Time Magazine, November 13, 2006 issue -
He is a brilliant man who is a former atheist. He is the Director of the National Human Genome Research Institute.
Dr. Collins says that interpretation of Genesis 1 and 2 in a literal way is not consistent with our knowledge of the universe’s age or of how living organisms are related to one another. He talks about St. Augustine, who warned explicitly against having a literal view of Genesis, to avoid making the Christian faith look ridiculous.
Dr. Collins is a Christian and a well-respected scientist. Will you continue to take the Bible literally, given this information?
2006-11-09 10:33:49 · 10 answers · asked by Kathryn™ 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Yes. Many scientists are Christians, who are former atheists.
Genesis 1 talks about how God made the universe and everything in it (specifically, the earth) in six days. What many don't think about is that it doesn't say six consecutive days, people just assume that. God could've just as easily made it in six days as he could have in 6 million years (Once every million years He did one more thing or things.) It may say, there was light, and then the fifth day, but we also do not know how long the days were, because God did not create humans first. I mean, Venus's day is longer than it's year, why couldn't have Earth's day been 1 million years, while it's year be a year?
2006-11-09 10:42:18 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Simply put, Genesis was never meant to be about HOW. It is about WHY and BY WHOM. (caps only for clarification)
The reason Genesis was written was to combat the pagan religions at the time and their own twisted version of what had formerly been passed down by word of mouth by God's believers.
Being a scientist, I can tell you, this is mostly a dead issue among the educated scholars in scientific study, Christian and non-Christian. Almost all scientists believe in some beginning. That is to say that it is implausible to believe that all this came from absolutely nothing.
As far as I know Adam wasnt given an electron microscope and recombinant genetic techniques to know what DNA was. Simply put, man at that time in creation would not have understood it. Not knowing about it doesnt make it any less real. Evolution may someday prove to be the same.
The joy of understanding is God's gift, left to us to discover.
2006-11-09 11:26:18 · answer #2 · answered by eliteflycaster 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Rephrase that: Will you continue to accuse all Christians of taking Genesis 1-2 literally?
2006-11-09 11:04:38 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
He sounds like a appropriate decision. Evangelicals are are a huge area of this united states of america. Evangelicals have been in charge for founding many universities, colleges and different colleges in u . s .. we would desire to proceed influencing the country.
2016-10-21 13:41:59 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes I will. One thing that is so important here is do not take a sound byte of someone elses idea until you go thru each step your self to confirm or deny the info. Take a lesson from the Bereans in the bible,
2006-11-09 10:42:50 · answer #5 · answered by rapturefuture 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The Bible interprets itself. Some of it is literal, some of it is symbolic. Genesis and creation is literal.
Thanks!
2006-11-09 11:04:20 · answer #6 · answered by mx3baby 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I didn't know who he was, but I've already had that theory on Genesis for some time now.
2006-11-09 10:37:15 · answer #7 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Bravo!
2006-11-09 10:45:40 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
you give no information to change my beliefs
2006-11-09 11:28:46 · answer #9 · answered by JaimeM 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no
2006-11-09 10:38:41 · answer #10 · answered by george p 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋