Evolution

[mediamogul]

I do think that Darwinian human evolution rules out the biblical account of the creation of man and animals. One cannot reconcile the two: the Genesis account of creation and the Darwinian accounts of human evolution cannot be simultanaously true. They are not non-overlapping magisteria (as in they do not make mutually exclusive claims). Genesis makes definite claims about the origin of the earth and it's inhabitants which contradict the claims of natural evolution. If one opts for a "creative reinterpretation of scripture" to make it fit with the scientific evidence then that opens the flood gates because if the bible is not to be read as a factual account of events then one has no grounds for dismissing most interpretations of scripture (the Manson account of Revelation is a famous one). One could interpret all the divinity out of Jesus, state that "god" was merely an anthropomorphic projection onto the laws of nature, and that prayer was really intended to lift the spirits of the supplicant and not to be actually be fulfilled. hey, if we are just making assertions now based on our ink blot of a book, why not? If none of it is fact then it all becomes an ink blot test where one is free to read into it whatever one desires. The interpretations then conform to some internal standard of the person reading and interpreting, as in it is their morality, worldview, and feelings that are being used as the standard NOT the book itself. Which leads to the final conclusion, if we are just using our own internal moral compass when reading the book why not just ditch the book and apply our moral compass directly to the world?

At least the fundamentalists have the guts to make the claims that their book actually does instead of molding it to fit their or their culture's values.