Re: evolution-digest V1 #930

Gary Collins (
Mon, 1 Jun 1998 14:19:34 +0100 (BST)

> At 09:57 AM 6/1/98 +0100, Gary Collins wrote:
> >I have read previous posts which concern your theory. I must say, I find it
> >extremely interesting. I have, of course, noted the objections with regard
> >to the timing of it, but I don't believe that per se they are fatal to the
> >theory.
> >
> Timing is obviously the major hurdle I have to jump over especially since
> everyone (old earther theistic evolutionists and progressive creationists
> also) are young-earthers when it comes to the creation of man. But I would
> suggest that all of those recent creation views violate observational data
> and thus are wrong.

I suppose it depends just how recent 'recent is.

As Sherlock Holmes said, (something to the effect)
> when all other options have been eliminated, what is left, no matter how
> unlikely, it is probably the truth.

Didn't he rather say, 'MUST be the truth'!?

> >One thing that has occurred to me as I have been thinking about it is this:
> >If there were really about 5 million years (I hope I remember this figure
> >correctly) between the Flood and Abraham, I find it rather strange that,
> >though the Flood account is itself recalled in great detail, presumably
> >passed down orally from one generation to another, yet in all that time, the
> >only other event which made it into the Bible is the Tower of Babel story,
> >and that, in comparison, only 'in passing.' Have you had any thoughts
> >yourself along these lines?
> What about Divine revelation giving the info to Moses? Afterall, divine
> revelation HAD to give the info on Chapters 1 and 2 which are also given in
> detail. There was no human around for the first Chapter and a half to
> observe and then pass things on. I get this question a lot and it is
> interesting that often those who ought to believe in divine revelation
> don't seem to believe in divine revelation.

Point taken. I most certainly do believe in divine revelation. But even in
that case it strikes me as odd that 5 million years of human history would
pass without so much as a divine comment. Not impossible, mind you - but

I rather like your theory though, unorthodox as it may be, and hope that more
data can be found to support it. In terms of it's ability to explain things
I think it scores rather highly. I feel that it really *ought* to be true!