Was the world created in 7 days?

[Mannyfit75]

I may be wrong but I’m pretty sure it is a REQUIRED Catholic belief to believe that Adam and Eve are the first and only original set of humans.

371 God created man and woman together and willed each for the other. The Word of God gives us to understand this through various features of the sacred text. "It is not good that the man should be alone. I will make him a helper fit for him."242 None of the animals can be man’s partner.243 The woman God “fashions” from the man’s rib and brings to him elicits on the man’s part a cry of wonder, an exclamation of love and communion: "This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh."244 Man discovers woman as another “I”, sharing the same humanity.

417 Adam and Eve transmitted to their descendants human nature wounded by their own first sin and hence deprived of original holiness and justice; this deprivation is called “original sin”.

The Catholic Church teaches that Adam and Eve are real individuals. Not symbolic beings.

 

[StevenS]

I always thought the Bible was full of “good stories”. I treated it/them respectfully, and true to a point, but when I wrestled with to “what” point, I would have a lot of mixed up thoughts. What was really, absolutely true? What was basically true? These were my questions.

Then, as other, non-Christians would ask how one could know something, or challenge what I would consider a core belief (with the same kind of analysis I might use, I might add…) from the Bible, I found I was being quite selective. And that troubled me - a lot.

I’ve been in a good number of Bible studies. Personally I’m now much more comfortable taking things literally, knowing that things are hard to understand, or perhaps are “lost” in translation, or perhaps require greater faith than I have, but praying to God to help me to not get myself so tangled up in my internal (and/or shamefully external) arguements, but just to believe and move on. Interestingly, the most vociferous about how one thing or another CAN’T be true, seem to be the most “learned”, the most educated, and often good Catholic folks. I don’t know what that’s all about…but it’s interesting.

Not really looking at proving the “Genesis / creation account” one day, I came across some verses in Exodus that really got me wondering:
Exd 20:1 AND God spoke all these words, saying:
Exd 20:2 "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
…
Exd 20:9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work,
Exd 20:10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates.
Exd 20:11 For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

Now, if anything in the early part of the Bible is true, the commandments must be true, no? After all, we have in this account God Himself relaying this information, don’t we? Or is this one of those “made up” or loosely translated parts? Did Moses mess this up? I should believe the part of keeping the Sabbath holy, and Honoring my parents, and not killing, etc. But God must have…mis-spoke?

Well, even though it was God and Moses, and one might think Moses couldn’t get it wrong, maybe it was inaccurate. but it sure might make one think…

But Then!!!: bigyikes:
Exd 31:17 ‘It is a sign between Me and the children of Israel forever; for in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day He rested and was refreshed.’"
Exd 31:18 And when He had made an end of speaking with him on Mount Sinai, He gave Moses two tablets of the Testimony, tablets of stone,
written with the finger of God.

OK, are You trying to tell me something? with Whose Finger? This is a bigger mistake than I thought, --or-- I don’t know what I’m going to be able to read as true anymore!

Anyway, like I stated earlier, sometimes I don’t know how to connect the dots, or understand, or it rankles me and my neat little oganized life! But I WANT to believe that God communicated His 10 commandments. I want chapter 20 to be His Words. I find it too audacious (is this too strong a word?) to get selective in this chapter about which words I will or won’t put credence to.

Just my thoughts.

God Bless you,
Steven

 

[milimac]

I think there may be some confusion between interpreting the Bible literally (as we Catholics do) and interpreting the Bible literalistically. Interpreting the Bible literally means that we believe that the *point *the author is making is true. So if someone said “I don’t want to go outside because it’s raining cats and dogs”, we believe that person didn’t want to go outside because it was raining quite heavily – NOT that felines and canines were falling from the sky – because most people in our culture are familiar with the meaning of that phrase. Another culture or time might read such a phrase with some puzzlement though, wondering if they were reading a true story or some sort of fairy tale.

In many places in the Bible, the literal and literalistic meaning are the same – such as when Christ says “This is my body.”

In the case of Genesis, the literal truth is that God created the world in time over several stages. Is the literalistic meaning also true? Did God do this in six 24-hour periods, resting on the 7th? Or do these “days” refer to something else? I’m not an expert, but I think Catholics are free to disagree on that.

 

[freesoulhope]

There are actually many case where God allows the Devil to have certain powers, even to bestow his followers with powers. How else would Pharaohs magicians be able to perform the same “miracles” as Moses? (Or is that Myth too ) There are also many current examples as anyone that knows anyone or that have actually been in the occult before.

Yes, but the Devil doesn’t have the nature of a snake, and he isn’t sliding around on his belly for the rest of his days as a punishment. I never said that the devil doesn’t have powers. I don’t think you trully grasped the point i was making in my post. Anyway, its up to you what you think.

Peace.

 

[Jon_S]

Does it really matter how many days it took God to create the world?

Ha-ha.

This is a fun thread to read though.

God bless all of you!

 

[freesoulhope]

He gave Moses two tablets of the Testimony, tablets of stone,
written with the finger of God.

But I WANT to believe that God communicated His 10 commandments. I
Just my thoughts.

God Bless you,
Steven

It is true that God gave Moses the ten commandments. That doesn’t necessarely mean however, that God wrote it with his fingure; since God the father does not have a fingure (this is classic biblical imagery). Neither does it have to mean that Moses himself did not inscribe the Laws, that God gave him, into the tablets; and if that is what he did, then why should that make the faith any harder to believe?

 

[StevenS]

It is true that God gave Moses the ten commandments. That doesn’t necessarely mean however, that God wrote it with his fingure; since God the father does not have a fingure (this is classic biblical imagery). Neither does it have to mean that Moses himself did not inscribe the Laws, that God gave him, into the tablets; and if that is what he did, then why should that make the faith any harder to believe?

My post is meant to be a response to the original poster’s question, “was the world created in 7 days?”

My point was that there are some very particular sections of scripture, where most Christian’s believe definitively (regarding the veracity of the commandments), that also include some indications that “God said” or “God wrote” creation took 6 days, and He (God) rested on the 7th.

To the poster’s question: “was the world created in 7 days?”; my answer (based on the Bible), “Yes, unless you want to read the Bible as a general reference book. I don’t!”.

I know this poses a host of potential “problems” for me. But, I would rather be challenged (and scratching my head as to “how is this possible”?..) to understand His Word, than to be someone scratching their head trying to figure out if this is another one of those things that can’t be believed.

My 2 cents…
Steven

 

[Prayer_Warrior]

I think there may be some confusion between interpreting the Bible literally (as we Catholics do) and interpreting the Bible literalistically. Interpreting the Bible literally means that we believe that the *point *the author is making is true. So if someone said “I don’t want to go outside because it’s raining cats and dogs”, we believe that person didn’t want to go outside because it was raining quite heavily – NOT that felines and canines were falling from the sky – because most people in our culture are familiar with the meaning of that phrase. Another culture or time might read such a phrase with some puzzlement though, wondering if they were reading a true story or some sort of fairy tale.

In many places in the Bible, the literal and literalistic meaning are the same – such as when Christ says “This is my body.”

In the case of Genesis, the literal truth is that God created the world in time over several stages. Is the literalistic meaning also true? Did God do this in six 24-hour periods, resting on the 7th? Or do these “days” refer to something else? I’m not an expert, but I think Catholics are free to disagree on that.

:yup: I particularily agree with the “cats and dogs” analogy. It’s the same with the “thousand years” statements throughout the Bible. A thousand years to Jews just meant ‘a really long time’ not a literal thousand years. As we Catholics are always saying, you have to put it in the proper context. God was authoring the OT through various human writers. God made the point he wanted to make, but I do not believe He dictated word for word every verse. Those who believe God “dictated” every word would need to explain 1 Cor 1:16 to me. He inspired the writers. The human writers were free to write the words according to the culture and customs at the time. To me, literalistic interpretation of the Bible poses a risk of missing God’s point and getting wrapped up in the human author’s words.

And, just so there is no confusion, I believe the Bible is literal truth. I resent the implication that Catholics don’t value or love God’s Word, simply because we have a different interpretation of it. Furthermore, we are free to interpet as we will, so long as it does not conflict with what the Church has authoritatively taught. So, one Catholic is perfectly entitled to believe that God created everything in six human days, while I am perfectly entitled to believe that God created everything in six of God’s days. We are not free to interpret issues on which the Church as spoken–That there is one God, He created the world, that we are descended from two parents whose original sin ruptured the relationship between God and the human race (thus giving us the need for a Savior).

One last point, if a Catholic takes a literalistic approach to the Bible (while still agreeing with Magesterial teaching) we that disagree ought not to make them feel bad about it or like they are some sort of fundamentalist “loony”. Likewise, that same Catholic who takes the literalistic approach ought not to make those who take a literal approach feel bad about it or that they don’t love the Bible. We are all in Peter’s net folks, let’s make sure we are acting like the Body of Christ.

 

[Hellisreal]

I found this link, and it is very interesting. Make sure to click on the stuff too.

chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/dettaglio.jsp?id=77264&eng=y

the stuff at the end that has the < 's are what you need to click on too.

 

[pacislander4lif]

No, the seven days’ creation is a myth, almost certainly written long after the institution of the Sabbath and as a story about it.

The Church tells which parts of the Bible to take literally and which are figures or myths. If you are asking how the Church knows, there is no one easy answer. St Augustine rejected the idea of a staged creation because the scientific theory of his time was that the world was made of the interplay of four opposing elemental forces, and each was a complement of the other. Therefore you couldn’t have water without fire to balance it. Whilst we no longer think that St Augustine was quite right, we still beleive in the principle of complementarity, and we believe in that kind of explanation.

Generally however our knowledge comes from scholarship rather than science. If a biblical passage has a parallel in a contemporary non-biblical text, then probably both derive from the same source.There are ways of determining which way the influence went.

Yeah but is your view that it is “myth” a dogma… You are just saying your opinion. Creationism is just as valid as your position…

 

[Mannyfit75]

Peter said in his epistles, “8 But of this one thing be not ignorant, my beloved, that **one day with the Lord **is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” 2 Peters 3:8

So with that in mind, God did not create the world in several days literalistically. He created the world literally meaning that in God’s mind, a day could be years perhaps millions or billions of years. We see in Scripture that numbers that are thousand is symbollically means a long period.

I don’t believe the world was created within 7 days. I believe it took a long time for it to be created and God made it the world. I think science attest to this.

They find out that the universe had a beginning. Just like in the Bible. That the universe was form out of the Big Bang out of nothing. I believe when God said, “Let there be Light, that is the Big Big.”

There is no exact date when the universe was made. The age of the univsere is 15 billion yrs old. There is one thing for sure thing. The science cannot contract the God. Because God is truth. I am amazed at the images of the Hubble Space Telescope and just amazed how God could create some wonderful material things.

Science, however is limited to the observable universe. So they can’t be able to explain supernatural events. Our minds are finite, and God is infinite. I would not die for theory of evolution though because those are just theories. They are revealed. God is the Truth. He is also the way. I would die for Him.

I do view science as a good thing in explaining things but we cannot negate God in the creation of the universe. God created us all out of nothing.

 

[pacislander4lif]

Peter said in his epistles, “8 But of this one thing be not ignorant, my beloved, that **one day with the Lord **is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” 2 Peters 3:8

So with that in mind, God did not create the world in several days literalistically. He created the world literally meaning that in God’s mind, a day could be years perhaps millions or billions of years. We see in Scripture that numbers that are thousand is symbollically means a long period.

I don’t believe the world was created within 7 days. I believe it took a long time for it to be created and God made it the world. I think science attest to this.

They find out that the universe had a beginning. Just like in the Bible. That the universe was form out of the Big Bang out of nothing. I believe when God said, “Let there be Light, that is the Big Big.”

There is no exact date when the universe was made. The age of the univsere is 15 billion yrs old. There is one thing for sure thing. The science cannot contract the God. Because God is truth. I am amazed at the images of the Hubble Space Telescope and just amazed how God could create some wonderful material things.

Science, however is limited to the observable universe. So they can’t be able to explain supernatural events. Our minds are finite, and God is infinite. I would not die for theory of evolution though because those are just theories. They are revealed. God is the Truth. He is also the way. I would die for Him.

I do view science as a good thing in explaining things but we cannot negate God in the creation of the universe. God created us all out of nothing.

Certainly that passage can be used in the syllogistic argument which an evolutionist can use to support his poition… But it is hardly a PROOF that Genesis is not literal… If this were true, the Church Fathers would have automatically taught anything other than a 6-day creation…

Laurence

 

[Sixtus]

I believe when God said, “Let there be Light, that is the Big Big.” Lawrence

Evidence in the last 15-years has shown that all that came out of the Big Bang was photons [light].

The temperature at the time of the Big Bang was too great for matter to exist. The universe [says the best astonomers] was opaque in a blaze of light. It took several hundred thousand years before the temperature dropped enough for matter to form and clump together.

So, God said ‘let there be light and there was light’

So it seems the bible was right all along.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Certainly that passage can be used in the syllogistic argument which an evolutionist can use to support his poition… But it is hardly a PROOF that Genesis is not literal… If this were true, the Church Fathers would have automatically taught anything other than a 6-day creation…

Laurence

I don’t take all of evolution to heart. There are some of it’s concept I believe to be fact because of the evidence that proves it otherwise.

One light year means it would take one year to for light to travel to reach us. It takes time for it reach us. You can try to disprove this but it cannot be disproven.

The sun’s light can reach the earth at 8.4 minutes. Light travels at 186,282 miles per second.

The distance from the Earth to the Sun varies because the Earth’s orbit about the Sun is elliptical. At it’s closest, the distance is 91,402,000 miles and it’s farthest distance it is 94,512,000 miles.This gives an average distance of 92,957,000 miles. Light travels at 186,282 miles per second. Dividing the average distance by the speed of light gives 499.01225 seconds which is 8.3168708 minutes.

According to David Kornreich the universe is measure in the following:

It is indeed true that scientists have known about the background radiation (commonly known as the Cosmic Microwave Background) since the early 60s. It was first discovered quite by accident by Penzias and Wilson working at Bell Labs, who detected it as an unexplainable interference in their precision radio equipment. When people finally figured out exactly what it was they were seeing, they won the Nobel Prize for their discovery. Only a few years before, George Gamow had predicted that if the Big Bang theory were correct, we should observe just such a background radiation. The CMB is not the only evidence in favor of the Big Bang, but it is one of the most important. It is a natural consequence of the theory, and is pretty unexplainable in steady-state cosmology.

The 15-20 billion year number comes not from the CMB, but rather predominantly from measurements of nearby and distant galaxies, particularly their rates of expansion away from us. We find that the distance to a galaxy is proportional to its recessional velocity. The constant of proportionality is the Hubble Constant, H, which turns out to be (approximately) the reciprocal of the age of the universe. So we measure the age by measuring recessional velocities. T = 1/H is only true, however, if the universe is not significantly accelerating or decelerating its expansion rate. If the rate of expansion is rapidly accelerating, the universe may be older than 1/H = 15 billion years, give or take. Such an acceleration would be caused by a large value of the Cosmological Constant, a sort of anti-gravity force predicted by General Relativity. There is some evidence that this might be the case.

So finally, yes, the age of the universe, being based on the empirical determination of H, is based on the observed evidence.

The age of the Solar System (including the Earth), on the other hand, is measured by the radioactive decay of certain isotopes in rocks and meteorites. These isotopes (principally Potassium and Uranium) were created with the solar system. By measuring how much has decayed, we can very accurately determine how long it’s been since they (and the rest of the solar system) were formed.

curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=45

The evidence proved that the Universe had a beginning, which doesn’t contradict Genesis. Yet, scientist are limited to only to the observable universe. We can see base on the instruments we have that allow us to see things billions of light years away.

I also like to note that God is outside time and space. Days is measured in 24 hours and base upon the rotation of the earth. I don’t think science itself is an enemy of creation account. In fact the early scientist were Catholic priests like Capernan (sp).

 

[DaMaDo]

I’ve often wonder what the purpose have having the earth around billions and billions years before man would have been. Specially if we believe the earth was made for man.

Now I’m not a scientist but I’ve often been interested by things like the “Young Earth Theory” and the “Canopy Theory.”

I’ve always thought of God’s creation being a “system” we call this system physics, biology, evolution and a whole mess of other names. This also helps me understand why God lets bad things happen. If he stopped all natural disasters from hurting people, he would be going against his creation. I also believe that in that system we, his people, are the ultimate purpose and goal (that it took billions of years is nothing to The Eternal). Unfortunately for us, earthquakes, tsunamis, disease, mental disorders, etc are all part of physics and biology, but it’s needed to keep the balance (and the earth from being overpopulated). [Plus having tossed in free-will also means if someone wants to do something bad to us, they have the opportunity. If we were immune to evil actions, what value would free will have.]

Now if people evolved as Darwin thought (Adam and Eve could have been the first God considered “finished” humans), it would still be God’s creation since it’s an extension of his system. But I think God could have also just popped Adam and Eve on the planet when it was ready for their existence (especially since I don’t see how we evolved from the same thing as plants). I can’t ignore fossils and our scientific understanding of the development of planets/stars/etc, but I don’t think there’s a need to. Plus time to God is void since He has no beginning and no end, what’s the measurement of time to Him? His existence is an eternal line…you mark one point on that line but since it has no beginning or end there’s no way to measure it. Ah man I’m getting a headache thinking about it now…too complex lol.

Overall my main view is I don’t know for sure what happened. All I know is God could have done it any way He wanted to.

Anyway is this compatible with catholic beliefs?

 

[Sixtus]

LJN212 said:

Specially if we believe the earth was made for man.

I’ve always thought of God’s creation being a “system” we call this system physics, biology, evolution and a whole mess of other names. This also helps me understand why God lets bad things happen.

Why only the earth, and not the whole universe?

Though we do not know, is it conceivable that the Lord wants us to populate the entire universe?

Scripture says ‘to them that have shall more be given’.

Imagine a hypothetical scenario: Supposen after the consumation of the world, the Lord wanted to populate the universe. A Creator would be concerned about the potential in creation for disobedience. We know first hand the consequences because we have lived in this vale of tears, the product of disobedience.

Might we not be the best guardians in the future to oversee future civilisations advising them of the sheer folly of opposing God’s divine will and putting self before God?

As witnesses to this, is it likely we would ever just stand by and watch an entire planetary civilisation bring such evils upon itself? Having lived through the consequences of disobedience, would we not stand up and be counted?

In oposition to the Divine Will, we would be a formidable challenge to anyone conceiving of such folly? Is this why we suffer on this planet?

 

[look3467]

Dear brothers and sisters, believers, unbelievers, Catholics and or non Catholics.

The key to understanding the plan of God is to understand the 7-day creation story.
Literal for a child to understand, figuratively for the matured adult in the faith.
The story is simple, the object is plain to see and the promise is made for the saving of mankind.

That is the story as simple as can be. Now as we study to learn and understand the 7-day creation story, God in due time and according to our abilities at the time, will give us understanding of what it really means.
I am 60 years old and have just recently, about 6 years ago, been give revealation in understanding of the 7-day creation story.

I can tell you all right now, that not many are able to see it the way I do just yet, for many are not in a position, place or faith to receive from God via the Holy Spirit.

I equate it with not giving the keys to the car to a teenager who is not ready, prepared or of the mind to be giving the responsibility to drive the car.

But don’t despair, for God is not ignorant of our abilities and fears.
He is very much a Gentleman, Gentlewomen, Gentle-brother, gentle-sister etc.

He is very much a very loving Father, cognizant of our every need and very patient with us as we learn by experience of trial and error.

Place your trust in Him for your safe journey through this world, have fear of nothing for you are safe in trusting Him.

Back to the 7-day creation story, Jesus came into the world on what day of that 7-day creation story, can anyone say?
Clue, How long was a lamb for the sacrifice looked at before it was accepted for sacrifice? On that day is when Jesus made His entrance into that 7-day story.

Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Peace>>>AJ:heart:

 

[mcarlsen]

On this issue, I feel we are to take God at his word. There is no reason to take it otherwise. Evolution would suggest that God created by trial and error. Evolution also requires death to advance and the Bible clearly indicates that death entered the world through sin. Sin was not introduced until Adam and Eve. How could they have evolved if death had not been introduced? I see no reason to doubt God’s account of his creation. He is God and he could do it just as he laid it out in Genesis.

 

[mcarlsen]

I have already responded to this issue but I feel that I must add some thoughts. I feel very strongly about the creation story because it is the beging or Genisis of our faith. In recent years archeologists have found that Darwin’s theory is not substantiated by the fossil records, yet our children are being told that we evolved from a premortal slime. I teach junior high PSR at our local Parish (St. James) and the first thing I try to teach each class is to challenge every thing.They are being bombarded with secular humanism and relativism in the public schools. They are mocked if they try to express their belief in a designer or creator. The Apostle Paul said, “Test all things (by scripture) and hold fast to that which is true”. You do not have to check your brains in at the door when you believe in Christ. Science and archeology actually substantiate the creation story. Why do we as christians feel that we must adopt the “religion” of the secular world when the facts point to a devine creator. Remember that the scientists in 1492 thought that the world was flat. When we try to change God’s word to fit the science of the time we are shone to be foolish. “God confounds the wisdom of the foolish”.

Michael

 

[Sixtus]

mcarlsen wrote:

I teach junior high PSR at our local Parish (St. James) and the first thing I try to teach each class is to challenge every thing.They are being bombarded with secular humanism and relativism in the public schools. They are mocked if they try to express their belief in a designer or creator. The Apostle Paul said, “Test all things (by scripture) and hold fast to that which is true”.

I agree with you. That also forms the basis of post-graduate training to be critical.

It astonishes me that there is not one shred of evidence in all of science that ‘nothing can beget something’. Neither is there a single shred of evidence that ‘intelligent codes’ such as DNA and language evolve by chance. Information also, has never evolved in nature. There is no information occurance outside from intelligence.

Yet they still not only believe in it but insist on our children believing it too!