That's a hard question to answer, Thaumaturgy.
As I said, I've heard the explanations from Creationists.
Ken Ham has a display that shows humanism vis-a-vis Christianity.
I like the cartoon. Those of us here in the humanist camp do so love our "pornography balloons". Big and shiny and can easily distract the most pious.
Notice in this picture, that the castle on the right is losing the battle because it is focusing on "side issues", whereas the castle on the left is winning this battle, because it is focusing
at the base of the castle on the right.
If we lay the axe at the root of a tree, the whole tree falls.
See, that's the thing. In the present case, non-literal Genesis doesn't necessarily have to be the axe laid to the base of your tree.
I don't fully understand why literal Genesis is so important when it works as an allegory. There are plenty of things I know of that are quite fine as allegory and tell me some "truth" in a manner of speaking. But if I were to take these allegories as literal fact and try to come up with explanations of them as fact then I wind up coming up with such ridiculous concepts that I effectively lose sight of the "underlying truth" the allegory provides.
That is, unfortunately, what I perceive one does when one comes up with things like "Embedded Age". Why does Genesis have to be literal? Does it somehow affect one's acceptance of the Christian doctrines?
[The late] Henry M. Morris points out that when God showed up, He tore into Job with one question after another after another --- not about Job's integrity --- but about God's Creation.
I don't want to get started on Job. I love most of the book of Job but despise the depiction of God as petulant.
Sure it's true God >> Job, but did God have to prove it by hammering Job?
Who, exactly, was he impressing? The little man? Easy enough to do I guess.
We Christians are losing this fight --- the tares are choking the wheat
Now in this case you think "Embedded Age" is the wheat and geology is the "tare"? (Geology, which I might point out provides just about everything you have around you since pretty much everything comes from the earth and geologists find it for you.)
So you think "Embedded Age", a strange assault on both language and logic is somehow a general "good" whereas "clear communication" is the dross you should avoid?
But if you look at Jesus in the book of Revelation, He's livid with anger; and it's not going to be a picnic when He shows up.
In fact, nothing is going to stand in His way as He single-handedly mows down all competition against Him.
I am always fascinated at how very
human that drive is. Revenge, the bad will pay! Jesus will kick some behind! Takin' names! REVENGE!
The blood is going to rise to the level of horse bridles (Revelation 14:20).
That's the stuff! BLOOOOOOOOD! VENGEANCE!
I'm not sure if this answers your question, but I hope it at least sheds some light (Light?) on something you may not have thought of.
As I said I've heard it all before from Creationists. I merely posed it rhetorically.
PS: About your PS, I vaguely remember you mentioning having to pass three crosses on a mountain on your way to work or something, and that seemed to bother you?
I'm just tired of having to see non-stop Christian symbology while I listen to Christians tell me how bad they have it here in the U.S. and how the eeeevil atheists are always keepin' 'em down.
A bunch of whiners who have the game locked up for themselves and surround us. But heaven forbid one atheist speaks up amidst the cacauphony of Christian voices. You'd think Richard Dawkins was 10 billion men whereas the billion Christian broadcasters were tiny voices out in the wilderness.
Or do I have the wrong person here?
Well I have complained about having to see the crosses on the mountains around here for the reasons stated above. I don't have anything really against crosses per se. Just how whiney Christians here in the U.S. can get when anyone threatens to ask for a break from the non-stop Christian symbolism all around us.
