It can be considered metaphorically and still make sense.
Then what was the ransom [Mark 10:45] that Jesus came to clear? If man didn't initially owe anything, there's no point to any atonements, including all the animal sacrifices in the OT and Jesus.
But where would those original ideas come from? Some crazy guy running around telling everyone to change their religions because he says so? Take Christianity's birth: how would people be swayed from their religions so easily when the other religions are indoctrinated
HahiHa, Kasic's first link cites other things, such as the big bang, his second used other Evolutionary dates as references, and his third is a little hard to follow without several college degrees, so I can't give my opinion.
All I saw in those links was physics, nothing evolutionary. We're talking about the universe after all, not life. Big bang should be expected to be linked with the age of the universe (d'uh). And if something is too hard, search for summaries. You don't need to understand the details; I don't either.
I'm not trying to belittle your efforts, I just don't understand on what basis you discard all this without any further thought. Shouldn't you at least consider it (sounds familiar)?
Uh, the Earth is appr 5-7000 years old. There is not pre-aging.
Tell me, what is your stance towards the science of chemistry, especially radioactivity?
but if you read further there is a giant flood... wipes out everything. That could explain what you're talking about.
There is no evidence for a unique global flood anywhere in the rock report. There is extensive evidence in the geological sections and fossil reports for a number of mass extinctions plus several other fluctuations. If the Flood was true, we would see this in the fossil record as one single big layer containing modern (including humans) as well as extinct animals (including dinosaurs) mummies and skeletons all together. However this is not the case.
More generally, I want to know why you don't consider all the evidence given by research (apart from the obvious, contradicting your book and all that). Just remember that science doesn't carry any intrinsic morality, nor is it the goal to disprove religions. Even if you're a theist, you should realize that the people back then didn't have the knowledge and know-how we have today, and simply couldn't know all this.
