>>714658158Yeah a lot of Biblical numerology is symbolic as opposed to literal, different numbers having different meanings. This is consistent and not a cop out throughout theology, we can use basic reasoning to deduce that days as we know them did not exist before the sun despite the timeframes being called "days" in the Bible.
I think we will eventually be able to get a better answer but for our dating mechanisms are very volatile even if useful.
>>714658237It isn't being a smartass to point out the continual nature of cause and effect, I'm sure you saw this one coming based on your reply, but what cause the big bang then?
Also consider the complexity of physics, the fine tuning argument goes far beyond just Earth being in a roughly habitable zone around the sun, even the most minute changes to universal constants could have easy led to the universe not even forming based on our current understanding, the changes are equivalent to 50 hands in a row of a royal flush.
If you saw the above example in a casino do you think it would be more likely that the player just got that lucky or that there was intentional design behind the circumstance (such as colluding with the dealer or manually cheating the cards in his hand?)
Back to the causal argument, dominoes don't just begin falling on their own. Something causes that.
>>714658324It isn't pointless, it is necessary groundwork for creationism. There is no point in believing in any God if we can't agree that something caused the universe to exist.