The evidence down here shows that all species share a universal common ancestor. Can this evidence influence how we interpret the text? This relates to what I said earlier:
“Why wouldn’t the truths we learn about the universe through science influence those same models? The scientific discoveries made by Galileo influenced the models that Christians held for the movement of the Earth, Sun, and other planets, so why couldn’t the same thing happen in biology and geology?”
If the evidence conflicts with the interpretation of the text, shouldn’t the interpretation of the text be questioned? This is what happened when evidence came forward for Heliocentrism, so why shouldn’t it also apply to findings in biology and geology?
Mutations add information to genomes all of the time, and those happen through natural processes. Mutations are the steps in evolution, and with a lot of little steps you can travel far distances, just as putting one foot in front of the other will move you one yard and repeating the process can move you miles at a time. The genetic differences that separate the human and chimp genomes are the result of mutations accumulating over time.[quote=“Mark_Moore, post:17, topic:37468”]
Actually we have been more than looking. We have been actively “forcing” evolution via animal domestication. And what we have learned is that domestic breeding had limits. We can only take things so far from the archtype before problems arise and limits assert themselves.
There are limits to how much change can happen over a short amount of time. However, those limits increase as you have more and more generations that have more and more mutations. You might as well say that you can’t walk 10 miles because you can only travel a few feet in one second.[quote=“Mark_Moore, post:17, topic:37468”]
That may be you, but the text says what the text says.
Then you should believe that the Sun orbits the Earth.
“I say that if there were a true demonstration that the sun is at the center of the world and the earth in the third heaven, and that the sun does not circle the earth but the earth circles the sun, then one would have to proceed with great care in explaining the Scriptures that appear contrary, and say rather that we do not understand them than what is demonstrated is false. But I will not believe that there is such a demonstration, until it is shown to me . . . . and in case of doubt one must not abandon the Holy Scripture as interpreted by the Holy Fathers. I add that the one who wrote, “The sun also riseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose,” was Solomon, who not only spoke inspired by God, but was a man above all others wise and learned in the human sciences and in the knowledge of created things; he received all this wisdom from God; therefore it is not likely that he was affirming something that was contrary to truth already demonstrated or capable of being demonstrated.”–Cardinal Bellarmine, 1615