How well do non-Biblical creation stories correspond to modern science?

  • Thread starter Thread starter tmellin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

tmellin

Guest
Dear Colleagues,

Let’s understand at the outset that I am NOT looking for a discussion in which holy book LITERALISM is shown to be in conflict with science. (We faithful know that God has often spoken in parables to his children, since the full Truth of his Creation is forever beyond our capacity for comprehension.) Please click here for a Catholic perspective on biblical literalism.

Here is the direction I’d like this thread to have:

Since its publication in 1927, the Big Bang Theory (which few know was originated by Catholic priest and scientist Georges Lemaitre) has been the best scientific explanation for the origin of the universe. The Theory of Evolution is regarded by scientists as the best explanation for the origin of the human body.

Though elements of the creation story in the Bible (e.g. “7 days” and “Adam’s rib” references in the book of Genesis) are not in accord with scientific definitions or understandings, Genesis does match the Big Bang Theory and the Theory of Evolution in several regards:

  1. *]The universe begins in the form of light (astrophysicists today might say “photons”: energy moving at the speed of light)
    *]Life originates in the Earth’s oceans and later becomes present on land and in the air
    *]Humans appear after the other animals

    (Thank you, Charlemagne II, for mentioning these in a recent post of yours)

    Good and evil are typically present in every religion (e.g. Taoism’s yin and yang), and many religions recognize one God (e.g. Catholicism’s Nicene Creed: “We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth…”). In this thread, I’d like to learn about how the creation stories of non-Judeo-Christian religions (or spriritual traditions) correspond to or do not correspond to the Big Bang Theory and the Theory of Evolution.

    Thank you,

    Tom
 
tmellin said:
Good and evil are typically present in every religion (e.g. Taoism’s yin and yang)
Click to expand...
Just to get you off on the right foot, the philosophy of Taoism (Tao Jia) doesn’t address concepts of “good” and “evil”. “Yin” refers to dark, heavy cool, moist, feminine aspects of things. And “yang” refers to the light, airy, warm, dry, masculine aspects of things. Everything has some aspects of both yin and yang. They have nothing to do with good and evil.

Many westerners try to put eastern concepts into western pigeonholes, but very often they just don’t fit.

Anyway, I’m curious to see how the thread goes.
 
Thank you for starting this thread. It has interesting possibilities. While I have not the time to explore all the different creation stories, I found that the best way to find them was to attach the name of the culture before the phrase “creation story,” which brought me immediately to websites that succinctly described the essential story. For example, I started with “greek creation story” and read briefly what I needed to know, which is that the Greek myth is far less conformable to the Big Bang and Evolution than you point out ought to be found (or at least implied) in a true account of creation.

'The conclusion you are working toward should prove to be a very interesting one; namely, that in Genesis alone will we find that the correspondence is about as close as any religion can get with discoveries of modern science … even though many of the details will strike some of us as decidedly at variance with what is likely the* whole* truth about creation (such as the creation of Eve from a rib of Adam).

I plan to follow this thread with great interest. I’m sure there must be some websites that compact all the creation stories into brief accounts. If anyone finds such a site, please let the rest of us know.
 
Xuan said:
Just to get you off on the right foot, the philosophy of Taoism (Tao Jia) doesn’t address concepts of “good” and “evil”. “Yin” refers to dark, heavy cool, moist, feminine aspects of things. And “yang” refers to the light, airy, warm, dry, masculine aspects of things. Everything has some aspects of both yin and yang. They have nothing to do with good and evil.
Click to expand...
Xuan,

Thank you for this major correction (embarrassing). Do you happen to know what Taoism has to say about the origin of the universe or the origin of life on Earth?

Appreciatively,

Tom
 
My thoughts are there is this mountain, and all the scientists need to get to the top and back down again in order to prove their rationale of existence. Only to find the Theologians have been camping out there for years.
 
tmellin said:
Dear Colleagues,

Let’s understand at the outset that I am NOT looking for a discussion in which holy book LITERALISM is shown to be in conflict with science. (We faithful know that God has often spoken in parables to his children, since the full Truth of his Creation is forever beyond our capacity for comprehension.) Please click here for a Catholic perspective on biblical literalism.

Here is the direction I’d like this thread to have:

Since its publication in 1927, the Big Bang Theory (which few know was originated by Catholic priest and scientist Georges Lemaitre) has been the best scientific explanation for the origin of the universe. The Theory of Evolution is regarded by scientists as the best explanation for the origin of the human body.

Though elements of the creation story in the Bible (e.g. “7 days” and “Adam’s rib” references in the book of Genesis) are not in accord with scientific definitions or understandings, Genesis does match the Big Bang Theory and the Theory of Evolution in several regards:

  1. *]The universe begins in the form of light (astrophysicists today might say “photons”: energy moving at the speed of light)
    *]Life originates in the Earth’s oceans and later becomes present on land and in the air
    *]Humans appear after the other animals

    (Thank you, Charlemagne II, for mentioning these in a recent post of yours)

    Good and evil are typically present in every religion (e.g. Taoism’s yin and yang), and many religions recognize one God (e.g. Catholicism’s Nicene Creed: “We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth…”). In this thread, I’d like to learn about how the creation stories of non-Judeo-Christian religions (or spriritual traditions) correspond to or do not correspond to the Big Bang Theory and the Theory of Evolution.

    Thank you,

    Tom
Click to expand...

  1. The question is inappropriate - because the creation narratives are not performing the same function as modern science. It’s a bit like trying to use TLOTR or other Tolkien texts as a source for geology or palaentology - that would be equally inappropriate as a method of acquiring knowledge 🙂 Yet that is equally what happens when Job is quoted to prove that the Bible teaches modern cosmology 🙂​

    Because the method is wrong, the seeming similarity as to results is irrelevant. So Genesis does not match “Big Bang Theory and the Theory of Evolution” in any significant way. So it can’t be quoted for or against either of them; nor do they support or go against it.
 
tmellin said:
Xuan,

Thank you for this major correction (embarrassing). Do you happen to know what Taoism has to say about the origin of the universe or the origin of life on Earth?

Appreciatively,

Tom
Click to expand...
I’m certainly no expert on this, but I’ll give it a try. Daoism (Taoism) doesn’t really have a creation story as such, although aspects of Daoism, as well as Confusionism and Buddhism, are found in various Chinese folk tales about a creation. Perhaps the best known of these is the story of Pangu (Pan ku), who hatched out of a giant egg. But this is a folk tale, like the stories of Paul Bunyan. It’s not really believed.

Daoism developed through shamanism, which had been developing since the Ice Age. The earliest known Daoist figure was Fu Hsi, who lived about 2800 BCE. The first to put Daoist thoughts into writing, though, was Lao-Tzu (Laozi), who wrote the Dao De Jing (Tao Te Ching), literally “The Canon of the Way and Virtue (Power). While Dao Jiao (religious Daoism) has many stories about gods and other beings, Daoists will generally readily admit that the gods are human constructs. But Dao Jia (philosophical Daoism) spells out more clearly how things are and how they got to be this way.

In the beginning was the Dao, the Way. We simply call it that for lack of a better word. “The name that can be named is not the eternal way.” Nor can it be described. Some have called it Non-Being. This might be in reference to potential, but not in the western philosophical sense.

The Dao gave birth to duality. This refers to yin and yang qualities. Yin relates to the earth (passive, feminine, etc.) and yang relates to the heavens (active, masculine, etc.) Yin also relates to physicality, whereas yang relates to spirituality.

From duality springs trinity. This involves the union of yin (physicality) with yang (spirituality) through qi (chi). There’s no english equivalent to the word “qi”. I’ve heard it described as “life energy” or “life force”, but they don’t have the same meaning. The trinity is depicted by the taijitu symbol (commonly known as the yin yang symbol), where the black represents yin and the white represents yang. Each contains a little of the other, the dot, and qi binds them together to make the whole symbol.

From trinity springs ten thousand things (everything).

The Dao is the source of everything. It gives all, and asks nothing in return. Qi binds yin and yang together to form everything that is. The Dao is all-encompassing; it’s everywhere. It determines the way things are.

It follows from the philosophy that living in accordance with the Way is good and will benefit the person. The three most important virtues in Daoism are compassion, moderation, and humility, humility both toward other people, and towards the Way itself. Daoism doesn’t really address an afterlife clearly, except the implication of being able to become one with the Dao if one lives in accordance with the Dao.

This is really a quick description, but maybe it will give a little glimpse into what Daoism is all about. It doesn’t contain the blunt threats of Christianity: “If you don’t do this, God will do that.” It’s much more subtle.
 
Gottle_of_Geer said:
Because the method is wrong, the seeming similarity as to results is irrelevant. So Genesis does not match “Big Bang Theory and the Theory of Evolution” in any significant way. So it can’t be quoted for or against either of them; nor do they support or go against it.
Click to expand...
Gottle of Geer,

You have incorrectly guessed my motives and criticized a “method” I am not using or supporting. Perhaps I can clarify the comparative intent of this thread thusly:

Classification step 1:
Creation stories in holy books or spritual traditions that
A) Represent the universe as having had a beginning OR
B) Represent the universe as having “always existed” OR
C) Other

Bible = A, Quran = ?, Native American tradition = ?, Taoism = ?, Hinduism = ?

Classification step 2:
A) Life began in Earth’s oceans
B) Life began on land
C) etc.

Bible = A… etc.

Step 3:
A) Human life appeared in the world after animal and plant life appeared
B) All life appeared together
C) Human life came first, followed by animal and plant life

Bible = A… etc.

This is the data gathering stage for those who are interested.

Thanks,

Tom
 
Tom

That was an excellent clarification of your initial question. If you are charting this in print somewhere, I’d really like to see how the ABC device works across many religions. Is Genesis the only one that comes near modern scientific accounts of creation, or are there some that come as close? I seriously doubt there are any that come closer … none that I can think of anyway.
 
I’d substitute the following question for Classification Step 2
  1. Light flooded the universe before the stars were made. (Yes, according to the Big Bang – Genesis: “Let there be light.”)
  2. Light was a much later thing created when the Sun was made.
  3. Light is not mentioned as a significant creation.
 
How in the world did this thread get stopped!?:eek: I would give my left (un-evolved) arm to read it or to get it going again!!!:crying:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top