I fear I might have made myself look stupid. When I say ‘I’m a creationist,’ I mean that I believe God created the universe. That’s all–not any of that literal ‘six days’ stuff.
Am I correct in my assumption that since you accept evolution, you must not believe that the Earth is only a few thousand years old, as other creationists believe?
Or do you feel that because God guided evolution, it took a much shorter period of time to get to today’s forms, so the Earth may be only a few thousand years old?
Yes.
On the contrary, you have made yourself look gracious, with a good sense of humor and humility. Welcome to the boards.
When God was dictating the bok of Genesis (so he would recieve proper credit for his deeds one presumes) to whoever it was that was writing it down, why did he leave out information about all the really cool dinosaurs?
Alternativly, What purpose would be served in burying a bunch of bones to give the scientific among us the silly notion that fantastic animals, never mentioned in the bible, ruled the earth for a significant period of time?
:dubious: Please read the other replies I have made. Thank you.
Sage Advice #1: It is physically impossible to ask a stupid question (per new question.)
Sage Advice #2: It is better to shoot your mouth off and have it corrected (by wiser people) than keep shut about it.
Sage Advice #3: It is better to look stupid than be.
Sage Advice #4: Until you have researched something, what you think on any subject is still only an opinion. Admittedly, these opinions will never become facts–but at least you can cite grenade the guy who hasn’t done any research.
Stone Girl, while you’re free to call yourself whatever you like, your beliefs on creation are about as mainstream American as it gets. If we are to preserve the meaning of “creationist” from the average manifestation of theism, I’d suggest the word you’re using is better applied to certain conservative theists who believe in a fair degree of scriptural literalism and infallibility.
I can relate to that. I tried to be an atheist in college, but gave it up when I realized that I still believed in God. Sometimes you just believe what you believe, whether you want to or not.
PS: Welcome to the boards, Stone Girl!
If that’s the case, I’m not sure what to call myself. I’m not a Christian, or affiliated with any other religious group. I’m not a theist either. I just believe that God exists and that He/She/It created the universe.
Ok, now that we’re just about through with the OP, what’s up with the username, Stone Girl?
It’s from a book by Tad Williams.
I would recommend Deist. I might note that I recently read something about how most of the founding fathers were Deists–so it certainly seems to have done us well. 
Oops. Missed that “I’m not a Christian” part. Deist does seem to fit.
Stone Girl, Welcome to the boards.
I don’t think that your point of view sounds like creationism in the usual sense, as many have already pointed out.
So, I have a follow up question for you:
[list=a]
[li]Do you believe anything as a matter of faith that is contradicted by current established science?[/li][li]Do you believe anything as a matter of faith that could, in principle, be contradicted by a scientific finding in the future?[/li][/list]
So, for example, if you belive in a moment of creation but the scientific view shifted to “the universe is infinitely old” (a distinct possibility according to some) would your views shift with the evidence or would you stick with your faith-guided perspective.
I realise the questions are provocative and I don’t want to seem rude, but this is a question I have long wanted to ask somebody who takes your philosophical position.
I see now that I took too long with my earlier post. Not only are you not a creationist, you are not a Christian.
I’m not quite what you mean here. Are you talking about the ‘steady-state universe’ concept?
I think the steady-state universe theory is pretty dead now, but some think that maybe the universe has, for example, repeatedly expanded and contracted and that we just happen to be living in one of an infinite number of such cycles.
However, that was just an example. The real question was can you give us an instance of something you belive that contradicts scientific findings now or might in the future. I was hoping that your answer would reveal something about you attitude to revealed religion versus science.
However, looking at some of your earlier responses it seems that while maintaining that God exists, you don’t adhere to any revealed religion. So, I guess that makes my question irrelevant.
Still, if you are here for the [python] full half hour argument [/python] perhaps I might try to carry the discussion forward a little:
[ul]
[li]If you (or a person generally) profeses a belief that does not contradict anything in verifiable experience (i.e. science) then does that belief really mean anything?[/li][/ul]
Welll, yes, I think it does. Because not everyone agrees with that belief.
Stone Girl, it is only fair that I should tell you that my own position is that of weak atheism.
Would you care to tells us what your beliefs do mean to you? For example, do they affect your views on moral questions. Or, do you simply think that God is logically necessary but does not otherwise influence you opinions or behaviour?