Not all christains are opposed to the idea that humans have evolved from pre-existing humanoid life-forms. Dr Francis Collins, the leader of the Genome project is one such scientist. He is vehemently opposed Intelligent Design arguments and favours a theistic evolution understanding of diversity in nature. Watch this video of Dr Collins.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjJAWuzno9Y

there are christians who try to incorporate God with evolution. at least some christians are smart enough to realize evolution has nothing to do with creation or when life started.

I have just finished watching the video and am very impressed with Dr Collins. He is an intellectually sophisticated christian who does not find evolution threatening to this christian beliefs. In fact, he is actively promoting the idea of not literally interpreting much of the Old Testament as this leaves one subject to future scientific refutations. In that degree, I wholeheartedly agree with him.

Any biblical literalist (Genesis literalists) here ready for take on Dr Collins on the subject of genetics and evolution?

therationa:

Any biblical literalist (Genesis literalists) here ready for take on Dr Collins on the subject of genetics and evolution?

It's going to be a hard search and loooong wait finding those you've tagged 'biblical literalists'. How many such do you know who go about with such appellations?

Biblical literalists are those who believe in the following doctrines;

Creation about 6000 years ago
Adam, Eve and serpent in the garden of Eden
Original Sin
Exodus out of Egypt
The Flood
etc
etc

I though most christian believe in the literal occurence of these events. If these events did not physically occur, then where is the raison d'etre for fundementalist christianity?

Which of the above events do you accept on a literal basis and which do you accept as metaphors/allegories? And what is the criteria by which you decide?

therationa:

I though most christian believe in the literal occurence of these events.

How many such do you know who go about with such appellation as "biblical literalists"? Ascribing such tags to people without a fair chance to invite a discussion is perhaps the reason why you have not received any replies hetherto - as it is obvious in the various other threads that you have never demonstrated a willingness to discuss issues in a reasonable manner.

therationa:

If these events did not physically occur, then where is the raison d'etre for fundementalist christianity?

Two things:

(a) As if I knew you'd make a (cheap) reference to "fundamentalist Christianity"! However, I'm still waiting for you and your adulators (such as bawomol/bawomolo) to offer a sane description of "fundamentalist" Christianity - have you done that? It does not appear that your problem is with Christianity; but with such qualifiers, it makes your premise suspicious of adopting a linear postulation that is unable to distinguish issues clearly.

(b) Your reference to "physical" occurence of the events is an example of why we need to ask you to be careful in your distinctions and ideas. I do not know of the "physical" occurence of "Original Sin"; and until you proffer a basis for why you'd deny its meaning and implication, you may as well keep making the same rounds on the same spot.

My point is not to deflect the subject of the thread. Infact, I'd be interested in its progress, even though not many may agree with my own views. But if your premise is to quickly label others with a prejudicial posit before offering the opportunity of reading the views of others, again that may perhaps explain why no one would be interested in answering to such a prejudicial mindset.

Take a look at this video.

huxley:

Take a look at this video.

Dr. Collins is a senior collegue that I have profound respect for. The video is quite long, 2 hours plus but it is worth it. Thanks Huxley. This video should be watched by all those who are interested in evolution and its compatibilty with belief in God.