Comment on Walla Walla University: The Collegian Debates Evolution vs. Creation by Kip Coleman.
I believe that one of the issues that arises when a religious text recounts an historical event is that the significance of the message gets lost in a quagmire of interpretations of the setting.
When studying the Genesis origins story, what should we be taking away from it? Was it the intention of the author to communicate that the Earth was created in six literal days, or was their intent perhaps to convey that this hunk of rock we call home is actually a beautiful, complex, and wonderful place that is perfectly suited to sustain our fragile lives?
Do we really gain a reverence and respect for nature through an understanding of the time frame involved in its maturation, or is the significance perhaps simply that the reality we see before us exists in the first place?
My hope for the Adventist community is that it can embrace scientific knowledge, facts, and truths when educating our youth to succeed in a modern world; and embrace spiritual significance in the messages of the Bible when those messages promote a healthy, loving, and spiritual lifestyle.
Kip Coleman Also Commented
Walla Walla University: The Collegian Debates Evolution vs. Creation
Let me make a clarifying statement.
My intent was not to come here and debate the individual points of specific texts.
Nor was it to debate whether or not God exists.
My point was to say that Walla Walla University, and other SDA institutions, should recognize that the knowledge we impart to our scientific students should be based on the scientific method.
If we allow religion– whatever that religion may be– to distort the truths that have been observed, tested, and utilized through the scientific method, then we are not teaching true science, and the degree holds less worth.
Holly Pham: I’m disagreeing with you, since you seem to think there can be no “day” without a sun. There can be. The creation of the sun should have no impact on whether the earth had a “day” before the sun was created, seen, etc. since a “day” is based on the earth’s rotational spinning time.
No, I’m saying that you and I know that one Earth day is one rotation around the Earth’s axis.
No one prior to Galileo even knew that the Earth was round. So, now, what is the definition of a day in Genesis Chapter 1?
Holly Pham: Yes!Doesn’t the “day” refer to the rotation of the EARTH? Suppose the earth rotated around for about 24 hours, and we couldn’t see the sun, like on a cloudy day. Would there be no “day?”
Isn’t a “day” on Mars the length of its rotational time? Same with other planetary bodies, correct?
I can see where there wouldn’t be a “day” if there were no earth, but not because there isn’t a sun, moon, or other celestial body.
I guess I can’t tell if you’re agreeing with me or disagreeing with me.
I would assume that since the author had no knowledge that the earth is round… their understanding of a day would be vastly different than our own.