sungyak

How does evolution “cancel out” the creation account in Genesis? This seems to me a blank assertion, and so I don’t see how the conclusion that Adam didn’t exist follows. 

The Bible is composed of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. ‘Light’ doesn’t always mean “one extreme of the electromagnetic spectrum.” That’s not what Jesus was saying about himself when he said ‘You are the light of the world.’ 

I don’t see the logic in your complaint. If your US history book doesn’t mention the law of gravity, can I then go on to assume that George Washington never existed?

Didn’t I just explain that to you?  Evolution cancels out the creation myth because the creation myth revolves around two humans.  Humans aren’t exempt from Evolution and therefore, they could not have been the first intelligent primate to walk the Earth.  Even if we grant that Adam and Eve were Neanderthals, we  still have to account for h.habilis, h.erectus, h.ergaster, h.heidelbergensis,  australopithecus africanus, australopithecus afarnensis, and others.  However, it doesn’t stop there.  When reading on, the animals that supposedly lived during the time of Adam were animals that are currently alive.  The original creation could not have been composed of current life on Earth.  Again, 99.9% of species are already extinct.  The fossil record is extensive.  There are hundreds, if not thousands, of dinosaur species completely unaccounted for in the Bible.  There is also a massive issue there.  Dinosaurs lived before modern man and all of our ancestors.  Again, there’s no way the original creation was composed of current life.  Evolution cancels out the Creation myth.  Heck, paleontology cancels out the Creation myth!  Adam is then canceled out.  No Adam, no original sin.  No original sin, no reason for Christ to have died.  No Adam, perhaps no Christ.  No Adam, maybe Christ, but not the Christ depicted in the Bible.  Christianity is a dead faith; its followers just don’t know it yet or they refuse to consider it — let alone admit it.

“Let there be light” is interpreted by some Christians as the Big Bang.  Therefore, they have to grant that light is one extreme of the electromagnetic spectrum.  If “let there be light” isn’t the Big Bang, where then is it mentioned in the Bible?  It is simple to conclude that it isn’t mentioned at all.  Of course “the light of the world” had a different meaning, but that is irrelevant when considering the point I’m making.  That was a red herring on your part.

Your last paragraph is a false analogy.  We aren’t talking about history and Washington.  We’re speaking of the supposed Creator of the universe.  How can he declare the Sun a greater light as if it is somehow different from the stars?  How can he declare the moon a lesser light as if it is in any way similar to stars?  The Moon is more like a planet.  How can he declare that the Earth was created before the stars?  This is utterly impossible.  How can he declare that a universe this vast was created for a third chimpanzee on a tiny rock orbiting a mediocre star in an average galaxy that is one of billions of galaxies?  How can he be the Creator and not have a knowledge concerning the vastness of species that have existed; not have a knowledge of the mechanism that drives speciation?  How can he be the original cause if he failed to mention exactly what he caused?  He decided to leave us with a story a kin to a myth rather than leaving us with an accurate description of events that are irrefutable when compared to science.  Your god is too puny for this universe; too nonexistent to be considered; too human to be called a god; too irrelevant to give you an upper hand in this debate.  You can avoid facts all you want.  Avoiding facts doesn’t make them any less true.

Read Thread