Very early in written history, God told us pointblank it happened. He did not!
Yes, He did.
He divinely inspired a story to be written
Yes, but it wasn't fiction that He inspired. It was a record of the literal history of the universe, because aside from Adam, who was only present on the last day of the universe's (including everything within it) creation, and the angels (who were there from around day 2, but whom we do not have access to), there were no other observers to give a record of what actually happened save for God Himself.
So if God says He created in 6 days, and rested on the seventh, why do you call Him a liar, and say that He didn't create in 6 days, but rather millions of years?
that helped a simple, uneducated generation
I think you seriously underestimate how smart ancient man was.
So much so that you don't realize that, compared to current-day man, they were geniuses. They make Einstein and Newton seem like toddlers in comparison.
I recommend reading Don Landis' book, The Genius of Ancient Man
All over the world there are similar findings of ancient religions, cities and towers, world travel, advanced astronomy, and civilized government. Over the course of two years, a team of researchers from Jackson Hole Bible College has worked to bring together the different pieces of the...
Or if you're unable, consider listening to the show where Bob Enyart interviewed him:
to understand very basic concepts of cause and effect.
I'm sure they understood it just fine.
God caused and everything else is effect.
Sure, but that doesn't mean that God didn't tell Moses what actually happened.
It also offers a basic insight into punishment and reward.
Sure, but again, supra.
God does not tell us point blank,
Yes, He does. It's just that people like you don't like it, because it doesn't fit your worldview.
because all Scripture is relative truth and not absolute truth,
because there will always be more to know and learn about God.
Non-sequitur. Just because we will never full understand or comprehend God doesn't mean He doesn't tell us absolute truth in His Word.
There is not so much as a thimble full of evidence for the literal Flood of Noah,
There's an entire solar system of evidence for the very literal, global, Flood of Noah. You just refuse to acknowledge it.
or any kind of extinction event in that age.
In what age?
Bio-systems flourished, populations and civilisations expanded and lived abundantly.
Whomever is saying there was widespread flooding and extinctions in this age
Define "this age." Please.
is promoting pseudo-science, not real science.
Saying it doesn't make it so.
And rather than dismissing God's word, I am doing my best to extract it from the thousands of years of superstition and the human ego that will not allow truth to come to light.
There is none, except in your head.
There's nothing superstitious about saying that God created in 6 days and rested on the seventh, and that He later destroyed all life save one family of 8 and a boat's worth of animals, with a global flood. There's nothing superstitious about saying that Christ came to die for all men, and on the third day rose again, and is now in heaven waiting to return. There is nothing at all superstitious about saying that upon His return, He will reign for a thousand years on earth, and then those of us who have a relationship with Him shall live with Him for the rest of eternity.
All of those things are facts, not superstition. They did, or will, in the case of the latter, in fact happen.
That truth must include science because there is only one truth and science is from God so that we might better understand the staggering complexity of His wondrous Creation.
Science (real science) affirms a literal interpretation of scripture.
This rock would have a very specific signature if sedimentary rock has really been formed in such a short period. I'm still researching this and am yet to be convinced that this is rock as opposed to densely packed detritus from the eruption.
The 1980 Mt St Helens Flow was dated millions of years old, using radiometric dating.
Also, see this video:
I just don't understand why science has you so rattled.
Science doesn't have ANY of us rattled. We LOVE science. What we don't like is when people claim science as their proof of a worldview that doesn't match reality.
Sure there are countless bigoted, know-alls running science and in many ways they don't even realise that what they are doing is more a religious undertaking than information gathering.
No one here was attacking their character.
Science is from God and all science can do is reveal the attributes of Creation in all their glory. Religion then reveals the purpose and the essence of Creation, so if science tells us something, you and I know we are learning one more little secret about Creation, whereas the scientists think they are removing God and Creation. The end result of all scientific research will end up at God. So don't worry about this war with science, you and I know better, so let's just use their work to better inform ourselves.
You seem to think that we think that science and Christianity (I'm going to avoid using "religion" here simply because religion could mean anything that has its foundation in superstition, and also because this is a Christian board) are at odds with each other. You are mistaken.
Not sure why suggesting, science, not evolution, has me unaware of myself? Sure evolution is one of the schools of though within the pantheon of science, but science is not really a challenge to scripture, only certain scriptural beliefs which contradict science.
The Flood does not contradict science, as there was nothing miraculous about it, save for the creation of the chambers where the water was stored prior to the flood.
A six-day creation story does not contradict science because supernatural actions fall outside the bounds of what science can explain, therefore they neither contradict nor can be affirmed by science.
So please, give us two examples that do not fall within those two topics, that you think contradict science.
Creationists are somewhat rattled by science.
Maybe, highly reactive, is a better term.
Only to that which contradicts reality.
They do feel as though they are in conflict with science,
No, we don't.
just look at they way they use derogatory terms regarding science,
Who is "they"? Quit making blanket statements that can't be supported nor verified.
which is the backbone of all our lives.
We live by faith.
Faith is evidence.
The evidence supports the existence of God.
The evidence supports that Christ rose from the dead, which means all other religions are false.
They imagine science to be the antipathies of scripture
No, we don't. You sure do make a lot of straw man arguments.
but they are really polar ends for the same human search for truth. Remove either one and you end up with superstition or materialism.
True. So stop accusing us of doing so, please.