I feel quite odd making this thread...but since no Creationists have yet made it, and it runs in the same vein as our recent "what would convince a Creationist" threads...
LucytheApe posted this in one of those threads:
I'll try to make it a simple as I can.
If the bible proves to be historically correct, through observation, all the way back to Noah, would you then consider looking for evidence of a flood? I'm not saying that because it's in the book it's true, I'm saying that it says so in the book. That's all, no observations or realities yet.
If evidence of a global flood poked you in the eye, would you then consider the implications this has on our understanding of the geology of the earth. Even to the extent of throwing out old long and hard held beliefs of an old earth, radiodating and the like, if need be. Or would you reject the concept of a flood and it's implications only because its written in the bible?
I don't think it's a hard question to understand or answer. If It seems that I'm having a shot a evolutionists, that is not my intention. But I've just watched a show that concluded by saying dinosaurs didn't go extinct, they turned into birds. I had to sit down and have a glass of water.
Let's run with this. For those of us who are evolutionists, would any of us accept evidence of the "biblical model" if it were presented? hypothetically speaking, if evidence along the lines of a universal, cross-species genetic bottleneck just a few thousand years ago, combined with a global sedimentary layer, or if it were somehow proven incontrovertibly that humans were created and did not evolve, or other such evidence was discovered that completely blew the current models and understanding of history, geology, physics, and biology out of the water...what would be the reaction of Evolutionists?
I'll provide my answer to Lucy right now:
If the bible proves to be historically correct, through observation, all the way back to Noah, would you then consider looking for evidence of a flood? I'm not saying that because it's in the book it's true, I'm saying that it says so in the book. That's all, no observations or realities yet.
I'm willing to listen to
real evidence of a global flood
right now. I don't care if the Bible is historically accurate from that standpoint - if you have evidence that current models are wrong and that the Great Flood happened as described int he Bible,
present it. Please. If that evidence is studied and verified as accurate, I will recant all of my previous statements regarding the falsehood of the Biblical Flood account.
See, I don't care about any sort of "presupposition" or "agenda." My only agenda is the desire for accuracy. I want to know and understand the truth, as closely as we are able to verifiably determine.
If evidence of a global flood poked you in the eye, would you then consider the implications this has on our understanding of the geology of the earth. Even to the extent of throwing out old long and hard held beliefs of an old earth, radiodating and the like, if need be. Or would you reject the concept of a flood and it's implications only because its written in the bible?
Give me incontrovertible evidence of
any event, Noachian Flood included, and I will believe it. I follow the evidence.
Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.
™ Version 4.2