Jersey Diamond, I’m afraid I don’t have the time to get into a full-fledged debate right now. However, if you’d like to send me your answers to the geology stumper questions, I’d be willing to put your response on my webpage.
(And as for the rest of you, I’d be more than pleased if you could point out any errors you spot in the geology FAQ.)
Ben, just so you know, I don’t claim to be a “young creatonist”. I don’t think that our idea of time is the same as God’s. A day for God could have been 2 minutes, 24 hours, or 100 years. One way or the other, science doesn’t disprove the Bible, it only proves it. I am curious to know what you think of this web page I stumbled across
http://www.trueorigin.org/geocolumn.asp
JDDid you read my FAQ?
To:
http://www.trueorigin.org/geocolumn.asp
Talk Origins has provided:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/geocolumn/
Wow. I had a Christian friend at school who answered the same question, stating, “God put the fossils there to test our faith…”
If Satan put the fossils there, then you have to accept (having already accepted that there is such an entity) that he is capable of acts of creation, which poses a problem (I think).
If God put the fossils there, then you have to accept that he is a deceiver (Polycarp has explained this far better than I ever could in a number of threads)
Vanilla I think that is a courageous statement to make here. I don’t hold it as a cornerstone of my own faith but I respect it.
That leaves the original question, do you reconcile your belief in creation with fossil evidence or just disregard it? You being a bible creation literalist makes you best able to give a direct answer to the OP.
FWIW I am not a creation literalist so there is little for me to reconcile. I believe that Genesis is not blueprint for the universe but a story that outlines our relationship with God.