Comment on Jay Gallimore comments on evolution conflict by Ricky Kim.

Dear Bob,

Although I do not agree with you in your conclusions regarding my latter comment, I nevertheless respect your views and am grateful for the opinion you have been willing to share. I will go ahead and list the comments I disagree with alongside my reasoning, and would be most grateful if you would take the time to clarify them for me.

1. “We spend quite a bit of time sending satellites up where there is no normal rise and set of the sun as they travel through our solar system. This does not stop us from knowing what 24 hours “is”.”

This does not stop us from knowing what 24 hours “is” because we make our satellites travel relevant to our natural environment where a 24 hour period exist and operates.

2. “From a science POV the “evening and morning” sequence does not require sun – it requires a rotating planet with a period that is the same as the one we have today – and a “light source” (does not have to be the sun) – that is on ONE SIDE instead of on ALL sides.”

What exactly was this light source? I have a hard time acknowledging that this is to be translated literal versus figuratively as a creation of an environment for the sun, moon, and stars to inhabit as i have stated before.

3. “Our own FIRST fundamental belief argues that the bible IS a reliable accurate account/record of history – and as it turns out – the record “starts” with DAY-ONE of Creation week. Thus the irreconcilable differences confronting the would-be “seventh-day darwinian” start from the very first Fundamental Belief.”

The issue with established doctrine is that it is not open to new truths that may be unveiled throughout the course of time. This is one of the reasons why there was a faction within the early church on the question of whether adopting the functionality of a doctrine would prove to be prudent or not. Also with that said, the Christian scriptures were written about 2000 yrs before Christ and about 200 years after Christ, that’s it. Whereas modern science did not occur to about the time of Gallieo, Newton, and Einstein. How can there be any science in the Bible, there cannot be, the two historical periods are separated by to much. I have a harder time trying to convince myself of this when I realize that only about 1% of the population during that time (upperclass, religious leaders) where literate and educated.

Also, I will argue that the Bible is not an accurate picture of history. For a number of reasons but I will name 2 to keep in short:

1) There are no extra-biblical evidence that the Exodus ever occured, or at least in the massive of a scale. For if there were, there would have been at least some evidence of it in Egypt or at least in its surrounding countries.

2) From the human genome project it is quite evident that the human race has its origins in Africa. Where they began to spread out to various parts of the world. As we know, an Ice Age did occur which set itself upon the Northern part of our world. Now, as the Ice melted-various floods would have occurred-in the Northern parts of the earth. Interestingly enough, all records of flood stories come from these Northern parts of the world. That is to say, that a global flood is quite questionable.

Ricky Kim Also Commented

Facebook

Pinterest

Twitter

Linkedin

email

Print