Why prefer the Biblical creation account over those of other religions?

You obviously know nothing about either natural selection or punctuated equilibrium. In neither would pear trees produce apple trees, that is just as ridiculous as the crocoduck.

I don't follow? You just lumped my entire post all into one big bowl of Gumbo and said I dont understand NS?Im not comparing NS or PE to pear trees or apple trees. Oh good, then you agree the Bible correctly predicts that kinds produce like kinds BUT you think evolution doesnt? Which is it?

Please define "kind"

Dr A, im not saying he is wrong. My point was that Science has moved past Darwin. As things prorress it doesn't mean the Bible is invalidated by progressions in Science, does it?

Well, im not interested in every Creation story, just one. And because it's right doesnt mean it's any LESS valid than the rest either.Truth is not relative, one has to be absolutly right. BTW, most creation stories steal from the bible.

Did you follow the link PD supplied? Please show which of those steal from the bible.Then go here
List of creation myths - Wikipedia
and show us which of those steal from the bible.

I havn't read them all. Im talking about the most common ones like Islam, mormons, seventh day, jehovah witnesses etc...Of course all the ones in the article I never even heard of. Have you? Do you ever use them to dispute the Bible? No you don't. The one's I said above are often used as being in the same faith as christianity, which they are not. That's my point.I can't know every Creation myth, there so many.

No just that the creo's don't understand evolution. Genus A doesn't change to genus B, even in the same family. Even Punctuated equilibrium takes a number of generations, just less that natural selection.

Then maybe you should not have said. Then your comment is just silly. The biblical creation account is a part of each of these religions, so how could that be seen as stealing? Sure the Islamic version is a little different but they come form the same tradition.So you did not read the link PD supplied?

quote:

---

Well, im not interested in every Creation story, just one. And because it's right doesnt mean it's any LESS valid than the rest either.

​

Truth is not relative, one has to be absolutly right. BTW, most creation stories steal from the bible.

---

Then what was your point in posting in this thread? The point is what makes the Biblical account of creation the true story over others?Your position is that the Bible describes what we see today, but other creation stories also describe what we see today. So that doesn't really show that the Bible is true over other creation stories.This thread isn't about whether you care about other creation stories or not, it is about showing why the Bible creation story is considered true (other than belief) and others are considered false.We already know people believe their respective creation stories are true due to faith and belief. The OP is asking for some evidence other than faith and belief that shows us one creation story is true over the others.If you feel that other creation stories steal from the Bible, you need to show it, not just say it. The OP isn't talking about the religions that evolved from Judaism. The Shinto and Hindus are two examples given.P.S. Don't get sucked into the science talk. This is the religious forum.

The Biblical record has a great deal of corroborating evidence for it's credibility.

I assume you can provide evidence to support that assertion? I assume you can provide evidence to support that assertion? I assume you can provide evidence to support that assertion?

Jar, I've cited the evidence many times for these in the threads. You're secularistic bias forbids you to acknowledge it. To repeat it to you is a total waste of time and band-width.

So no evidence or even links to where you claim to have provided such evidence.Okay.So without any evidence is there some reason to think any of the different Biblical Creation myths over the much older Hindu Creation Myths?

It is difficult to accept your claim that you have evidence when you have been banned from the science forum because you do not understand what evidence is.
I do not know a way forward from this.It is a shame that you couldn't agree a thread proposal with Admin regarding how evidence works.