Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

yellowcanine

(36,900 posts)
11. "Eras" doesn't quite work either because the earth exists before the sun does.
Tue Feb 26, 2013, 12:22 PM
Feb 2013

And plants were created on Day/Era 3 but the sun wasn't created until Day/Era 4. Exactly how is that supposed to work? Besides, the whole notion of a creation account being dictated to people by God is completely unscientific and philosophically problematic, to say the least. The Genesis authors were uneducated in science so they wrote stuff based on oral history. Before humans existed there was no oral history. So anything up to the existence of humans is creation myth. Unless the authors were way ahead of their time they would have had no notion of man being related to/derived from animals. As much as I would like to encourage the "moderate" creationists, it just doesn't work scientifically or philosophically. The mistake Creationists make is linking their religious faith to the science of the origins of life in the first place. The whole notion that it is necessary to accept a set of propositional truths in order to be a good person or to find favor with God is flawed. If God is so great, what does he/she (another goofy idea, that God would have gender) care what individual humans believe about the origins of life? Isn't it more important how humans behave - for example if they are good stewards of the earth and refrain from exploiting or killing each other?

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

"tantamount to abuse of our children." ChairmanAgnostic Feb 2013 #1
Further proof that there are rational, reasonable theists. A HERETIC I AM Feb 2013 #2
The irony is that the "seven day" thing can be completely true,... Gorp Feb 2013 #3
nice points. ChairmanAgnostic Feb 2013 #4
I've been discussing the concept of co-existance of creationism and evolution since the 70's. Gorp Feb 2013 #5
Creationism and evolution really can't coexist. At least not if you mean "special creation" or ID. yellowcanine Feb 2013 #6
You can use the definition you provided or what's currently called "guided evolution". Gorp Feb 2013 #7
Nah, we live in a freckled face kid!s computer nadinbrzezinski Feb 2013 #9
I don't do cosmology - I'm not into makeup. Gorp Feb 2013 #10
I don't have a problem with a God "imagining a universe." yellowcanine Feb 2013 #12
It's also a good description of the awareness of modesty (with regards to naughty bits). Gorp Feb 2013 #14
There's nothing in creationism that is science Bradical79 Feb 2013 #8
Right - any creator is not science. I misspoke. yellowcanine Feb 2013 #16
a whole new meaning to the big bang? ChairmanAgnostic Feb 2013 #19
"Eras" doesn't quite work either because the earth exists before the sun does. yellowcanine Feb 2013 #11
The day/era 4 thing with the sun has always baffled me. Where did "light" come from on day one? Gorp Feb 2013 #13
"hell is other people" Alternatively, if we are honest, "hell is other people and myself." yellowcanine Feb 2013 #17
I think "No Exit" at least implied that. Gorp Feb 2013 #21
No. It can't... SidDithers Feb 2013 #15
"uninformed ramblings of bronze age mystics". "uniformed" by science, anyways. yellowcanine Feb 2013 #18
I disagree. There were three primary authors of Genesis (as far as we know). Gorp Feb 2013 #20
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»A Creationist Picks A Fig...»Reply #11