re: #573 Sharmuta

A little slow on the draw, but here you go.

What evidence would I accept?

This may seem a bit indirect but here goes. Forewarning: there are going to be a lot of ifs and presuppositions buried in here, each of which is it’s own can of worms for another day.

My belief in creation starts with a historical figure who walked the earth about 2000 years ago or so. According to the records we have, he made certain claims regarding who he was, where he was from, why he was here, and where he was going. He said and did a lot of outrageous things that threatened those in power and led to his eventual crucifixion and death at the hands of the Romans. After having been killed and placed in a tomb, he literally and physically came back to life. I believe the historical evidence points to (but does not “prove”) these events being true and accurately recorded.

Jesus is either a fictional or historical figure, of course with many degrees in between being possible. If the record of his life is accurate and he is who he claimed to be, then he came for a purpose. That purpose, articulated by him and those who were eyewitnesses to his life, was to provide a way for the gap that exists between man (collectively and individually) and God to be bridged.

So, where did this gap come from? After the creation of the world, including mankind, whether in a few days or a few hundred million years, God pronounced his creation “good.” This goodness included a communal relationship between God and mankind, and free-run of a new planet, albeit with a few commands to follow. Mankind chose not to follow one particular rule and in so doing committed a cosmic act of treason against the God of creation. This act of self-reliance and rebellion broke the relationship that mankind had enjoyed with God in a way that affected the entirety of creation. The enormous consequences of this act include the entrance of death and disease into the world, which brings us back to evolution.

The fossil record plainly shows a history of violence, disease, and death in the animal kingdom, things we obviously take for granted, but it was not always so. The plain teaching of the Bible is that these things were brought into the world as a result of mankind’s rebellion. Therefore, the fossil record, in so far as it contains these corruptions of a perfect creation, must necessarily reflect the time after mankind’s rebellion.

This is why I hold that evolution is incompatible with the fundamentals of my faith. Basically, the whole chronology is backwards. Rather than many millions of years of mutations leading to the emergence of humans as we now know them, it was, instead, a fully developed human that initiated thousands of years of mutations.

So, back to the original question, I need to see conclusive evidence that the Bible is not reliable or accurate in regards to the topics it speaks to. Most importantly, that would be the bodily resurrection of Jesus, the starting point of this argument.

To quote Madeleine L’Engle quoting Aristotle, “That which is probable and impossible is better than that which is possible and improbable.”

I’ll take the Glorious Impossible.

PS. I’ll still check out Giberson, but to be honest, it’s going to be a little while down the road, and I am a bit stuck in my ways.

Cheers