events. Yes, I'm not claiming the bible is
inerrant,
> but I think I can still say it is "authorative."
>

Bernie,

The Bible's account of the Flood is not the only one that exists. The
Babylonians, for example, had a flood story also. If no such flood
really
happened, what reason would the ancients have had to invent one?

Gordon Brown (ASA member)

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Nov 4 23:23:47 2007