Now when it comes to Evolution i.e. man came from a lower primate (my apology to Chimps and Gorillas. HUmans are the true lower primates LOL ) and stuff like that that goes against what The Bible says, I can't reconcile the two (there is no way you can put monkey to man and Genesis 2 in harmony, even allegorically. One is purely scientific theory, the other a supernatural account. Apples and oranges. ) but when it comes to the Earth being 4.5 Billion years old, the Earth being round, animals evolving (Major physiological changes can occur over time. The fossil record of Bears shows this, among no doubt many others)and man living on this Earth for hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years, I dont see a problem with that. Even the idea of a local flood as opposed to a global one is okay with me (though I wont rule out a global flood, and not for YEC reasons)
Actually, there is, if you stretch things, and look directly at the hebrew rather than the english translations.
The word in genesis that is translated as 'create' is more like 'Formed' .. as a potter forms a pot. The word Adam is a generic term
meaning 'mankind', and is related to the word 'adamah', which means
'red clay'. Adamah is also close in root to the word 'Edom', which means both 'red' and 'blood'. So, you could say that god fashioned (out of preexisting material' mankind out of flesh and blood. If you wanted to stretch things, you could say that he fashioned mankind out of the primative ancestor that is the common ancestor to chimps and humans.
When a language is very poetic, and very unspecific, a lot can be said with it that the modern more precise languages misinterpret. And, of course, people can read as literal when it is obvious in the original language it is a couple of allegories.
This message has been edited by ramoss, 03-14-2006 07:57 AM