The Evolution Definition Shell Game

That's amazing.But did you know that the biblical worldview from which creationism stems has ALSO gone under a bit of evolution? I know it seems amazing that creationists would try and sweep this under the carpet but part of this worldview used to accept the notion that the Sun revolved around the Earth! It seems like it's hard to believe, but it's all true!I once read that some people even got killed for saying otherwise! Or at the least sent to bed early. I don't know the names of these people but I think someone here might be able to back me up on this. Also I know of several historians whose theories support my statement.Later, it was proven that the Earth actually revolves around the sun (and is NOT FLAT!) Creationists have simply "solved" the problems and inconsistencies in their worldview by claiming faith. The Earth revolving around the sun business still remains a part of the Creationist worldview though they are always at a loss to explain how the Sun can stop in the sky.go figure.

You're right, peoples long before us had figured out that the Earth was not flat. However, the point I was making (despite the fact that there are still some out there who believe the Earth is flat as Mammathus pointed out) and indeed, the largest portion of my previous post was devoted to it (you chose to refute only a brief statment of my previous post), was that for some time the worldview that those who believed in the Bible espoused was one that the Sun revolved around the Earth.If you find the fact that the "Evolutionists" of the past included abiogenesis in their definition of what constitutes Evolution and now have removed it from their definition to be "an illusion" then does it not follow that the change from a strident belief by many that the Sun revolved around the Earth based on Biblical evidence to one that the Earth actually revolves around the Sun also belies an illusion of some sort? Or is it simply natural for things such as this to grow and change and adapt themselves when new information is presented?Just curious.

quote:

---

This is also misleading. Most of Galileo’s problems were due to resistance from the academic community. Only later did the Roman church become involved.

---

Regardless of the academic community, this WAS a church belief that the sun revolved around the Earth. So much so that, as another has pointed out, they threatened to execute those who disputed this belief.This has, to my knowledge, changed. So if the Evolution definition shell game, by your definition or implication, is that Evolutionists have changed the definition of what constitutes Evolution to exclude abiogenesis wherein it once contained the notion of abiogenesis, is it not then consistent to call this flip-flopping on the part of Christianity in regard to the makeup of our solar system (not to mention the universe) the Christian Cosmology Shell Game?

quote:

---

You are missing the key point. This is only a small part of the greater illusion I mentioned to Percy, which is the oft-used illusion that micro-evolution proves large-scale, molecules-to-man evolution.

---

I apologize for missing the key point (and belaboring the non-key point above! ). From your original message it appeared that you were stating that because at one time in the past Evolutionists had included abiogenesis in their definition of Evolution, it meant that they persisted in this belief today. If I am mistaken that this was your intent, then I apologize again. I would love to debate the key point further, but I really don't have the breadth of knowledge that some others on this board have in regard to evolution so I won't waste everyone's time by offering redundant and dangerously uninformed arguments.