As to what evidence would cause me to change my position. Well, it might sound as though I'm being disingenuous, but I honestly do not have a position on origins. I argue with evolutionists and I argue with creationists, asking them to make their case better, more clearly, in a less biased fashion. I find both the scientific and the textual evidence for recent creationism quite unconvincing, and I think your real question is 'what would it take to convince me that recent creationism is correct?' On the one hand, I'm not absolutely convinced that it's incorrect, but on the other I'd need to see some sort of position that at least addresses in a serious way the scientific evidence and provides a plausible account of it. Doesn't mean science is the measure of the Bible, not at all, but it does mean that either creationists stop making any scientific claims or they start making credible ones.

I'd be completely happy with (though not convinced by) a simple 'this is the way I read the Bible and the science can go hang'. What I abominate is the dishonest use of science.

What I'm currently looking into is the Biblical text, which some are so confident that they can read and understand fully without any effort at fully understanding. If there is a single convincing piece of evidence - a magic bullet - that's where it will be. I'm afraid the discussion of 'day' above is not it, but that's the place to search.

Robert:

1. Yes, your random insults are certainly encouraging me to think seriously about your case and
2. The discussion is precisely about trying to understand - rather than to merely assume - what 'God says'.

(I'll be out of contact with the web for the next 2 days, so if you don't get a response it's not because I'm ignoring you!)

Bevin, there are no fossils in rock predating Creation Week. Some fossils may have been formed prior to the Flood, because death entered the world when man fell. But the vast majority of fossils were created by the Flood.

The trees in Eden were mature, full-grown trees, one day after they came into existence. If you want to call God a liar for creating things this way, then I will take God's "lie" over your "truth" any day.

David Koot, why did you post all that lexicon material on the meaning of "day" in Biblical Hebrew? We know all of that. This has long been debated and decided among us. We know what a day was in Genesis. Like the text plainly says, the evening (dark portion) and the morning (light portion) were the first day (etc.) All throughout the Bible, Jews observed their days from sunset to sunset. God plainly told the Jews, "...from even unto even, shall ye celebrate your sabbath." (Leviticus 23:32)

What remains in dispute?

Quote:

---

It's amazing to me how one cannot conceive of a watch, a car, a dictionary coming into existence by random processess and yet can believe that all the living things we see around us came into being by the random processess of chance!

---

Evolutionists suspect that watches, cars, and people are the result of the interaction of three basic concepts

• replication
  
• mutation
  
• selection
  

To characterize it as 'chance' is to miss the whole point.

/Bevin