Is there any "evangelical" who sincerely believes in a 6-day creation today? Mr. Gumbel gives the nod to such people in his pamphlet entitled "Is There a Conflict Between Science and Christianity?" But he hastens on to add that the Genesis account can also be made to fit in with what he calls "modern" science. Though he mentions the organization that promotes creationism, his message is clearly that such teaching is not "modern." Specific names of prominent scientists who are creationists are not mentioned. (Morris, Ham, eg)

He then compares, in one of his worst written moments - my opinion- Galileo to John Scopes! He is attempting to suggest that the church is consistently wrong in the areas of science and should perhaps back off.

Most of us know the name Galileo, I think... the scientist whose belief that the earth travels around the sun (rather than the other way around), had him censored by the Roman Catholic Church. Persecuted, we would say. Convicted of heresy! Not a light matter in the 1600’s, when the Inquisition was in its glory. Galileo spent much of his days under house arrest after this conviction.

In this case, Galileo, and Biblical texts, were right. Rome was wrong, and has admitted it. They had improperly interpreted some of the Bible texts, and ignored others.

In the case of John Scopes, the evolutionist in the famous trial by that name, the Biblical evidence is still intact and against his conclusions. He was wrong, the church was right. Yet Nicky, and so many "evangelicals" today, say that John Scopes was persecuted in the same way as Galileo. In actual fact, Scopes was fined a mere $100.00, having been found guilty of teaching evolution in a school system that forbade it. He admitted later that he had not actually taught it, but had set up some students to testify that he had. Also later, even the $100.00 fine was rescinded because of a technicality.

Later still he joined the Catholic Church.

Not sure where the persecution is to be found. Surely strong conviction and arguments supporting same, cannot be considered persecution.

Galileo, John Scopes. Unfortunate comparison to say the least.

So is it your thinking that one can pick and choose interpretations of Genesis, or are we duty-bound to discover what God actually said and live with it? For me, it's the latter.

But, "Many different interpretations of Genesis are held by sincere Christians," says Gumbel. Genesis one (may be) a literary device, mere poetic license. He quotes the claim that the fossil evidence is inconsistent with the literal interpretation. And all this is being taught to new believers, who are not being exposed to creation scientists who answer these concerns effectively.

He simply does not want Christianity to appear to be out of touch, and therefore "un-cool."

Two responses: One, Science, true science, does back up the Biblical claims!

And two, resurrection is very “unscientific,” along with miracles in general, which he elsewhere defends admirably. Our religion is not popular nor is it acceptable. To suggest to new believers that it is, is, I think, disingenuous. A time will come when they must choose between Christ, and being accepted.