I say opinion because I wish to be kind. Perhaps it would be better said that based on my trust in God and in the Bible, I have discovered for myself that God never lies. That God is not deceptive when he says he created the arth. If we can pick and choose whatever is not "provable" and say that it didn't happen then we will eventually get rid of any other truth the Bible teaches. This is dangerous ground.

Many Scientists have have at their basis the notion that the Bible is incorrect because they "see so much evidence to the contrary."

One can make a communistic or socialistic speach out of the most democratic president if you chop it up enough. Just so, what seems to be in support of evolution may be in such support of creation that it will one day be laughed at, just like medical science has changed a great deal through the centuries.

I do not believe that God would do the following if it were not true.
1. state so many times that he is the creator,
2. that he gave us the Sabbath as a memorial of that creation.
3. that he created the world in 6 days
4. quote the old testament as the truth if it weren't the truth.
5. he himself would refer to the flood as an event in history if it didn't happen. Would equate it with the second coming unless of course the second coming is as much a myth as some people think the flood is
6. that he would in one place say he was the creator and then later say "but when you find out differently I can live with that".

I believe to the very core of my being that
1. the Bible is true, that God can be trusted explicitly
2. that God means it when he says there is nothing too hard for him, (which would include creation and the recreation of the human heart)
3. that he didn't allow part of the Bible to be included in the Bible if it wasn't supposed to be there
4. that it does matter whether you trust God completely or man's interpretation of what God says.

I am glad you think God is truthful.

God inspired men to write the Bible, therefore God is not going to inspire them to write something that is untruthful. One day in heaven, we will look back on some of the "proofs of creation" and realize how little we really did know and how much more incredibly sound are the "real proofs" and we will look back on our "proofs of evolution" and realize how much we missed because we left God's truth of Him being the creator God out of the picture.

or, some day in heaven, we will look back at the vast amount of evidence that the long age of the earth and evolution is correct, and wonder how we ever let ourselves get so mired in the traditions of organised mainstream Christianity that we forgot that God inspires people to record their personal experiences - misunderstandings and all...

Until I looked at detail at the evidence, I also found it easy to categorize as dismissable. It was not until I spent years looking through the evidence, and watching the evidence mount up, that I finally understood the the human traditions of the fundamentalist churches could be wrong...

/Bevin

That would be correct for anything written without God's inspiration. But since God inspired men to write the Bible he would not inspire an error. It isn't human tradition, it isn't a church's interpretation, it is God's word that we are dealing with. If we can pick and choose what we think fits with the mounting evidence and throw away what doesn't fit that evidence then we are placing human knowledge and expertise above God's word.

Taylor, I offer this for you. Evolution as a theory of Origins is contrary to several foundational philosophical principals.

As C.S. Lewis indicated, "If the universe had no meaning, we should never have discovered that it had no meaning."

According to evolution, we evolved eyes because it was an advantage to perceive light. But there can be no valid reason to develop an organ for something which does not exist.

Right! :)

Utter nonsense, both statements.

(a) You can't even define the concept of "the universe has meaning".

(b) Light has existed on this planet since it was formed around the sun, and even the ability to detect and react to nothing but the intensity of light - which requires relatively simple cells - has a distinct advantage over not doing so

It is utter nonsense arguments like these that show just how inadequate the creationist stance is in practise.

/Bevin

Except that we know that he did - there are significant examples of simple factual errors in the Bible, starting with the obvious concept in the OT of a flat earth

/Bevin

Well Bevin I am not going to argue with you. I respect you as a person but I couldn't disagree more strongly. God is the author of truth and in him there is no darkness or untruth at all. He would never inspire error.....To believe that God would inspire error that humans must pick through, puts the human in controll of what is truth and not God. That to me is very dangerous ground.But you can believe what you want to.

AND again, I do not wish any harm on you nor do I dislike you. I just have as strong of ideas and convictions are you do, on opposite sides of the pole.

Both science in general, and evolution in particular, are attempts to find meaning in the universe.