"Is it literally true, the Bible?" Bush - "Probably not. No, I'm not a literalist".Bush goes on to say "you can have both" as to evolution existing with God. I think he's right.
Johnson has been having lots of fun of late bashing creationists but he left no comment on this one. He didn't have to--the post says speaks for itself. Chances are he's filled with glee that the creationist hero has popped a sacred balloon.
But the rub is that while Bush may not be a literalist or young earth creationist he's still a creationist (and Christian). He said he leans on the Bible for his daily life, quite similar to what he said going in during 2000. It's true he might have caught some flack had he opened up that much but let's not forget he's a politician.
But his views aren't insane. Genesis itself was prescient in the timeline, starting with darkness (nothing), going to light (Big Bang), to unformed earth, then to formed earth, life-plants, animals and man, and all without any meaningful science whatsoever. Presuming the days aren't taken literally--and recall there wasn't a 24 hour day until the solar system was formed--then micro and even macro evolution can exist within that framework. This is what the Catholic Church seems to believe now, and it's where I come down on the issue as well.
The crux is what caused everything. As the president said, he believes it would have taken a God/Creator to bring everything into existence, which makes him a creationist in the root sense, ie, in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Most hard core evolutionists and scientists won't go there without proof, perhaps Charles being one of them, but in the big picture it takes a true article of faith to believe that life just "popped in there" from nothing one day, then immediately learned how to replicate itself. This is the core of what Christians do not want taught in schools without 'proof'.