I really despise magical thinking. I'm all into MYSTICAL thinking, but not magical. What is the difference?
I have no idea how the marshmallow was created. Not one idea. So when we, as humans, come to something where we don't know how it was created, what do we do? we make up a story about it! Just like the creation story in Genesis or the creation myths in every culture on this planet. We are a story-telling species that are unique to this planet and perhaps the universe as no other animal tells stories.
So I looked it up on Wiki how Marshmallows are created, and now I know that this story is not the literal truth. I have the facts... so what does this mean for those who have to have a literal bible?
In short, their wrong... As James McGrath put it in this post
In short, they deny that the Bible is what it is. To claim that the Bible is simple when it is complex, to claim that it is clear when it is not, to claim that it is uniform when it is diverse, to claim that it is monolithic when it is pluriform, to claim that it is flawless when it is characterized throughout by the limitations and failings of its human authors - what could possibly be more unbiblical than this?
Now if i persist in my claims that the Unidactyl ACTUALLY created marshmallows despite all the evidence to the contary, this is magical thinking. If i instead say, this is NOT the literal, factual truth, but an excellent symbol that still holds truth to how marshmallows are created (which is still a stretch), then that is mystical thinking. Now comes the most important question, and one i ask as often as possible, does this make any sense?