Believing in creationism is a sin

[Esquilax]

Saying that it is wrong to teach creationism presupposes that the correspondent theory of truth is the sole means of determining whether something is true or not (or something similar to that). I am not a creationist, but I don't think that it is a sin to understand the world in terms of abstractions and simpler concepts.

In fact, when you study science, you find that many things in science do not actually exist as objects, they are just abstractions of things that exist. Such it is also with language and metaphysics. What really exists is very difficult to day. I think traditional Bible believers are entitled to their abstractions just as science is.

That said, I do not believe the earth is 6000-10000 years old. But I do not see any reason to understand the concept of truth as specially aimed at appreciating certain types of abstractions as being fallacious while other abstracts as being legitimate.

The reality is that people know very little about the world.

And what of the things we do know? What of the things that aren't abstractions? Things like evolution, that does have real evidence behind it. Science concerns itself with facts, and the facts are true regardless of belief. The theory of evolution reflects the facts that we can see.

You talk about these things as though they're on an even playing field but they really aren't; the fossil record, genetic data, and laboratory testing all confirm evolution. There's no abstraction there; it's all concrete and physical, and that's something that creationism doesn't have going for it. One is confirmed, and the other is an abstraction.

Now: which one of those should be taught in science class? The factual one, or the abstraction that holds no evidentiary value?