Can science prove the world is over 4 billion yrs. old?

[vz71]

I gave multiple reasons already, and I am not the only one. Please address the issue.

I have.
Your only reason was disapproval of the source.
But you have not given an alternative nor specified why the source is incorrect.

 

[vz71]

I’m talking about scientific discoveries that some posters insist go against Catholic teaching, such as polygenism etc.

The jurisdiction of the church is upon faith and morals.
Those that would encounter the problem you specified earlier are simply running into a symptom of a much deeper problem…that of placing the church where it does not belong.

Faith and morals should guide us in our scientific discovery, not dictate it.

 

[inocente]

Well it’s worked on me. I can’t even remember the question. I am elbow-gnawingly frustrated and I’m not even an active participant at the moment. Makes a discussion with buffalo seem like the height of genteel and erudite debate.

For heaven’s sake: Farsight says the article on language by the two creationists is invalid even though he hasn’t produced a single refutation of any argument in it, but dismisses it entirely on the identity of the authors. Buffalo says the references in the article are from learned specialists in lingiuistics and they are his sources, or at least he listed them with that implication, even though he hasn’t read any of them and they don’t support the idea that the diversity of language arose at a single Babel-like event anyway. vz seems to be arguing for the sake of it. What a shambles.

Oh. And there was me thinking it might make for an interesting linguistics paper – “Implications on the limits of communication in online debates when three guys speak without listening over an extended period”.

 

[buffalo]

So, say it changes it’s position on something it once required Catholics to believe…then what?

Then a very good explanation is needed. Why we got it wrong, why the Holy Spirit failed to preserve the truth. Then Catholicism is built on a foundation of sand.

There has never been a dogmatic reversal. It is like a bush, our understanding grows fuller but not reversed.

This is really important - one either believes Catholicism possesses and preserves the truth or she doesn’t.

 

[Farsight001]

I have.
Your only reason was disapproval of the source.
But you have not given an alternative nor specified why the source is incorrect.

If you think that was my only reason, then please go back and read my posts again. That was in no way my only reason. Please address the issue.

 

[vz71]

If you think that was my only reason, then please go back and read my posts again. That was in no way my only reason. Please address the issue.

Please specify the post to re-read.
I have over 7 pages of posts to go through…it is likely you have a better idea where it is then I.

 

[samiam1611]

If I had a million wishes, one of them would be to be able to go back in time and talk to some neanderthals or other homo species. I wonder what it was like when neanderthals and humans interacted. If they could talk to each other or had to use mostly hand gestures and grunts.
I would come back and clear up all the mystery for you guys

 

[HOLY_POOH_FAN]

Seems a lot of carbon prints are wasted on here arguing over irerlevancies. The esential infallible teaching of the Bible has to do with the meaning of Creation, the Human made in God’s image, the Flood and Tower of Babel. Those stories were borrrowed from the B
abylonian - pre- Abraham and used as teaching devices in the Genesis version of the same. There was no division of languages re Babel, there was a huge ziggurat, ruins still there attempting to reach upward in Ur of the Chaldees by the Persian Gulf. That effort to reach the gods was used to correct those who were prideful, divisive in their false beliefs. It cannot be used as a proof or reference for any study of language today, and certainy not languages which developed outside the then known world.
SAME for the Creation of the human and the Flood. Pre-exisiitng stories were used to highlight the creation of humans in God’s image and His mercy at saving humans from sin and tragedy.Nothinjg whatsoever about incest by his eight family members. SALVATION HISTORY is God’s field- Science is left to us as intelligent humans who as we are wont mix up the two and cause unnecessary tension . A scientist who says there is no God is out of his field and a believer who tries to use the Bible for science is also.

 

[razredge]

Then a very good explanation is needed. Why we got it wrong, why the Holy Spirit failed to preserve the truth. Then Catholicism is built on a foundation of sand.

There has never been a dogmatic reversal. It is like a bush, our understanding grows fuller but not reversed.

This is really important - one either believes Catholicism possesses and preserves the truth or she doesn’t.

This kind of thinking assumes that for the CC to be infallible it has to possess the absolute truth at any point of time, it can just as easily be held that the Church ascertains the truth over time as it grows in understanding due to the involvement of the Spirit but can be wrong at certain points in history

 

[razredge]

SALVATION HISTORY is God’s field- Science is left to us as intelligent humans who as we are wont mix up the two and cause unnecessary tension . A scientist who says there is no God is out of his field and a believer who tries to use the Bible for science is also.

Yes, exactly, well said.

 

[Lui]

Seems a lot of carbon prints are wasted on here arguing over irerlevancies. The esential infallible teaching of the Bible has to do with the meaning of Creation, the Human made in God’s image, the Flood and Tower of Babel. Those stories were borrrowed from the B
abylonian - pre- Abraham and used as teaching devices in the Genesis version of the same. There was no division of languages re Babel, there was a huge ziggurat, ruins still there attempting to reach upward in Ur of the Chaldees by the Persian Gulf. That effort to reach the gods was used to correct those who were prideful, divisive in their false beliefs. It cannot be used as a proof or reference for any study of language today, and certainy not languages which developed outside the then known world.
SAME for the Creation of the human and the Flood. Pre-exisiitng stories were used to highlight the creation of humans in God’s image and His mercy at saving humans from sin and tragedy.Nothinjg whatsoever about incest by his eight family members. SALVATION HISTORY is God’s field- Science is left to us as intelligent humans who as we are wont mix up the two and cause unnecessary tension . A scientist who says there is no God is out of his field and a believer who tries to use the Bible for science is also.