The Gap Theory (Fossils Young / Earth Old) genesis 1:3/ 1:1

About 8 minutes after the sun was made the light was visible on the earth.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

RickRegardless of how you stretch or compress time descriptions, 8 minutes after the sun became a star it shone on the earth or the spot where the earth would someday be..

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Not really Rick.If you look at any of the Creation stories, not just Genesis, you will find some similar ordering.The fact is, the ordering in Genesis is simply wrong. It is simply an Earth Centric viewpoint. For example, Light would have been there long before the Earth even existed, even before the Solar System exited.The odds are that the writer of Genesis and each of the other Creation Myths did guess at the order. You have to remember that the writers (probably more likely chanter, singer or reciter) of these myths were very intellegent people. Primative man was not dumb. The may not have accumulated as many facts as are available today, but they were not dumb. So they were not working from random chance. They were making observations and coming up with the best theories possible to explain the facts, the observations, that they made.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

RickI think that you may be missunderstanding what I am saying. That's not unusual, I'm old and often have trouble expressing myself.I am not in anyway saying that the description in Genesis is not well written. With liberties, it can be expanded to show a resonable, although not one for one, correspondence with what the Evolution record shows. But to do so you do have to be pretty liberal with your interpretations and fudge things slightly.But that is not my point. My point is that even if there was a far closer correspondence between Genesis and the Universe we see about us, that does not prove that it is divinley inspired or written.Genesis was written very recently. It is one of the more recent Creation Myths. The people alive at that time were certainly as intellegent as we are today, perhaps more so. They had the advantage of knowning quite a few of the other earlier creation stories and so I am sure, had debated the strong points and weak points of each of them.If you look at what Wallace Pratt said, you'll find that we all agree with his statement. Genesis is a pretty good explaination for a simple, pastoral people. No one argues that.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

No problem You'll find that there are many Christians here that happen to think that Evolution best explains what we see.And don't worry. One thing that none of us will do is ask you to believe anything. Science is not about believing some theory. That just doesn't enter into it.Let me give you an example.Aerodynamic lift happens because there is a pressure difference between the air under the wing and the air flowing over the wing. Now I might believe that the best shape for a wing is the wheel of a chariot. In fact, if I look in the Bible I can find that chariots do in fact fly.The scientific approach says, "Okay, let's try that and see if it works".Now no matter how much I believe that the best form is a chariot wheel, that sucker ain't gonna fly.Evolution is like that. Science doesn't really care what one person believes. Instead, they look at the evidence. If things fit, if they make sense, if they are repeatable, if they can be used to make predictions that are later proved, and most importantly, if there are things that would Disprove a theory if they were observed, then the theory is used as long as it explains what is seen. If it cannot explain something, if it is shown to be false, then it is modified or discarded.Now as to the age of man. Tonight, look up at the stars. Are they really there?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion