Creation of the Earth v.s. creation of man

Okay, why on Earth must we find the oldest writings in order to date the existance of human beings? Shouldn't a fossil or two do the trick?Second, even if God had created the Earth, and then man five days later, why should we bother with such a small difference? I mean,why care about the five day difference of two events which most likely never took place?I'd say the lack of evidence that God created all things in a mere six days should prove to most of us that, for this part anyway, the Bible lacks accuracy.TrékThis message has been edited by Trékuhrid, 12/31/2005 05:10 AM

But how do we date the writings? Any dating method that gave a date prior to one accepted by Biblical literalists would be said to be "inaccurate".Furthermore, have not human beings been around much longer than our writing? I mean, seriously, accepting the date of the earliest writings as the date of the earliest human beings, is somewhat like accepting the date of the Declaration of Independence as the date of the first colonies in America.And yes, we could use pottery and what not, but that would just show us the earliest pottery. Also, how would we date the pottery? I thought carbon dating was used on those sort of things to establish a general date.Why not when searching for the earliest human beings, don't we actually look at the human beings themselves?Trék

I'm not sure what you are saying about the dating of Genesis, since 900 BC is further back than 200 BC, but I understand the rest.Trék

Oh, okay. I've never seen that on a forum before. I be sure to use it next time .Thanks,
Trék