LL> You've overstated the ICR position a bit. Note the
LL> phrase "which which they deal." The position is that
LL> the Bible is accurate about whatever it discusses,
LL> not about everything. Conservative Christians are also
LL> aware that there are some types of literature in the
LL> Bible, such as poetry and parables, that are not to
LL> be taken literally. But the first eleven chapters
LL> of Genesis are considered to be history and factual.
Why MUST Gen 1-11 be literally true? To protect your theology?
According to your leader, Henry Morris the main objection to the timeframes implied by evolution is theological. He says specifically of the evolution accomodating gap and day-age theories,
| "But the one overriding and overwhealming objection to both theories is that they make God out to be the author of evil and confusion! ... These sedimentary rocks and the multiplied millions of fossils found in them testify with great clarity and force that they were formed at a time when storms, floods, volcanic eruptions, great earth upheavals, disease, fighting, struggle, and above all death, existed in the world. ... This can only mean that, since all of this supposedly took place before man had sinned (and, for that matter, even before Satan had sinned), sin was not the cause of death and disorder in the world. Consequently, God Himself must have deliberatly and willfully instituted this system of decay and death in His creation as a process finally leading up to man's appearance. Therefore, God would then be the direct author of confusion, suffering, and death." page 123 Biblical Basis for SCIENCE. |
And there we have the REAL reason for Morris' Biblical bias against science, it conflicts with his theology. A theology that is clearly the product of one misguided loud mouth, Paul [Saul of Tarsus]. Oh what tangled webs we weive! All that arm waving about science this and science that and it all boils down to a religious belief system created by one single human in the right place and time.