Bible Study Does the Bible communicate a young age of the Earth, Yes or No?

[chessman]

Out of respect for you I want to respond to all your questions to me, unless they are obviously rhetorical or something. Sometimes it's hard for me to tell. So here goes:

For instance, in the discussion about 4.6 billion years vs. less than ten thousand years, would it be okay to simply conclude that genealogies don't really matter?

It's not my position that Adam (i.e. the genealogies) teaches 4.6 million years ago. In fact, I find it a profound proof that the Bible is inspired by God, in that it clearly describes Adam (the first modern human) as the last creation in a line of creations (I'd say long line of kinds reproducing). My point is critical to the discussion. It's not the genealogies that dates the creation of the Earth (on either of our views). I'm assuming your view is they are separated by only five days where on mine it's billions of years between the creation of the Earth and Adam. I hope that answers your question. If not, let me know.
If you think about it (I'm sure I'm not the first though I've never read it in a book), an atheist that will say the Bible is a made up myth, I guess he just thinks the authors got lucky by picking humans as the last creation. A made up story could have had man as the first and birds as the last, for example. But it doesn't. Not that that's the reason I believe.

Can we agree that this time period can rightly be considered to be less than 50 or 100 thousand years?

On that order of magnitude, sure. I'm not sure any scientist would hard claim a position for the first human (they'd probably say group of humans but I say Adam) to any degree of precision more than 120,000 to 50,000 years ago. But I'm comfortable with that order of magnitude for Adam, yes.

What does the Bible mean by the word "Ancient"? Could it mean billions of years or no?

Yes, i think it could mean billions of years. Which is why I quoted them as I feel they compare the mountains' age as being much, much older than Adams (man's).

In a similar fashion we might be able to agree that the commonly quoted passage of 2Pet 3:8 will not serve to justify the position of billions of years. It fails because it come shy by an order of at least 4.4 x 10^9 or so.

Of course it's not meant to be a math conversion factor (like metric to english) or something. I don't think a 1st century hearer would have thought of it that way either. Nor should we. But, I do think it proves a point that God is eternal and doesn't talk about time in the same way we do. So it is "somewhat" relevant to the discussion. Again, I don't know if that answers your question, but I think it does.

 

[chessman]

I hold to the Gap theory, ...


In Jer 4:23-26 We see a fierce Judgment when there was no man:
...
I believe this was Satans fall, And the Genesis account is Gods Promise that he would not make a full end. (verse 27).

Jarrod Kruger, Thanks for your input. However, I read all of Jer 4:1-31, and in no way can I come to the same conclusion that you do above. Clearly Jer 4 is God telling Israel through Jeremiah to straighten up and fly right or I'm going to pronoucne judgment on you (which He did). Clearly as stated in verse 16, this is a phrophecy, not a historical account of the Earth's creation (this thread's OP). It's not discussing events prior to man's creation in verses 23-26.
"I looked at the earth,
and it was formless and empty;
and at the heavens,
and their light was gone.
24 I looked at the mountains,
and they were quaking;
all the hills were swaying.
25 I looked, and there were no people;
every bird in the sky had flown away.
26 I looked, and the fruitful land was a desert;(BV)
all its towns lay in ruins(BW)

Why would there be bird's flying away (if they hadn't been created yet)?
Why towns in ruins if they hadn't been created yet?

This type of language is used all through Hebrew texts to depict a great battle or punishment is coming.


"Gen 5 is the Gospel in a nutshell also....with the meanings of each persons name..."
I"ve actually never heard these name meanings all together like this. I'll have to study up on it some and see if I agree.

 

[Sparkey]

Regarding your statement,

"I'm assuming your view is they are separated by only five days where on mine it's billions of years between the creation of the Earth and Adam. I hope that answers your question. If not, let me know."

I think that is a reasonable assumption to make especially in light of:

1. You may have noticed that there is a "Young Earth Creationism" tag under my name.
2. You're relatively new to this particular forum and could not be expected to have knowledge of posts that address this common assumption with my reply, "I don't really know," and "I wasn't there."

I don't mind telling you that a year or two ago, there were a couple/three subscribers to the Christianity and Science forum who may have felt some degree of frustration after trying to budge me from what I called "my formal position of ignorance." I've been accused of being a cop-out before. Yet, my position on the matter stands unmodified today: You could be right, I'm unsure, and although I have not be able to prove what you are teaching as fact, I do not mind trying.

So part of what we are doing here is getting to know each other better. I know the standards I'm talking about are difficult to maintain so if I get out of line, PM me about it and I'll try to remember that a slap from a friend is better than a kiss from an enemy.

 

[gr8grace]

Jarrod Kruger, Thanks for your input. However, I read all of Jer 4:1-31, and in no way can I come to the same conclusion that you do above. Clearly Jer 4 is God telling Israel through Jeremiah to straighten up and fly right or I'm going to pronoucne judgment on you (which He did). Clearly as stated in verse 16, this is a phrophecy, not a historical account of the Earth's creation (this thread's OP). It's not discussing events prior to man's creation in verses 23-26.
"I looked at the earth,
and it was formless and empty;
and at the heavens,
and their light was gone.
24 I looked at the mountains,
and they were quaking;
all the hills were swaying.
25 I looked, and there were no people;
every bird in the sky had flown away.
26 I looked, and the fruitful land was a desert;(BV)
all its towns lay in ruins(BW)

Why would there be bird's flying away (if they hadn't been created yet)?
Why towns in ruins if they hadn't been created yet?

This type of language is used all through Hebrew texts to depict a great battle or punishment is coming.


"Gen 5 is the Gospel in a nutshell also....with the meanings of each persons name..."
I"ve actually never heard these name meanings all together like this. I'll have to study up on it some and see if I agree.

No problem. We are all believer priests and have to come to our own conclusions. It is difficult to make a summary of a rather large doctrine. It is a part of the Angelic conflict or the Kingdom conflict. Eph 3:10. ...http://gracebiblechurchwichita.org/?page_id=716 Here is a link if you are interested.

 

[Sparkey]

So now, my promised reply to your Post #19:
We've handled your question #2, now to try to address your first question which addresses what I recognize as an matter classified as an "Appeal to Authority".

Thanks, and I agree we should slow it down and move step by step, so to speak. Between you and me, I feel there are some points we need to go back and clarify however. Can you respond to just two questions I have for you quickly?

1. I started with the ESV and AMP study notes on the subject of developing chronologies from the Genesis genealogies because it's a summary statement, not a detailed analysis. I don't recall you responding to their summary. Do you feel their study and statement can be trusted? If not, why?

and

My question asked if we might agree about less than 10,000 years. I did not assert that was the case.

2. I'm not always technical or precise in my langauge either. But when you said "we might agree about less than 10,000 years", does that mean you'd agree to 9,999 years from Adam to now?

It's not a matter of trust but more a matter of my habit of challenging almost everything (at least internally). For general usage, I like the Scripture that says we can rely on the testimony of 'two or three witnesses' to verify an alleged truth. It doesn't really apply when there are no witnesses though. Clearly, righteous Job was "put in his place" by God's reply (found in Job chapter 38), encapsulated here as "Where where you when I laid the foundations of the earth..." (I should really [PAUSE] right here to go and read that again.)

But, before I do, and as I continue to try to honestly answer your question, let's first see what non-biblical sources say? I think there is room to squeeze that in, while considering Luke 16:8. A little research on the subject of "Logical Fallacies: Appeals to Authority" yielded what I sought.

 

[chessman]

I will look at the link. But just quickly, why towns prior to God cresting people?

 

[Sparkey]

Part of my way of thinking about such things is to consider various age-old techniques that may be used to avoid pitfalls that can trap debaters. This goes back at least to Socrates and Plato and other thoughts of the ancient, secular Greek scholars. The "pitfalls" are well known and often discussed and commonly called logical fallicies. One of which is termed an "Appeal to Authority". Here's how a sandbox version of that typically goes: "My daddy is bigger than your daddy." Reply: "No. He isn't. My daddy is bigger than yours, so nanner-nanner." :rolling


A more scholarly discussion may be found here:
The Nizkor Project: Fallacy: Appeal to Authority

and is quoted (in part) here:

Condition #3. There is an adequate degree of agreement among the other experts in the subject in question.

If there is a significant amount of legitimate dispute among the experts within a subject, then it will fallacious to make an Appeal to Authority using the disputing experts. This is because for almost any claim being made and "supported" by one expert there will be a counterclaim that is made and "supported" by another expert. In such cases an Appeal to Authority would tend to be futile. In such cases, the dispute has to be settled by consideration of the actual issues under dispute. Since either side in such a dispute can invoke experts, the dispute cannot be rationally settled by Appeals to Authority.

We both know that the final appeal remains rightly placed in the Lord, who is the ultimate author of what we're talking about. He is also known to be our Teacher and Comforter and Provider as well as a host of other to-be-rejoiced-over things. So, especially as I enter into debate, it's good for me to think on these things in a Philippians 4:8 "whatsoever things are pure" manner as opposed to a Plato/Socrates type of way. Still, the way of the world in such things may be put to good use if just used to avoid common pitfalls.

NOTE: I am on [Pause] here to give time for consideration of other posts (and to follow along, if you will). Hi Jarrod Kruger, welcome to chessman's thread.

 

[chessman]

"My daddy is bigger than your daddy." Reply: "No. He isn't. My daddy is bigger than yours, so nanner-nanner." :rolling

A more scholarly discussion may be found here:
The Nizkor Project: Fallacy: Appeal to Authority

I'm as familiar with logical fallacies as I am the fingers on my hand

It was not my intention to pull out "Big Daddy" on you. I honestly didn't know your position on these committee's statements (and still don't clearly). Do you feel their study (the committee's for ESV, NIV and AMP) and statement concerning not turning a genealogy into a chronology can be trusted? If not, why?
If your answer is no and it’s because “"my formal position of ignoranceâ€, then fine. I understand. I’ll agree to drop the dating of Adam discussion.

However, at this point I'm assuming that you do in fact agree with their position since you say in your post #20

If we can get past the stipulation that we won't sweat the small stuff about a couple ten-thousand year time-periods or so, … Does less than 32,127 years sound arbitrary enough?

You can’t get to 32,127 years ago or even 10,000 without understanding that all generations are not listed. Then can we move on from the genealogies being a math formula to calculate the age of the Earth and therefore that being the primary reason for YEC’s stance.

I’d be glad to discuss the Hebrew usage of “yom†in Genesis 1 or we could also stipulate that it too is flexible, then move to the next argument. It’s up to you.

By the way, it may be time to restate something. I have no desire whatsoever to change your mind on this subject or any other subject (or even win a "debate"). I honestly was (and am still) searching for anything (Biblical and therefore logical that is) that might be YEC's valid argument(s) for supporting their stance so staunchly. I may very well have simply overlooked some argument somewhere along the line. But it’s not the Appeal to Authority fallacy that I’ve overlooked.

I too will have to pause my replies/study for now. I'm off tomorrow on travel for three days.

 

[chessman]

My daddy is bigger than yours, so nanner-nanner." :rolling [/I]

One more thought just occured to me. The reason "Appeal to Authoirty" doesn't really apply here is that it's only a fallacy if the authority's arguments are not valid. I want the pilots flying my planes tomorrow to be an Authority. And I want them to follow all the rules, not just the ones they like.

 

[Sparkey]

One more thought just occured to me. The reason "Appeal to Authoirty" doesn't really apply here is that it's only a fallacy if the authority's arguments are not valid. I want the pilots flying my planes tomorrow to be an Authority. And I want them to follow all the rules, not just the ones they like.

Have you read my provided quote or looked at the source link (also provided)?

Here it is again:
A more scholarly discussion may be found here:
The Nizkor Project: Fallacy: Appeal to Authority
and is quoted (in part) here:

Condition #3. There is an adequate degree of agreement among the other experts in the subject in question.

If there is a significant amount of legitimate dispute among the experts within a subject, then it will fallacious to make an Appeal to Authority using the disputing experts. This is because for almost any claim being made and "supported" by one expert there will be a counterclaim that is made and "supported" by another expert. In such cases an Appeal to Authority would tend to be futile. In such cases, the dispute has to be settled by consideration of the actual issues under dispute. Since either side in such a dispute can invoke experts, the dispute cannot be rationally settled by Appeals to Authority.

As a form of appeal to authority, name-dropping can be an important form of informal argumentation, as long as the name being dropped is of someone expert on the subject of the argument and that person's views are accurately represented.

We need to look at specific quotes from the authorities you've mentioned about Genesis, Chapter Five to see if we can determine whether we have a case of name-dropping (as I suspect), or if this is a case of a legitimate Appeal to Authority (as you allege). I've no problems with the credentials except for my previously stated preference to look toward the Sages (a.k.a. Rabbinical Teachers, schooled in Hebrew as their native language) in these matters, but can not agree to your assertion (as it pertains to the fifth chapter of Genesis) without evidence of what they have specifically said. If there are no problems with your case, it should resolve quickly and I'll look forward to your reply.

 

[Sparkey]

...You can’t get to 32,127 years ago or even 10,000 without understanding that all generations are not listed.

Asked and answered. I was being generous in my math. My mistake.

Truth found in the BIBLE:Assumption: The passage of time in the earlier passages of Genesis is indicated by counts of generations:

Actually the evidence is the passage of time is indicated by skipping some generations and breaking the lineage to record a Hebrew genealogy that's not necessarily representative of an unbroken lineage from Adam to Noah. After all, it's clearly broken in multiple places as Hebrew scholars have noticed since it was authored.

Let's take a look. When I gave an example earlier about the first two men mentioned, Adam and his son, Seth, I was not quoting you. I obviously was not clear enough in my communication and your reply then was:

I know of none who straight-up say, "The holy word of God is wrong here and it contradicts itself - look over at this other chapter - I'll show you where it clearly says that Adam had 3 sons between him and who we now know is his great-grandson,Seth," or any such thing.

I’ve never said that either. Thisis not a quote from me or even a paraphrase. This statement is misleading toward my position. I trust the Holy Word of God with mylife. I cannot ignore your tone andimplication here. Seth is obviously Adam’s son in the sense that you mean itsince the text does offer their there dialog later in Genesis, etc. However, I don’t think the same is true forall the other “father”/ “son” relationships. Those are where I’d say telescoping is possible.

Note: bolding added by Sparrow for emphasis

Upon examination, I find:

1. Your above quoted statement: "I’ve never said that either. Thisis not a quote from me or even a paraphrase." [sic]
   
   REPLY: See above. I've never said it was.​
2. Your above quoted statement: "This statement is misleading to my position."
   
   REPLY: Here is a selected quote from your first post, let's see if I misstated:

   "After all, “years” and “total lifetimes” are present in the Genesis 5 text and should be seen as historically accurate.

3. Your quoted statement: "Seth is obviously Adam’s son in the sense that you mean itsince the text does offer their there dialog later in Genesis, etc."[sic]
   REPLY:I am unsure what you mean exactly, but would invite you to explore your conclusion further at Bible Genealogy.com which explores 3087 biblical characters with details such as who were their parents, brothers, sisters, spouses, concubines and children. Simply stated, we must not insist that people were not related because we don't have records of their conversations.​

Contrary to your objection, I did not quote you and did not attempt to quote you. Instead, what I did was provided a single example (the Adam/Seth example) to get us started and to illustrate my main point: There is no problem that I can see in the specific genealogy (Genesis, chapter 5 from Adam to Noah). Neither is there any challenge that I can find to this specific linage. My conclusion that the genealogy found in the fifth chapter of Genesis, from Adam to Noah, is free from what you term "telescoping" and remains unchallenged except by your simple assertion and the Appeal to Authority fallacy where there is not sufficient agreement (about that specific text, and that text only) to make such an appeal. My simple assertion (that you seem to want to challenge here) therefore bears repeating:

I know of none who straight-up say, "The holy word of God is wrong here and it contradicts itself - look over at this other chapter - I'll show you where it clearly says that Adam had 3 sons between him and who we now know is his great-grandson,Seth," or any such thing.

Pointing to other genealogies and then going from general observations to specific conclusions about Genesis, chapter 5, from Adam to Noah, simply will not do. I have not spoken about the generations mentioned regarding Moses, nor the ones about Ruth. I've also steered away from various comparisons of the reigns of Kings for similar reasons. I didn't mention 1Chr 1:1-4 because standing alone it lacks substantial weight for this purpose.

Point Blank now: Show me from Scripture where I am wrong in my statements that the number of years between Adam and Noah total to a sum of precisely 1056 years.

• Adam-Seth 130 years
• Seth-Enosh 105 Years
• Enosh-Kenan 90 Years
• Kenan-Mahalalel 70 Years
• Mahalalel-Jared 65 Years
• Jared-Enoch 162 Years
• Enoch-Methuselah 65 Years
• Methuselah-Lamech 187 Years
• Lamech-Noah 182 Years

-OR- (if you are unable to fault my math or conclusion)​

Option #2: Proceed to show me biblical support for the allegation that my conclusion herein is somehow, anyhow either dubious or wrong. This would include specific Scriptural references that prove that the chain of patrimony is incomplete as listed in Genesis, chapter 5, from Adam to Noah, or that I am guilty of omission and failed to list any progeny. Use examples like what is found in Luke 3:37 where is specifically lists in reverse chronological order from Noah to Adam to support your allegation of my "telescoping".

-OR- (if you are not able to do so yourself)​

Option #3: Provide specific links or quotes from any reference work of your choosing that does same and can rightfully be used to discredit any of my statements or conclusions about Genesis 5 in this post: who they were, how old the were when they sired their sons, or their ages at the time of their deaths. In other words, prove or retract your assertion that there has been "telescoping" (deliberate leaving out for the sake of brevity) proven or or even suspected in the Genesis 5 genealogical list of the first ten Patriarchs, but only as it directly pertains to the Genesis 5 genealogy. This option specifically excludes broad, sweeping generalizations or statements made about all Hebrew genealogies.

I specifically call to notice the fact that I have refrained from speaking in general about the various genealogies that can be found in the Bible and instead continue to ask for any reference whatsoever that specifically points to this unique genealogy because it is, quite frankly, exceptional and here is why:

I am aware that other genealogies have what is called a "telescoping" influence. I've not used those and purposefully not mentioned them. The genealogies of Genesis 5 differ in at least one respect from others. In Gen 5 we see a formula repeated, “When X had lived Y years, he became the father of Z”, rather than simply “X was the father of Y” or “X the son of Y” as we see elsewhere in the Bible

-OR-​

Option #4: Point to further options I've missed.
Option #5: Concede this as trivial in the larger discussion about billions of years vs. what I now call the period of the genealogical-annals-of-Adam to Noah, which is exactly 1056 (no more, no less) years. Or continue with me and turn to Genesis, chapter 11, where we may start again with Shem, son of Noah and move toward Abram.


You've also quoted President Bill Clinton as having asked,

"So as Bill Clinton would say, 'When does when mean when?'" [endquote] My reply to the rhetorical question? "It means now, Bill, it means now."

 

[reba]

Please remember Bible Study is a no debate forum. Although this discussion seems to be pleasant, we need to hold tight to the spirit of this forum.... Chessman if you wish I can relocate the thread.... Thank you, reba

 

[Stone-yarder]

The answer to your question ^ Is YES, unless you start adding things to Gods word then you can make it mean whatever you want.

 

[Sparkey]

Please remember Bible Study is a no debate forum. Although this discussion seems to be pleasant, we need to hold tight to the spirit of this forum.... Chessman if you wish I can relocate the thread.... Thank you, reba

Sparrow

I too will have to pause my replies/study for now. I'm off tomorrow on travel for three days.

 

[Sparkey]

Here then is a link to a Hebrew Interlinear for Genesis 5, which is relevant to our study:
Hebrew Interlinear Bible (OT): Genesis, chapter 5

Within you will see the:
Hebrew Text : WLC_v (v1.1): Westminster Leningrad Codex with vowels
Sublinears : WLC_t, CHES (v2.0),
Translation : Authorised Version.

I tend to ignore the English (Authorized) translation to focus on the Hebrew Text and mostly look at the "sublinears".

 

[chessman]

Please remember Bible Study is a no debate forum. Although this discussion seems to be pleasant, we need to hold tight to the spirit of this forum.... Chessman if you wish I can relocate the thread.... Thank you, reba

Thanks for the reminder. I understand. My preference would be to stick to the Biblical discussions, study and exegesis as much as possible for this particular thread here if thats okay. If you are following it or another moderator perhaps, you could help shepherd this criteria (and others of the ToS). It has been and will continue to be my goal of fully understanding what Scripture says concerning the age of the Earth. I've tried to proceed that way and too am somewhat disappointed that there's been so much extra-biblical discussion between sparrowhawke and myself. There's three fingers pointed back at me This forum seems like a great asset for these unavoidably controversial topics.

 

[gr8grace]

I will look at the link. But just quickly, why towns prior to God cresting people?

It is possible that Angles lived here first, and had cities and towns,or dwelling places. the angelic conflict is the reason we are here. Satan accused God of being UNFAIR and without Grace and God has granted Satan an appeal trial so to speak. And we were created to reveal Gods Grace and His fairness. Eph 3:10..... so that the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known through the church to the rulers and the authorities(Satan and fallen angels) in the heavenly places. 11 This was in accordance with the eternal purpose which He carried out in Christ Jesus our Lord,

 

[Sparkey]

Thanks for the reminder. I understand. My preference would be to stick to the Biblical discussions, study and exegesis as much as possible for this particular thread here if thats okay. If you are following it or another moderator perhaps, you could help shepherd this criteria (and others of the ToS). It has been and will continue to be my goal of fully understanding what Scripture says concerning the age of the Earth. I've tried to proceed that way and too am somewhat disappointed that there's been so much extra-biblical discussion between sparrowhawke and myself. There's three fingers pointed back at me This forum seems like a great asset for these unavoidably controversial topics.

I'm not aware of my introducing "extra-biblical" sources to our discussion, for the most part, I've urged that we stick to the clear, plain meaning of the text found in Genesis 5 to look at the 1056 years that passed during the time of Adam to Noah. I'd like to get past this, so we can proceed smoothly to the next major clue, the Genesis 11 text and continue to see what we are shown about the subject in the bible. My part, freely admitted, is that I have strenuously engaged in debate here, in the study forum, but today stand corrected. Perhaps a move to Apologetics and Theology forum will be good? Unsure, but time will tell.

totopic

We left off with Gen 5, have you had a chance to look at the Hebrew Interlinear, yes? I know you're offline for awhile and will continue to look forward to continuing this study with you.

 

[n2thelight]

I would say the age of the earth is millions of years......However the time from Adam till now is coming up on 7000,which will start the day of the Lord,ie,the 7th day..........


Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."

There are two bodies mentioned in this verse; the heaven and the earth. It simply stated a fact and left the time factor out. The verse not only did not say when, but left it totally to our imagination, as to the eternal span of time, and how the creation took place.

If one dosn't see the fact that God destroyed the earth after He created it,the first time(not Noah's flood)you won't get it..............

Verse one describes an event (“in the beginningâ€) when God created everything. The passage is straightforward, and nearly all translations render it the same way.

Before looking at verse two, consider that the God of the universe is a perfect Being and He always creates for a purpose. Consider further His description of the moment when the heavens and Earth were created: “For thus says the Lord that created the heavens; God Himself that formed the earth and made it; He has established it, He created it not in vain, He formed it to be inhabited†(Isa. 45:18).

The Hebrew word translated “vain†can also be rendered “a desolation, desert; a worthless thing; without form, nothing, waste, wilderness.†The heavens and Earth were created to be inhabited from its very first moment—obviously not “a worthless thing without formâ€!
In fact, the creation event described in verse one was so magnificent that “the morning stars [angels] sang together, and all the sons of God [angels] shouted for joy†(Job 38:7).

Now let’s examine Genesis 1:2. The phrase “without form†comes from the Hebrew word tohu—the same word translated as “vain†in Isaiah 45:18. The word “void†comes from bohu, meaning “a vacuity (a total emptiness of matter, a vacuum), an undistinguishable ruin.â€
This is exactly what God said He did NOT create! He “is not the author of confusion†(I Cor. 14:33)—rather, everything God does is “done decently and in order†(vs. 40).

The Hebrew word hayah makes this crystal clear. It was incorrectly translated “was†in Genesis 1:2. A more proper rendering is “became†or “came to be.†With all of this information a more accurate translation of the beginning of this verse could be: “And the earth became desolate, a worthless thing and an undistinguishable ruin…â€

These verses describe two completely different events! This is not an interpretation by any man; it is the clear, direct interpretation of the Bible by the Bible.

 

[EdenBorn]

The Bible, under critical observation, does not tell a young earth at all. This was a rather stunning realization for me; I was once a YECist myself.

In Genesis, light is created before the sun and stars, even though stars are the primary light sources of the universe. The order of things made on Earth are relative to evolutionary theory. When looking at Genesis, you in fact see the Big Bang and evolution at work. You even see common ancestry echo in the story of the Tower of Babel.

The Bible is designed for all eras of people to understand. The literal interpretation worked for ancient man, and this explanation befits modern man. This brings the true meaning to God not being the author of confusion, which YEC's will commonly pin against theistic evolutionists, you see.

We are the celebrants of God's creation. It is not necessary that Genesis be literal for us to be cherished by God, being the great imitators and taking part in the ritual of His Creation. We are made in His image, being the clay shaped by the Potter. We should praise His creation for what it is, which is explained by our logic and reason.