F
findingmyself08
Guest
Ditto. But I noticed our posts were ignored.
- Status
P
prodigalson2011
Guest
I never tire of recommending this man’s work. I think this should be required reading for all people of a Judeo-Christian bent:
The Age of the Universe - by Dr. Gerald Schroeder.
Dr. Schroeder is a physicist and former MIT professor/alumni who also happens to be a Torah scholar. His insights are invaluable, thought provoking and reveal layers of Scripture beyond the grasp of the average reader (i.e. you and me.) The consistency of modern science with ancient understandings of Scripture are uncanny and, if you ask me, beyond the threshold of possible coincidence.
The Age of the Universe - by Dr. Gerald Schroeder.
Dr. Schroeder is a physicist and former MIT professor/alumni who also happens to be a Torah scholar. His insights are invaluable, thought provoking and reveal layers of Scripture beyond the grasp of the average reader (i.e. you and me.) The consistency of modern science with ancient understandings of Scripture are uncanny and, if you ask me, beyond the threshold of possible coincidence.
B
bsroufek
Guest
Now, if the Six Days of Creation is an allegory, what about the ages of Adam and hisDitto. But I noticed our posts were ignored.
decendents until Joseph son of Israel? Were they allegorical as well?
I
Ion
Guest
Why do you give up so easy? Do not give up! Maybe you are going to change your opinion…
B
bsroufek
Guest
*The Catechism explains that “Scripture presents the work of the Creator symbolically as a succession of six days of divine ‘work,’ concluded by the ‘rest’ of the seventh day” (CCC 337), but “nothing exists that does not owe its existence to God the Creator. The world began when God’s word drew it out of nothingness; all existent beings, all of nature, and all human history is rooted in this primordial event, the very genesis by which the world was constituted and time begun” (CCC 338). *
Even though it is “symbolic and allegorical”, I also cite the following:
*The Catechism states, “The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents” (CCC 390).
*
So, since Adam and Eve are real, however you think the Earth and the Heavens were created, Adam’s given age and his successors’ ages are given in Genesis.
Are you using the “allegorical” comment to disbelieve in these ages as well?
M
migueltojose
Guest
Wow - not too fair - ‘Fairwind’… can you not reconcile Faith and Reason. That is a basis for Catholicism. Sounds like you have made your mind up-- right or wrong, but, at least it’s made up… not a mamsy pamsy fence rider… no sirree… better to make a decision as opposed to no decision…
We don’t know jack squat… we observe and draw conclusions… what we observe may be like looking at it with a cracked smudgy dirty mirror.
We’re seeing the tip of the iceburg and trying to calculate how much water has been dispaced. But we don’t know how much water there was to start with or how much of the iceburg is submerged. Good luck with that. The math just doesn’t work.
S
SuperLuigi
Guest
Those are good questions, and there have been some links posted. I wouldn’t say that any of that data is absolute though, since we are only dealing with the EM spectrum after all.
Just ignore the anti-Creationist bickering. :crying: I’m not going to get into that because the last time I talked to pro-evoluts they thought Panspermia was a sexual fantasy of mine. :dts:
H
humble_catholic
Guest
The Hebrew word used for days in genesis is called YOM. YOM can mean day or time period, and I know this personally because I’m lebanese American and we still use the word in the lebanese language and it can mean day or time period.
This is why we are allowed to go with either old earth or new earth. I’m an old earth creationist myself.
This is why we are allowed to go with either old earth or new earth. I’m an old earth creationist myself.
H
humble_catholic
Guest
Hahahaha , good one. I gotta remember it lol
R
Roscoe_Turner
Guest
Yes. Words like figurative mean that it’s allegory. It’s the fall that’s actual. Adam and Eve are just a story to give context.
C
CompSciGuy
Guest
Ummm in that story of Lazarus he was talking about their failure to listen to the prophets’ command to feed the poor, not in taking absolutely literally the prophet’s account of the creation of the world. As for the Genesis account… have you ever heard of symbolism or alliteration?
C
CompSciGuy
Guest
Where are you getting this idea that the Big Bang theory is “accidental” or contradicts God’s creation? All it says is that the universe had to have had a beginning and came from a single point and is expanding outward from that point. No offense but you really need to read up on your science my friend!
E
edwest2
Guest
"Real History
"The argument is that all of this is real history, it is simply ordered topically rather than chronologically, and the ancient audience of Genesis, it is argued, would have understood it as such.
"Even if Genesis 1 records God’s work in a topical fashion, it still records God’s work—things God really did.
"The Catechism explains that “Scripture presents the work of the Creator symbolically as a succession of six days of divine ‘work,’ concluded by the ‘rest’ of the seventh day” (CCC 337), but “nothing exists that does not owe its existence to God the Creator. The world began when God’s word drew it out of nothingness; all existent beings, all of nature, and all human history is rooted in this primordial event, the very genesis by which the world was constituted and time begun” (CCC 338).
"It is impossible to dismiss the events of Genesis 1 as a mere legend. They are accounts of real history, even if they are told in a style of historical writing that Westerners do not typically use.
"Adam and Eve: Real People
“It is equally impermissible to dismiss the story of Adam and Eve and the fall (Gen. 2–3) as a fiction. A question often raised in this context is whether the human race descended from an original pair of two human beings (a teaching known as monogenism) or a pool of early human couples (a teaching known as polygenism).”
Peace,
Ed
J
JimG
Guest
Dr. Schroeder is one who tries to read modern physics and modern cosmology into Genesis. It wasn’t written that way and can’t be interpreted that way.
R
Roscoe_Turner
Guest
Yes there are basic truths that come to us through allegory. God created everything, God Created Man, Man Sinned. The rest is window dressing. That why words like symbolic and figurative are used. It isn’t a historical account nor should it be taken that way. It is not a scientific nor historical text. Doesn’t mean it doesn’t contain truths for humanity.
B
bsroufek
Guest
The comment that “the rest is window dressing” is wrong, I think. Whether or not we believe in the ages of men and their children from Adam on, thus telling the age of the Universe, is the original question here: Old Earth (Big Bang) or Young Earth (Moses). I believe in Moses account and that the Earth is about 6000 years old. Most Americans seem to believe in a 14 billion year old Universe, which I think just denies the account of Moses.
R
Roscoe_Turner
Guest
Do you believe DNA is false?
B
bsroufek
Guest
I believe DNA can tell us some things, but not whole human history. It’s like radio carbon dating: it’s only good up to 500 years, but they use it for ancient artifacts–the equilibrium of carbon is reached within 500 years. So, to say that “DNA says man is about 200,000 years old” is a fantastical reading of DNA in my opinion.
Why do you ask?
P
prodigalson2011
Guest
His ideas are based on Biblical commentaries that were written, some centuries and some millenia ago. I can only conclude you haven’t read his work extensively, because he is very careful to keep the science and the Scripture separate. The fact of the matter is that certain Biblical commentators who lived centuries or millenia ago predicted things like the Big Bang Theory in their interpretations of Genesis. Look up “Nahmanides Big Bang.”
All Dr. Schroeder does is compare the ancient understanding of Genesis to modern cosmology, and the two just happen to correspond to an astonishing degree.
There is no reason to assume that there could not be deeper truths buried in Scripture. As Dr. Schroeder, who is himself a Torah scholar, explains, much of the depth of these Scriptures is lost on modern readers due to the subtleties of the written ancient Hebrew language.
In sum, I don’t think you’re being fair to dismiss him without hearing his full case. The man is both a distinguished physicist who both graduated from and received tenure from one of the most prestigious universities in America and also a very rigorous religious scholar. He is far from being in the same camp as the AiG folks.
B
bsroufek
Guest
Posted By Roscoe Turner
Re: Old Earth vs. Young Earth
*How about the DNA evidence that puts the Y chromosome “Mitochondrial Eve” 200,000 years ago. One estimate has it 338 K years ago. Really tough to square with a young Earth. I look at A&E as…
*
In order for DNA to be used for historical reading, it would have to lengthen or keep history for each parent from the beginning. DNA is not that long. I believe historical reading of DNA, beyond that of your immediate parents, is false. It’s a nice idea, but it doesn’t work.
Re: Old Earth vs. Young Earth
*How about the DNA evidence that puts the Y chromosome “Mitochondrial Eve” 200,000 years ago. One estimate has it 338 K years ago. Really tough to square with a young Earth. I look at A&E as…
*
In order for DNA to be used for historical reading, it would have to lengthen or keep history for each parent from the beginning. DNA is not that long. I believe historical reading of DNA, beyond that of your immediate parents, is false. It’s a nice idea, but it doesn’t work.
- Status