How do you science guys deal with this?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jesusmademe
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jesusmademe

Guest
This is for you science guys out there.
The Bible teaches a 7 day creation or rather a 6 day creation with a resting day. I see this as a story and not literal days.
We have a God who created and rested on the 7th day. Had he stopped creating on the 7th day we would have perished. So the 7th day is God saying “I have now created humans and will now rest or just uphold the universe”? The 7th day rest is there because He had already created humans and nothing more needed to be created (except for new human persons and so on). Then there is the 8th day, the Lord’s day, which is the begining of the new creation.
How do you science guys deal with this?
 
jesusmademe said:
How do you science guys deal with this?
Click to expand...
What about this is there to deal with? A non-literal interpretation of Genesis? The fact that humans were created last? Is that to imply that there will be no further evolution beyond humanity? I find that particular line of thought more interesting/humorous of logic since it would seem to imply that women are thus superior to men since they were created after men. 😉
 
Last edited:
The Catholic Church does not require Catholics to interpret Genesis literally. Neither do mainstream Protestant Churches.

This literal interpretation is limited to so called Fundamentalists and is a uniquely American phenomenon as one poster already said.
 
I am a ‘science guy’. I find no problems with this. As far as I am aware the Church does not teach, nor require us to believe, a literal translation of Genesis, i.e. that God created the entire universe in six consecutive 24-hour periods.

Again, unless I am in grave error, as I understand it the Church accepts the so-called ‘Big Bang’ and I believe both the Venerable Pius XII and St John Paul II accepted biological evolution.
 
This has been brought up many times. The evidence shows that this is being done to distort what the Church teaches.

"The Time Question

“Much less has been defined as to when the universe, life, and man appeared. The Church has infallibly determined that the universe is of finite age—that it has not existed from all eternity—but it has not infallibly defined whether the world was created only a few thousand years ago or whether it was created several billion years ago.”
  • Catholic Answers
 
steph03 said:
The Catholic church is different
Click to expand...
It is now; it wasn’t always. The early Church Fathers were quite unanimous in their belief in a Young Earth.

(Not saying that I am a Young-Earther; I’m not. I’m just pointing out that the Catholic Church has changed its mind.)

D
 
God made the Sabbath for man. It formalizes a periodic day of rest for man.
 
DaveBj said:
40.png
steph03:
The Catholic church is different
Click to expand...
It is now; it wasn’t always. The early Church Fathers were quite unanimous in their belief in a Young Earth.
Click to expand...
Unanimous is quite strong, perhaps even for that. However, even so, they were not unanimous in interpreting all things scriptural or in the creation narrative as being absolutely historical-literal, even if they were young Earth (and they had little cause to think other than young earth at the time).
 
Last edited:
I would not say they were UNANIMOUS on the subject since many of them never mentionned anything on the subject. But back then science had little evidence to bring forward on the subject, so the idea of a somewhat younger earth (not 6000 like we see today) was almost universally believed. But the Church did not make it a dogma back then (and correctly so).
 
Sarcelle said:
The Catholic Church does not require Catholics to interpret Genesis literally. Neither do mainstream Protestant Churches.

This literal interpretation is limited to so called Fundamentalists and is a uniquely American phenomenon as one poster already said.
Click to expand...
I’m catholic, a science guy, certainly no fundamentalist, not from the US, and it doesn’t take much to harmonize a very literal reading of genesis with science - and I like the thought.
Genesis 2:18. The LORD God said: It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suited to him.
Click to expand...
 
If you go with the Big Bang theory, view the universe from the point of view of the monobloc, and take relativity into account, the Genesis creation story lines up fairly well with how science views things. There is a book, Creation: Genesis and Cosmology by Gerald L Schroeder that goes into this in detail.

It was a real Ah Ha moment for me when I learned this.

Patrick
AMDG
 
I am talking about the Sabbath. How you science guys think about the rest of God. When God created man and woman He rested. What exactly is a rest? I mean, creation didnt exactly stop. Creation is an ongoing process but still there was a rest on the 7th day.
What would a rest or Sabbath be? How do you science guy look at this?
 
Last edited:
I don’t know how to deal with the “7 days” tale and creationism, because of the multiple historical and scientific proofs. It’s the only thing that prevents me to believe in Christianity for now.
 
Last edited:
The best explanation of the Sabbath rest that I have heard was likened to children playing for hours without fights or disagreements. Or think about a sports game where the referee doesn’t need to blow the whistle. Spending time together and enjoying it.
 
I don’t really see Genesis as the reason why we have a Sabbath.

I observe Sunday as Sabbath because the church says we must.

I imagine (i.e. it is my opinion) that the story of Genesis incorporated a Sabbath day AFTER it had already become an established “thing” in Judaism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top