Creationism

I've thought perhaps when human populations were low, and life was real tough thousands of years ago, that metaphysical spirituality might have been more accessible to people, and as a result a message to guide people to a higher appreciation of it would be practically useful and therefore popular. Though, like a hollywood movie done today about a real world event, for it to be popular it has to be 90% rubbish to keep people's attention and to use contexts relevant to the lives of the readers. So I dont take it literally and instead see the messages as symbolic langauge to the nature of metaphysical spirituality and methods to relate to it. So if someone wants to believe in Genesis literally then I just intepret that to mean they are trying to fully immerse their conscious identity into the story of the book perhaps to maximise its intended purpose. Any evanglism from them in that regard is a sign of the power of their belief and not something to be afraid of, but obviously its rude for anyone to push their beliefs onto other people who dont want to listen or participate.

Br. John wrote: How can the creationist issue be separated from the Bible Literalist issue? Genesis gives two different accounts of creation and they contradict each other. Later in the Old Testament The Bible clearly states that Earth is fixed and unmovable with four corners. I'm sure you all know what happened to Galileo for saying Earth was not the center of the universe.

I've never met a Creationist who did not frame this as an argument for believing in God or not. As though to believe in evolution was the same as not believing in God.

This is refreshing: http://ThankGodForEvolution.com/

Haha! When someone tries to justify Genesis being truth, I bust out the "God created the earth" first (in darkness) and then he made day and night, when we now know factually that it requires a star to create a planet, and therefore the earth couldn't have been created before day and night.

Though, like a hollywood movie done today about a real world event, for it to be popular it has to be 90% rubbish to keep people's attention and to use contexts relevant to the lives of the readers.

So, you're saying christianity is a crappy religion because it is essentially based on some popular hollywood movie?

Many faiths do share the creationism as the way that Earth been created (not exclusively Abrahamists). Others beliving in The Dream (subjectivity) as some peoples in the Big Bang (or other objectivist theories).

The better thing to do would be to travel back in time to know for sure (with dr. Emmett Brown's machine or to pass arround the the sun in hyperexponential speed or with Superman spinning arround the Earth at light speed? lol). Till there, to live in harmony is the better thing to do. Because we can't proove any thories (without any doubts and with a absolute certitude), such "fights" are trivial and futile.

Does anyone here believe that the universe is 6,000 to 8,000 years old and humans appeared ready made much as we are now around 4,000 to 6,000 BCE?

I believe most modern day physicists would agree that the universe may be around 14 billion years old and Earth would be around 3.5 - 4 billion years old. Over the previous decades the Catholic church and many other religions world wide have attempted to align their view points with modern day physics findings.

However, like many have already posed in this thread, your belief is your belief. You don't have to side with science, but to me it does seem more logical. I wont hound you for opposing to the math.