Should All Schools Be Mandated To Teach Creationism?

I am the one going through the alchemical process the terence mckenna describes in his talks.Terence is communicating with me. My actions are being choreographed by a mind that seems bigger than me.If I don't do this here I will be doing it elsewhere. the reason I lit on this site is the quality of thought that exists in general on this site. I'm thinking this group represents a high potential hanging out in a common space. yeah I don't how could miss the change especially when I come right out say I've changed tack. Starting to separate.the wheat from the chaff so to speak. It is kind of amusing to me how some seem to thrill to challenge when they feel they have been embarrassed.

I don't know why the science of meaning should be so important to our well being as animals but it very much seems to be the case.

 

our species has already met the requirements for basic survival so basic survival is no longer an issue. we no longer have to devote our intellect to figuring out how we're gonna survive, so what else is there in life?

 

Prepping?

 

Exactly we are leaving the age of fire to reach on up to become light.

 

If you don't snap to you'll be catching up

 

Well, just for argument sake, if you are talking about creation and you are thus talking about a God who created all this, then he could create everything just the way we see it with no need for light to have been traveling for billions of years. In fact God could have created the universe yesterday and made everything to look like it had been here for billions of years, even giving us memories that would make us think we had lived lives prior to our creation. Just saying.

 

well, if we're gonna go there, there's no reason it couldn't have been created 2 seconds ago including all of the history and our memories and stuff.

by why would "God" do that? what would be the purpose of this deceptive illusory history that we can observe?

would God try and trick us?

 

You are correct and there would be no way for us to tell. You are also correct to ask your follow up questions about why he would do that, many would just say; "God works in mysterious ways". But I was just pointing out that your using physics to prove how old the universe is only valid only if you eliminate God from the equation, which arguing creation does not allow you to do.

In any case, the Bible says that "in the beginning" God created the heavens and the earth and does not say how long ago that "beginning" was, yesterday or hundreds of billions of years ago and that could allow for your physics. As for the "days" of creation, these seem to take place after the earth was created (in the beginning perhaps billions of years ago) and the original word, translated as day, indicates a period of time to be determined by context and each "day" could be thousands of years and not just 24 hours.

Just saying.

 

Actually evolution is an idea of the process of creation or creationism. If you want to confine the idea of creation to god then so you confine your argument but you don't expand on understanding in doing so. God being that which we invoke is never eliminated from the equation where god is concerned or where you are concerned for god.

 

after the world was created, when one night comes and one day comes thats 24 hours. there is nothing, nothing, nothing, that indicates that this period of time was longer than 24 hours. it is so specific about the 24 hour period that it says "there was evening and there was morning." it doesnt say there was a thousand evenings. if you can find anything that points to a longer time period then enlighten us.



as far as the translations of "yom" and other translations that have to do with this topic, they were discussed in detail in the following post:

http://www.hipforums.com/forum/topic/464224-atheists-left-speechless-on-a-question-on-evolution/page-2#entry7684462

 

Ahhh the old 'teach the controversy' concept.
The problem with this is that the two theories are NOT scientific equals and therefore do not deserve the same consideration.

Creationism can be taught in religious studies, anthropology, or maybe in history classes so long as it's not being touted as fact but as myth or belief.
But it has absolutely no place in a science classroom.

 

Magic underpants, golden tablets, absolution sales, pedophiles, sea org, Zenu, don't believe in doctors, tower of babel, kill you unbelievers, give more-give more now, etc,etc. Good stuff. Makes sense to me.


Sure, teach this stuff as the relics they should be.

 

With all due respect, I don't know why this is even a debatable subject. Isn't it obvious that we, as biological, earthbound creatures cannot possibly know the meaning and purpose(if any) of the nature of 'the beginning'(if any). We're not supposed to know--OR WE WOULD and any debate about it would be moot. I just don't get it---what's the purpose of believing or not believing? What does it solve? It helps no one but hucksters,IMO.

 

The creation story runs about 2 paragraphs in Genesis: that hardly constitutes a curriculum. I know there's some topic called creation science, but this a fiction grounded in 19th-cent. romantic idealism (the same philosophy that brought us evangel. Christianity, capitalism, communism, Darwinism, & psychoanalysis). Our current state of affairs is to use 21st-cent. technology to recycle a 19th-cent. philosophy to reproduce 1st-cent. moral values. So, nihil sub sole est after all!