How long has man been created.

[Blue sapphire]

the majority of existence.

then of course spending any time on this or any forum is kinda a waste of time that could be spent much better.

mpok...you are 24.....and there is much to learn......speaking in haste does not allow one to listen and learn.

You seem interested in this thread.

Your input is valued if you can demonstrate your knowledge in such a way that uplifts those who read it.

I would encourage you to give more thought to the proverb. [bible]" A good reputation is worth more than gold and silver."[/bible]

May God be with you.

 

[Blue sapphire]

Originally Posted by genez

There you go.
​

fwwid: Thumbs up

It doesn't have to end like this fellas....no-one wins an argument when both get in their corners and vehemently defend their positions.

Is there a lesson we all can learn here.....isn't it our attitude towards those we disagree with.... that shows how much we really love them.

Loving one another is the golden rule.....winning the argument on this thread and losing it on this rule ....well ....I will let you finish the sentence.

May God be with you both.

 

[mpok1519]

heres the thing; I try to explain why and how ID and IR are bogus, but, people just ignore it anyways.

You put measurements, data and records out there, but still, the earht is 6000 years old to some.

But, I don't think its healthy for a society to have people walking around, telling others total nonsense in place of a fact or truth.

 

[Blue sapphire]

heres the thing; I try to explain why and how ID and IR are bogus, but, people just ignore it anyways.

You put measurements, data and records out there, but still, the earht is 6000 years old to some.

But, I don't think its healthy for a society to have people walking around, telling others total nonsense in place of a fact or truth.

Ok....you mean well... am I correct? If so...just remember it is up to the individual to seek out truth..... even the good LORD doesn't force himself upon us.....He is there if we seek Him out...

All through life... situations arise where others do not "get it" as we may see it.....but this is their spiritual journey and i should respect that even if i disagree with it. It may take 15 years for them to "get it' . Likewise it may take me 15 years to "get it"....so who am I to cast judgment.

Isn't it better to state your position using tact and sound argument....then leave it alone. Isn't this how God communicates with us using His Word.

May God bless you

 

[mpok1519]

But it irritates me when people try to tell lies to a world that doesn't know any better.

does God ever get irritated at people spreading lies?

 

[Blue sapphire]

But it irritates me when people try to tell lies to a world that doesn't know any better.

does God ever get irritated at people spreading lies?

The mind of God is no easy matter to understand....He Created all things knowing full well the end from the beginning....for generations He tolerates certain types of behaviour.

I am pleased i do not have the final say on who is saved.

Go in peace mpok.....the Creator of the Universe.....will have the final say.

 

[fwwid]

Originally Posted by genez

There you go.
​

fwwid: Thumbs up

It doesn't have to end like this fellas....no-one wins an argument when both get in their corners and vehemently defend their positions.

Is there a lesson we all can learn here.....isn't it our attitude towards those we disagree with.... that shows how much we really love them.

Loving one another is the golden rule.....winning the argument on this thread and losing it on this rule ....well ....I will let you finish the sentence.

May God be with you both.

There was no intention of sarcasm on my posting the thumbs up. I took it as an acknowledgement that he returned to accept my invitation to reconciliation. I hope the best for Genez as well as yourself in our mutual endevour of discipleship in Jesus Christ.

Was my intention to "win the argument" - absolutely not. My intention was to clear up misunderstandings regarding my beliefs and the beliefs of other theistic evolutionists. Whether people, including yourself, agree or disagree with what I offered is up to you and I hold no ill will. Regardless, thanks for the invitation to clear up another misunderstanding. "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall called the children of God."

 

[GenemZ]

Originally Posted by genez

There you go.
​

fwwid: Thumbs up

It doesn't have to end like this fellas....no-one wins an argument when both get in their corners and vehemently defend their positions.

You are under a wrong impression. I am not vehemently defending my position. I would not think what I believe is truth, if I were.

Loving one another is the golden rule.....winning the argument on this thread and losing it on this rule ....well ....I will let you finish the sentence.

We are all at different stages of spiritual growth. I believe you have a bit more to learn about what took place in the Bible when those who followed false doctrines were resenting the truth being presented.

The golden rule does not apply in this situation. It may have begun with it. But it does not mean its to continue after a point.

Golden rule? I would have to treat the person how I would want to be treated for propagating and promoting a lie. You love the one accepting the lie by patiently presenting truth. If they not only continue to refuse? And, tell you that you have the lie? That's what Pharaoh did. That's what the Pharisees did. That is what the Judaizers did with Paul. None of these folks received the kind of love you speak of. And, I will spare you of what one passage says in the Greek when Paul made comment on those legalists who were opposing the truth.

My job is to make the point clear. If they still refuse? They are not rejecting me. Its not taken personally. You seem to think I am taking this personally. I am not. For I know its not I who must open the other one's eyes. Its not me they are refusing.

I suggest you read the Bible again and take note of how we are to treat the less fortunate and those whom we would naturally not want to associate with. We are to love them as we love ourselves. Even our enemies we are to love. But love in that case does not mean show appreciation and approval. Love in that case would be to keep presenting truth, in spite of how negative they are, while they deny it and claim they are being nice.

Titus 3:10
"Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time.
After that, have nothing to do with him."
​

I guess that's not love to you on how to treat another in such a situation. It must not be in the Bible?

Matthew 10:12-15
"As you enter the house, give it your greeting.

"If the house is worthy, give it your blessing of peace.

But if it is not worthy, take back your blessing of peace.

"Whoever does not receive you, nor heed your words,
as you go out of that house or that city, shake the

dust off your feet.

"Truly I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land

of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than

for that city."​

Are you capable of that? Could you follow that command? Or, do you always follow the golden rule in everything?

Romans 1:21-23
"For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as
God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile
and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed
to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the
immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds
and animals and reptiles."

In their own way, evolutionists who deny the Creation account are essentially doing just as desribed. And, remember. They see themselves as being wise one. Wise for what they choose to believe. They have even told us as much.



In Christ, GeneZ



.
​

 

[fwwid]

You are under a wrong impression. I am not vehemently defending my position. I would not think what I believe is truth, if I were.

hahaha

We are all at different stages of spiritual growth. I believe you have a bit more to learn about what took place in the Bible when those who followed false doctrines were resenting the truth being presented.

Did you just assume he has "a bit to learn" and that you do not? I've caught you many times now talking down to people as though your the ever-superior teacher as though we were all your pupils, all while accusing the theistic evolutionists of possessing eletist attitudes. Sounds pretty "matthew 23"-ish if you ask me.

The golden rule does not apply in this situation. It may have begun with it. But it does not mean its to continue after a point.

The golden rule is always in effect brother.

Golden rule? I would have to treat the person how I would want to be treated for propagating and promoting a lie. You love the one accepting the lie by patiently presenting truth. If they not only continue to refuse? And, tell you that you have the lie? That's what Pharaoh did. That's what the Pharisees did. That is what the Judaizers did with Paul. None of these folks received the kind of love you speak of. And, I will spare you of what one passage says in the Greek when Paul made comment on those legalists who were opposing the truth.

This passage is so full of conceited statements it makes me laugh with nausea. OF COURSE, Genez has the truth. OF COURSE, those who do not agree with Genez are "promoting lies", ohh, I love that phrase "promoting lies" as though we were snakes in the grass. OF COURSE, those who don't believe as Genez does are as the Pharaoh's, Pharasees, Judaizers, and Legalists - liars and vagabonds.

My job is to make the point clear. If they still refuse? They are not rejecting me. Its not taken personally. You seem to think I am taking this personally. I am not. For I know its not I who must open the other one's eyes. Its not me they are refusing.

Again, such a cocky statement - "It's not me they are refusing" as though you were God's prophet. I lose more respect for you the more you try and sales-pitch me the idea that you are the sole possessor of truth and that all who do not bow to you and your ideology merit your accusations of fire and brimstone.

I suggest you read the Bible again

hahaha, now your saying that that he doesn't understand this one point of doctrine so much that he has to read the entire Bible again. Maybe then Genez, would you be able to admit that he may know that point of doctrine as well as you? I think not.

and take note of how we are to treat the less fortunate and those whom we would naturally not want to associate with. We are to love them as we love ourselves. Even our enemies we are to love. But love in that case does not mean show appreciation and approval. Love in that case would be to keep presenting truth, in spite of how negative they are, while they deny it and claim they are being nice.

So basically your saying that anybody who doesn't agree with you (inlcuding CHRISTIANS) are considered your enemies and that they don't merit any appreciation and approval from you at all? Because that's what you're saying. "in spite of how negative they are"? - so conceited.

"Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time.
After that, have nothing to do with him." I guess that's not love to you on how to treat another in such a situation. It must not be in the Bible?

Sounds like you ARE taking this pretty personally Genez if you deem it necessary to continue to "warn", and "warn", and "warn", and "warn", and on top of belittling this Christian for making an attempt for peace.

But if it is not worthy, take back your blessing of peace.

Ew, Ew, Genez, "We're not worthy!" "We're not worthy" Seeing how yet again your ability to arbitrate what is truth, and now worthy, or not is impecable...psssht.

"Whoever does not receive you, nor heed your words, as you go out of that house or that city, shake the dust off your feet "Truly I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city."

And now all of us who don't agree with you will suffer a retribution beyond that of SODOM and GOMORRAH for not agreeing with you. Your arrogance is nauseating.

"For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as
God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile
and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed
to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the
immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds
and animals and reptiles."

In case you haven't noticed Genez, we are all Christians here and all glorify and give thanks to Him, neither do any of us here worship idols. The only person here who seems obsessed moreso with the "creation" rather than the "Creator" (even to the point of showing hatred to your own brethren in Christ) is you. You're failing to prioritize what's more important.

In their own way, evolutionists who deny the Creation account are essentially doing just as desribed. And, remember. They see themselves as being wise one. Wise for what they choose to believe. They have even told us as much.

Again, typical "your word only" doctrine brought to us by Genez. We actually DON'T view ourselves as the "wise one" talked of in scripture. Genez wants to label us as such because if he's successful then he believes he can discredit our argument. In the end, you're the one whose labeling, not us.

In Christ, GeneZ

hahahahaha, hardly Genez, this message was so tainted with Babylonian pride I'm, well,...ha, I'm at a loss for words now.

 

[GenemZ]

FWWID?

That was great. Thanks for proving me not a liar about you.

Now, where were we?

Oh! That's right.
​

 

[JediMobius]

well, creationism is just one thing; the literal interpretation of creation of the universe by biblical standards. Thats creationism; the big bang, evolution, abiogenesis, and all scientific jargon like that, is not creationism. We aren't even discussion intellegent design, or irreducible complexity, which are also bogus and have no scientific credibility.

Saying creationism is just one thing is equivalent to saying science or Christianity are each just one thing. It's a true enough statement, in a way, but not every bird can fly, not every Christian is orthodox or protestant, not every science is physical or theoretical, and not every instance of creationism is the same as every other. If you can't be open to the idea that creationism as presented by Genez (for example) is different from the young earth creationism commonly spread, then you simply won't understand the other side of the discussion. There are similarities, but as we get closer to the proper interpretation of scripture, the less scientific data contradicts it. Only the conclusions drawn from the evidence by human minds, not the evidence itself, contradict scripture.

By any other standards, its just the natural processes of the universe which need no God to exist, which is why, creationism (the myth) simply does not exist.

The discussion is unreasonable because creationism is unreasonable; infact, there is no discussion.

Slamming the door on any and all discussion on a subject is far less reasonable than any subject itself could be. If you haven't noticed, this section of these forums is not scientific, it's theological. Forcing-in a topic that doesn't belong in this thread, or that even has any bearing on the original question in context, highlights the definition of unreasonable, as does the argument 'creationism doesn't exist.' For that matter, it takes a great deal of hubris to claim that the universe needs no God in order to exist; it's jumping the gun since a theory of everything doesn't exist yet, and there's no guarantee it actually will. I expect to read about an 'established' ToE, but I doubt it will close the book on the origins of the universe.

The universe's natural processes created life; end of discussion. To add anymore would just taint the integrity of the scientific standard itself.

Oh, and did those natural processes create themselves? Does a fire cause itself to burn? Does a child cause itself to be born, or a fetus conceive itself?

The discussion should end because 'creationism' itself is unreasonable, and bogus just like IC, or ID. Unless theres some scientific evidence to be brought to the table, rather than just quoting scripture (which does NOTHING besides make the person who is quoting that scripture feel good about theirself, no it doesnt teach much other than people are willing to memorize and rehearse things just for their own entertainment)

That is an extremely closed-minded assumption, and could only serve to make the bible seem to be no more than a fable. Is that really what you want to portray as a Christian? Comments like these make me think people change their faith icons only to get into Christians Only discussions. Is it unreasonable to pursue the truth? Of course not, but that's what most people are really doing, whether they ascribe to evolution, creationism, or ID.

And open mind? What do you mean? Open to fantasy? Open to insanity? Open to things that aren't real? Open to the fact that I should stand by and let others spread false ideas and myths? No. I will not be open to the fact that fantasy is another word for realiy.

Without an open mind, new ideas, new information, new truths cannot enter. A closed mind is stagnant. Having an open mind doesn't mean accepting anything as truth, it means considering all the options equally, without undue bias. If something previously unaccepted becomes tied in with new information, it is reconsidered. The US judicial system is a good illustration. Innocent until proven guilty is open minded - no bias, only reasonably drawn conclusions from evidence. Guilty until proven innocent is closed minded - which is the attitude by which creationism is automatically wrong and fantasy, no matter how we may rectify your objections on the subject. The US criminal justice system started out open-minded, but more laws and fewer rights are gradually closing it.

 

[JediMobius]

This is correct, we do not have the technology yet to make any direct measurements yet. We may, however, have already made them.

God existed before this universe did, since He created it. Therefor, God is not contained within this universe, nor part of it (intrinsically). God exists outside of the universe, so the best science could ever do is observe the effects of God, perhaps the manifestation of Christ within believers ('God spot' of the brain) but God himself is infinite and cannot be measured.

TRUE, it is dichotomous, GOD is all things. I do not know of anything that does not have an opposite. I also think that without this “opposite” neither exist.

What do you mean God is all things? And about opposites: if black is the opposite of white, what is the opposite of gray? What is the opposite of neutral?

I am too pragmatic for that stance about existence, But I understand. We need to be careful because it is us that determine what existence is. Look at Genz, he has exist defined nicely, but is it really there?

We determine what existence is. . . I would love to see you elaborate on that, perhaps in a different thread so as not to hijack this one. (If you can elaborate, and feel like starting a thread, just send me the link.)

If you define a thing as everything, it is nothing

I am the alpha and the omega.
Dichotomy.

Huh. Dichotomy? or paradox? - that which at first seems contradictory, but reveals a hidden truth.

 

[JediMobius]

Golden rule? I would have to treat the person how I would want to be treated for propagating and promoting a lie. You love the one accepting the lie by patiently presenting truth. If they not only continue to refuse? And, tell you that you have the lie? That's what Pharaoh did. That's what the Pharisees did. That is what the Judaizers did with Paul. None of these folks received the kind of love you speak of. And, I will spare you of what one passage says in the Greek when Paul made comment on those legalists who were opposing the truth.

I'm confused, didn't you just elucidate on how exactly to apply the golden rule to the situation? I'm sure many people on this site who propagate and promote lies have no idea that's what they're doing. When most of us think something is true, we'll be pretty stubborn to let go of it, and firm to defend it. Pharaoh was given more golden rule love than the pharisees were, God was much more patient with Pharaoh than necessary.

What if it benefits certain believers to believe in theistic evolution for the sake of the gospel? The depths of God's creation is the solid meat kind of wisdom and not the spiritual milk a lot of people need first, after all. I don't think "propagate and promote lies" is accurate of their intentions. I may look at the same evidence and see flaws in evolution where others see support, but that's the weakness of human logic, not a desire to dismantle the truth, except in the case of Richard Dawkins, then it's both.

hahaha, now your saying that that he doesn't understand this one point of doctrine so much that he has to read the entire Bible again. Maybe then Genez, would you be able to admit that he may know that point of doctrine as well as you? I think not.

Oh no! Not the whole bible again! Seriously though, that should be the diagnosis for each of us ever: suffering from a lack of scripture. Treatment: more scripture. In order to understand the depths of the wisdom contained in even one particular verse, it takes reading the entire chapter, the entire book, the entire testament, and eventually the entire bible, to really put that one verse in context and perspective. Of all the passages in the bible, the golden rule is at the top of the list of those particular passages that require massive exegesis for more than a surface understanding.




You two seriously need a mediator. More than just the disagreement, there seems to be discord in the way each of you communicates and understands the other.

 

[An Arch Angel]

God existed before this universe did, since He created it. Therefor, God is not contained within this universe, nor part of it (intrinsically). God exists outside of the universe, so the best science could ever do is observe the effects of God, perhaps the manifestation of Christ within believers ('God spot' of the brain) but God himself is infinite and cannot be measured.

God is in the universe, is the universe, and is out side of the universe. Without going to far, a universe of multi universes is still one universe. That is to say, a room full of boxes is still one room.

There is a problem with is argument until you except the possible of a beginning. When humans speak of ‘forever, most do not understand what they are saying. Is forever 10^10 years? 10^100 years? 10^10^10 years? You are forever in your life, you are infinity to a worker bee’s life (they live a summer in my area).

“I am”. No more, no less … than that of “I Am”

What do you mean God is all things? And about opposites: if black is the opposite of white, what is the opposite of gray? What is the opposite of neutral?

The colors black and white do not exist. They are of human construct, your brain made them up.

White is made up of the “visible” portion of the EMR spectrum. Red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, violet. There is no white, your brain calls a bunch of EMR “hits” on your retina “white”. Black is just the absence of these “hits”. If there is not enough energy to trigger the retina your brain decides that it is ‘black”.

I simplified it here ... ok.

We determine what existence is. . . I would love to see you elaborate on that, perhaps in a different thread so as not to hijack this one. (If you can elaborate, and feel like starting a thread, just send me the link.)

I would like that.

Huh. Dichotomy? or paradox? - that which at first seems contradictory, but reveals a hidden truth.

LMAO, Yes I mean Paradox, Thank You.
I meant to show that things exist on a continuum. If we line people up from “Short” to “tall”. If you can imagine drawling a line at the top of their heads you would see a sloped line. What we do as humans is “look” at the short side, we then “Look” at the tall side. The dichotomy exists because we do not ‘see” (or understand) the middle.


The short and the tall exist as a dichotomous illusion. Illusion meaning here it is looks like it is there. This is different than delusion in that you see the short and tall but they aren’t even there. Thats why there is no "God Delusion".



Did you see my post where I answered you before Lowly? post # 265.


Lowly, this is not for you:
Please, if you’re reading this and you call it science and there fore it shouldn’t be here, I know. I am explaining it to her. Also, my theology is supported with evidence, so when ever I am asked about theology I use science. When ever I am asked a science question like …‘Why do you think “it” does this/that” I used my theology.

 

[mpok1519]

just becuse someone doesnt believe in elves unicorns and dryads doesn't mean they're mind is closed.

 

[GenemZ]

just becuse someone doesnt believe in elves unicorns and dryads doesn't mean they're mind is closed.

Then what would you call it when someone insists that another believes in elves, unicorns and dryads, when they do not?


You remind me of this..

I don't care what you think! This is what I say you think!



You require creating straw men to attack to be at peace with your own beliefs.


Ironically.. You are being very closed minded to the idea that you might be closed minded.


life goes on.

 

[mpok1519]

and being closed minded to being closed minded is a bad thing?

sure, creationism, by biblical standards doesnt exist.

but creaitonism, by scientific standard, can exist, if that said creaitonism follows the laws of the universe.

 

[fwwid]

[/SIZE][/FONT]I'm confused, didn't you just elucidate on how exactly to apply the golden rule to the situation? I'm sure many people on this site who propagate and promote lies have no idea that's what they're doing. When most of us think something is true, we'll be pretty stubborn to let go of it, and firm to defend it. Pharaoh was given more golden rule love than the pharisees were, God was much more patient with Pharaoh than necessary.

What if it benefits certain believers to believe in theistic evolution for the sake of the gospel? The depths of God's creation is the solid meat kind of wisdom and not the spiritual milk a lot of people need first, after all. I don't think "propagate and promote lies" is accurate of their intentions. I may look at the same evidence and see flaws in evolution where others see support, but that's the weakness of human logic, not a desire to dismantle the truth, except in the case of Richard Dawkins, then it's both.



Oh no! Not the whole bible again! Seriously though, that should be the diagnosis for each of us ever: suffering from a lack of scripture. Treatment: more scripture. In order to understand the depths of the wisdom contained in even one particular verse, it takes reading the entire chapter, the entire book, the entire testament, and eventually the entire bible, to really put that one verse in context and perspective. Of all the passages in the bible, the golden rule is at the top of the list of those particular passages that require massive exegesis for more than a surface understanding.




You two seriously need a mediator. More than just the disagreement, there seems to be discord in the way each of you communicates and understands the other.

Haha, be careful in your choice of words in the midst of your currect contradiction to Genez' belief regarding the Golden Rule. He'll effectively treat you the way he apparently wants to be treated - and that ain't sayn' much; I'll be giving you the same advice before long I'm sure. It's hard to create peace when others seek contention and argue for the sake of arguing rather then trying to reconcile each others differences. Nevertheless, peace will always prevail and love will continue to tarry. "By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another".

I wish the both of you the best of luck in your pursuit for true discipleship in Jesus Christ.

-fwwid

 

[JediMobius]

God is in the universe, is the universe, and is out side of the universe. Without going to far, a universe of multi universes is still one universe. That is to say, a room full of boxes is still one room.

There is a problem with is argument until you except the possible of a beginning. When humans speak of ‘forever, most do not understand what they are saying. Is forever 10^10 years? 10^100 years? 10^10^10 years? You are forever in your life, you are infinity to a worker bee’s life (they live a summer in my area).

“I am”. No more, no less … than that of “I Am”

Well, I don't believe multiple physical universes exist, but if they did, I would accept your illustration of them. However, I disagree that God is the universe. I could accept that God is within the fabric of the universe, the laws and energies that hold it together, but I don't think God is the universe in the sense that we are all part of God right now, as are every rock, tree, planet, and star.

The colors black and white do not exist. They are of human construct, your brain made them up.

Fair enough, but what about neutral? In Revelation chapter 3 God calls the church in Laodicea lukewarm, neither hot nor cold. There is no opposite to neutral, they are between two extremes. Certainly, God wants them to go one way or the other, but the mirror (for example) does not reflect itself, only what is apart from the mirror has its opposite through the glass.

LMAO, Yes I mean Paradox, Thank You.
I meant to show that things exist on a continuum. If we line people up from “Short” to “tall”. If you can imagine drawling a line at the top of their heads you would see a sloped line. What we do as humans is “look” at the short side, we then “Look” at the tall side. The dichotomy exists because we do not ‘see” (or understand) the middle.

The short and the tall exist as a dichotomous illusion. Illusion meaning here it is looks like it is there. This is different than delusion in that you see the short and tall but they aren’t even there. Thats why there is no "God Delusion".

ROFL, richard dawkins cracks me up. Are you saying there is the illusion of dichotomy where no dichotomy truly exists? That would make sense to me.

Did you see my post where I answered you before Lowly? post # 265.

Yes. I didn't reply because I had nothing to add or take away (criticize) from what was said. That post didn't cover every question or objection I had prior, but I did understand what you were saying much more clearly.

Lowly, this is not for you:

Please, if you’re reading this and you call it science and there fore it shouldn’t be here, I know. I am explaining it to her. Also, my theology is supported with evidence, so when ever I am asked about theology I use science. When ever I am asked a science question like …‘Why do you think “it” does this/that” I used my theology.

Well, since I've been one to criticize the use of science in a theological thread, I'll reply anyway. If science aids in understanding of God and of spiritual matters, then it is definitely theological, and relevant to this thread.

 

[JediMobius]

just becuse someone doesnt believe in elves unicorns and dryads doesn't mean they're mind is closed.

It's easy to use an example of things that are obvious fantasy, but that doesn't mean everything anyone ever said was a myth is in actuality a myth. Do you think demons are a myth? Is Satan real?

Then what would you call it when someone insists that another believes in elves, unicorns and dryads, when they do not?

I, for one, would like to see an answer to genez's question.

and being closed minded to being closed minded is a bad thing?

That's not what was said. "You are being very closed minded to the idea that you might be closed minded." That's what was said. Being closed-minded to being closed-minded is a paradox, because in doing so one would still be closed-minded. Not being open to any and all possibilities is being closed-minded. The disadvantage is that new truths cannot enter unless they appear like the old truths which are accepted. It's easier to close the door and only deal with what is already know, but the bigger picture is completely lost. Being open to every possibility is much more work to separate fact from fiction, but it allows for all the evidence and all the interpretations of the evidence so that the truth can speak for itself.

sure, creationism, by biblical standards doesnt exist.

but creaitonism, by scientific standard, can exist, if that said creaitonism follows the laws of the universe.

How can creationism be said to follow the laws of the universe when it is the theological history of how God established the laws of the universe? Science is held by the limits of the universe, creationism looks outside of those limits, and beyond them.