I understand her dilemma, however her reason for the throwing out of Genesis 1 creation account is not based on a theological foundation.
That is discrediting the basis for the world view…one cannot predetermine a philosophical belief from outside of philosophy.
I fully agree that the science appears to be contrary to the literal reading, however, for me the answer is found in the story of Elijah…he ran from Jezebel and hid in a cave. He was called out, not by the wind, thunder, earthquakes…but by the still small voice. Its the little snippets of our creation that God has left for those to find who are devoted to biblical truth. Everything else is corrupted by Satan and Sin.
What people reading this simply do not appreciate are the overwhelming numberof theological/or philosophical inconsistencies that begin to arise from the moment one takes this approach.
I am astounded to here educated people make the claim that theories are facts in order to justify their change in direction. I cannot find any sense in it.
I can absolutely tear holes in any Christian view that attempts to do this…so much so, it proves Christianity is absolutely pointless.
For all the demands that the bible interpretation must agree with scientific theory, im flabbergasted by her opening statment in the podcast…
“For myself, I have just come to the point that nothing discovered in science will cause me not to believe in God, nothing, no science discovery. We could discover absolute empirical evidence for abiogenesis or the multiverse, but the science is the one thing that’s not going to challenge my faith”
If science doesnt matter for her faith, why the heck has she been forced to change her theology?
I do not understand how people miss that glaring discrepency in this world view…and you claim YEC are blind to the obvious!
The truth is, one cannot choose God if you refuse to read as its written. All sorts of excuses are given, compromises made…in the end the entire reason for CHIST DYING PHYSICALLY ON THE CROSS AS ATONEMENT FOR THE WAGES OF SIN (Romans 6.23), is lost.
The philosophical and historical fact is, Christ died physically on the cross.
A person cannot be Christian and deny Christ died physcially on the cross.
If his atoning death was physical, how can the sin of Adam and Eve, and the entire sanctuary service, be allegorical?
We know for a fact the sanctuary was a physical demonstration of the process of atoning for sin, salvation, and redemption!
Another massive problem is that there is no biblical support for the idea that suffering and death were in this world prior to Adam and Eve because we have an overhwelming narrative that is completely at odds with such a view.
So when i hear a podcast opening statement supporting my claim science makes no difference to Christian faith, (which we all know is founded on the bible…there is no other source for it)…i agree!