The problem with the concepts of new-earth creationism is there is no proof. Absolutely no data supporting that the earth was created in 6 days some 6000 years ago.

On the other had, there is a lot of data indicating the earth is old -- radioactive dating, ice cores, rate of slowing of the earth;s rotation. Plate tectonics -- the driving forces are incompatible with an new earth.

It actually results in a very simple model for the evolution of the planet.

As for biology, well, in the fossil record, we have some rules: older rocks are on the bottom, younger are on top. That is, unless faulting occurs. Where we have large sequences of rocks -- such as the Grand Canyon, there are simpler organisms on the bottom, with increasing complexity. You end up with a dominant set of species; 65,000,000 it was reptiles. Then, something wiped them out. Then, you saw evolution in the fossils record of mammals, starting with rodents, and diversifying. We are now in the age of mammals.

Unfortunately, if we don't change our behavior, we will kill ourselves off -- either by climate change or with bombs. either way, something else will replace us humans, and possibly mammals.

There is a lot of data supporting this, but no data supporting creationism.

Ergo, by Occam's Razor, creationism is rejected in favor of an evolving earth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if your church is holding classes teaching Intelligent Design with the purpose of lobbying for it to be taught in public schools, your church is part of the "American Taliban" that you seem to deride in your follow up post.

+1
My faith in the Lord is strong enough that it doesn't need to be taught in school. It's also not so limited that I can't simultaneously believe in God and understand that evolution is the mechanism through which I evolved. It took me a long time to see that, OP.

Thank you for this comment, I appreciate it (I'm OP). I'm still trying to understand and learn and reconcile this all in my head. I want so badly to have faith, yet as I grow as a Christian, I find myself doubting more and more each week. It makes me want to stop asking questions all together and just go on my merry (ignorant?) way again.

So, I asked my SS class, why must I believe they are mutually exclusive (creation and evolution), and the short answer (or what I took away from it, anyway) was: The Bible says all life forms appeared at once, while evolution does not. Have you ever asked yourself this question and if so, how do you get past it?

I did find a website AnswersinGenesis.org that has been answering some questions, but it also is causing me even more questions. :/

Not that specific question, but I believed the Bible was the inerrant Word of God until a car ride with my mother when I was 13, maybe? We got to talking, and I said, well, the universe was created in six days, and she asked why I thought that. I of course said the Bible. She said that many people of faith do not take the bible literally, they believe it to be inspired, but not written by God. Why do we need to take the Creation story literally? Did I literally believe God made everything - everything! - in the farthest reaches of the universe and including fossils, just to fuck with us, evidently? in only a few days? Did God working through the Big Bang and evolution make it any less miraculous? No.

And the more I learned as I grew (especially about the history of how the bible we have now was arrived at - it's a story equal parts boring and compelling), I no longer believe the Bible to be infallible. It was very hard. I did have a crisis of faith, and I may be practically a heretic to you. But I have zero problem reconciling God and science. At this point in my life, I just can't reconcile why some Christians need to believe literally in the Bible in the face of miles of evidence to the contrary.