@sonship said
@Proper-Knob
Isn't that what i said in my first post replying to you?
Point taken.
Now do we LIMIT our assumptions when doing the revisiting? Do we hold stubbornly to preconceptions that are TOO DEAR to us to relinquish?
Or do go where the evidence leads?
So I asked - Do you have a backup theory as a plan B ?
Maybe the animals are not as old as we thought.
I used to be a young earth creationists before I studied scientific truths along with rabbinical writings on Genesis in the Torah.
Essentially, there are three distinct ways to measure the age of the universe, all pointing to some 15 billion years, and all unrelated. I could understand if one might be erroneous, but all three? No.
Early Rabbinical writings suggest that when studying the Torah in the original Hebrew, those rabbis came to a startling conclusion, that the age of creation was much older than thousands of years old.
Essentially, the subtle mistranslations of the KJV in Genesis has contributed to this fallacy in translation, much like the early church insisting that the universe revolved around the earth, which is also no where to be found in the Bible, it was interpreted erroneously as such.
As for the Great Flood, this event has been recorded in other ancient writings in Samaria. In fact, to even know what a flood is one would have to have had an experience with one. The only question then becomes, how big was it?