Why do fundamentalists believe the world is 6000-10000 years old?

[cassini]

It’s 2.5 million light years away- this means the light that enters our eyes and is processed by our brains left that galaxy 2.5 million years ago.

Ah tjm, I was hoping Albert would answer me. I hoped he would defend his rhetoric with some of his ‘science’ to show me how they measure the distance of stars that does not include a metaphysical asssumption.

As for your science, well yes, that’s the theory, but but I thought I explained how that light could enter our vision into our brains IMMEDIATELY man was created 6-10,000 years ago. In other words, couldn’t God have created the stars with their light visible on earth IMMEDIATELY? Just like He is going to show those on the last days these same stars fly in every direction. If ‘science’ is the new DOGMA then we will have to wait 2.5 million years to know Jesus is coming. Why maybe He has already come down from the stars as promised but we will have to wait millions of years to see him.

The point is tjm, there are TWO sources of knowledge, faith and reason (science). You cannot separate them as Galileo, Leo XIII, Vatican II and John Paul II thought because you end up with CONTRADICTIONS, faith contradicting science, and science contradicting faith, just like above.

You guys can live your Catholic lives with science as dogma, I and a few others prefer revelation and faith.

 

[spn82756]

Ah tjm, I was hoping Albert would answer me. I hoped he would defend his rhetoric with some of his ‘science’ to show me how they measure the distance of stars that does not include a metaphysical asssumption.

As for your science, well yes, that’s the theory, but but I thought I explained how that light could enter our vision into our brains IMMEDIATELY man was created 6-10,000 years ago. In other words, couldn’t God have created the stars with their light visible on earth IMMEDIATELY? Just like He is going to show those on the last days these same stars fly in every direction. If ‘science’ is the new DOGMA then we will have to wait 2.5 million years to know Jesus is coming. Why maybe He has already come down from the stars as promised but we will have to wait millions of years to see him.

The point is tjm, there are TWO sources of knowledge, faith and reason (science). You cannot separate them as Galileo, Leo XIII, Vatican II and John Paul II thought because you end up with CONTRADICTIONS, faith contradicting science, and science contradicting faith, just like above.

You guys can live your Catholic lives with science as dogma, I and a few others prefer revelation and faith.

Thanks

I’m sure JPII wished he would have had you as his scientific advisor. Science and religion do not contradict each other.

God: Okay Moses…let’s go over the theory of relativity.
Moses: HUH?

 

[cassini]

Thanks

I’m sure JPII wished he would have had you as his scientific advisor. Science and religion do not contradict each other.

God: Okay Moses…let’s go over the theory of relativity.
Moses: HUH?

Here above I have DEMONSTRATED science and faith contradicting each other. Why do you still think JP2 had it right and I have it wrong? And what’s this ‘God: Okay Moses…let’s go over the theory of relativity.’
Moses: HUH?

 

[spn82756]

Here above I have DEMONSTRATED science and faith contradicting each other. Why do you still think JP2 had it right and I have it wrong? And what’s this ‘God: Okay Moses…let’s go over the theory of relativity.’
Moses: HUH?

The Bible is a religious book inspired by God to explain his creation…what he expects from us…and so on.

The God/Moses bit is self explanatory. God didn’t inspire the Bible to teach science. I don’t think that Moses would have had a clue about the theory of relatively or had been able to understand the Einsteinian physics and the advanced math to get there. He was too busy trying to survive.

By your claim…anyone can make another claim and say that they are correct and your wrong. I think JP2 had more advisors with far greater knowledge than you or I. If not…perhaps you could consider running for pope after Benedict is gone.

Peace

 

[AlbertBall]

Ah tjm, I was hoping Albert would answer me. I hoped he would defend his rhetoric with some of his ‘science’ to show me how they measure the distance of stars that does not include a metaphysical asssumption.

As for your science, well yes, that’s the theory, but but I thought I explained how that light could enter our vision into our brains IMMEDIATELY man was created 6-10,000 years ago. In other words, couldn’t God have created the stars with their light visible on earth IMMEDIATELY? Just like He is going to show those on the last days these same stars fly in every direction. If ‘science’ is the new DOGMA then we will have to wait 2.5 million years to know Jesus is coming. Why maybe He has already come down from the stars as promised but we will have to wait millions of years to see him.

The point is tjm, there are TWO sources of knowledge, faith and reason (science). You cannot separate them as Galileo, Leo XIII, Vatican II and John Paul II thought because you end up with CONTRADICTIONS, faith contradicting science, and science contradicting faith, just like above.

You guys can live your Catholic lives with science as dogma, I and a few others prefer revelation and faith.

The second you started referring to science as dogma, your credibility in this debate vanished. You are presenting nothing but an argument from ignorance. Please explain to me the problem with measuring the distance to M31? Awaits “Dr” kent hovind quotes…. You are actually trying to say you believe that every galaxy in the universe, more than 100 billion of them, are in fact taking up less space than 1/4613th (roughly) of the milky way?? Dear oh dear. Or are out by a factor of 2.1 MILLION! Which about the same as believing the sun is in fact about 45 miles away.

PS. I presume that god set the light in motion just to make the universe LOOK like its old?

 

[cassini]

The Bible is a religious book inspired by God to explain his creation…what he expects from us…and so on.

The God/Moses bit is self explanatory. God didn’t inspire the Bible to teach science. I don’t think that Moses would have had a clue about the theory of relatively or had been able to understand the Einsteinian physics and the advanced math to get there. He was too busy trying to survive.

By your claim…anyone can make another claim and say that they are correct and your wrong. I think JP2 had more advisors with far greater knowledge than you or I. If not…perhaps you could consider running for pope after Benedict is gone.

Peace

The point is tjm, there are TWO sources of knowledge, faith and reason (science). You cannot separate them as Galileo, Leo XIII, Vatican II and John Paul II thought because you end up with CONTRADICTIONS, faith contradicting science, and science contradicting faith, just like above.

**Ok spn, you seem to reject this fact above in your own complicated way. Repeating that well worn idiom that the Scriptures do not teach science means nothing. But I will simplify it for you and JP2 if he needs it now.

Science can hold the following as truths of science:

The universe is infinite in time
Life in the universe stems from inorganic matter
Life originated in more than one place
Psychical life is reducible to biological and social conditions (evolution)

All of the above examples are CONTRARY to the Catholic faith.

God created the universe so it is not infinite in time
God gave the gift of life so we cannot say it stems from inorganic matter
God gave man life to one original couple so cannot have originated in more than one place
God gave man a body and a soul independent of that body.

Now anybody still of the opinion that faith and science complement one another rather than contradict one another?**

 

[rossum]

God did not see the millions of skeletons of dead things torn about and savaged to death and then create Adam and say to him,look at the “very good” world I have created for you - twinc

The world God created for Adam initially had at least one fault in it:Then the LORD God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone” - Genesis 2:18
See that “It is not good” in there? We can be sure that there was at least one fault in the world before the creation of Eve.

rossum

 

[buffalo]

The world God created for Adam initially had at least one fault in it:Then the LORD God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone” - Genesis 2:18See that “It is not good” in there? We can be sure that there was at least one fault in the world before the creation of Eve.

rossum

Incomplete is not the same as bad.

 

[spn82756]

The point is tjm, there are TWO sources of knowledge, faith and reason (science). You cannot separate them as Galileo, Leo XIII, Vatican II and John Paul II thought because you end up with CONTRADICTIONS, faith contradicting science, and science contradicting faith, just like above.

Ok spn, you seem to reject this fact above in your own complicated way. Repeating that well worn idiom that the Scriptures do not teach science means nothing. But I will simplify it for you and JP2 if he needs it now.

Science can hold the following as truths of science:

The universe is infinite in time
Life in the universe stems from inorganic matter
Life originated in more than one place
Psychical life is reducible to biological and social conditions (evolution)

All of the above examples are CONTRARY to the Catholic faith.

God created the universe so it is not infinite in time
God gave the gift of life so we cannot say it stems from inorganic matter
God gave man life to one original couple so cannot have originated in more than one place
God gave man a body and a soul independent of that body.

Now anybody still of the opinion that faith and science complement one another rather than contradict one another?

Science does not indicate the universe is infinite in time. Read the thread. God’s big bang occurred approximately 13.7 billions years ago. Scratch off the first line in each of your above categories. Genesis says that God made Adam from dust. That’s most likely inorganic! Scratch the second two lines off. Life did originate in more than one place. Birds fly…fish swim…buffalo walk. Scratch off line 3 in each of your categories. We could argue the 4th…but there’s no point…you already know more than the Supreme Pontiff.

 

[cassini]

The second you started referring to science as dogma, your credibility in this debate vanished. You are presenting nothing but an argument from ignorance. Please explain to me the problem with measuring the distance to M31? Awaits “Dr” kent hovind quotes…. You are actually trying to say you believe that every galaxy in the universe, more than 100 billion of them, are in fact taking up less space than 1/4613th (roughly) of the milky way?? Dear oh dear. Or are out by a factor of 2.1 MILLION! Which about the same as believing the sun is in fact about 45 miles away.

PS. I presume that god set the light in motion just to make the universe LOOK like its old?

Sorry albert, this debate is not about who can tell the other he or she knows less and less but simply about the the age of the earth and who we believe gives us the truth of it. Your science has its ‘truths’ and my faith has no limits other than making a square circle so to speak. Now I know there are as many stars out there as grains of sand on the earth, and if we were aliens I supplose you might argue that all those billions of grains of sand could never fit on a globe as small as earth.

At the moment we are discussing the age of the earth relative to starlight. Your science, having started with the Big Bang theory, and moved on to the expansion theory, uses the heliocentric theory to measure known parallax stars and uses this assumed dictance measurement to measure the distance of outer stars. So how many theories does it take to measure the distance of stars.

Now I have the word of God. He reveals in the scriptures that Man when created on day six could see the stars created on day three I think. So the distance of stars becomes MEANINGLESS as a source of knowledge to me. You can quote figures till the cows come home but you will not prove to me they can age the earth.

 

[cassini]

Science does not indicate the universe is infinite in time. Read the thread. God’s big bang occurred approximately 13.7 billions years ago. Scratch off the first line in each of your above categories. Genesis says that God made Adam from dust. That’s most likely inorganic! Scratch the second two lines off. Life did originate in more than one place. Birds fly…fish swim…buffalo walk. Scratch off line 3 in each of your categories. We could argue the 4th…but there’s no point…you already know more than the Supreme Pontiff.

Oh spn, . Are you kidding me or something. Are you saying that there is no STEADY STATE theory in SCIENCE? Do you really think science needs God to start life for it. No need to go further.

Obviously you are a theistic evolutionist

Well both sides, creationists and Atheistic scientists have nothing but contempt for theistic evolutionism.

 

[rossum]

Incomplete is not the same as bad.

I did not say it was bad, I said that it was “not good” and hence less than perfect. Arguments from the perfection of the pre-fall world fail on this point. There was at least one imperfection in the world before the Fall.

rossum

 

[spn82756]

Oh spn, . Are you kidding me or something. Are you saying that there is no STEADY STATE theory in SCIENCE? Do you really think science needs God to start life for it. No need to go further.

Obviously you are a theistic evolutionist

Well both sides, creationists and Atheistic scientists have nothing but contempt for theistic evolutionism.

That’s your opinion and your problem. I know my faith in God. And I follow Catholic teaching. Maybe someday when you’re pope…and write your own catechism…you’ll convince me. Til then…ummmm…enjoy delusions of grandeur.

 

[AlbertBall]

Now I have the word of God. He reveals in the scriptures that Man when created on day six could see the stars created on day three I think. So the distance of stars becomes MEANINGLESS as a source of knowledge to me. You can quote figures till the cows come home but you will not prove to me they can age the earth.

Fair enough, so your position is no matter how much the evidence supports an old earth that evidence is not good enough for you. I think that is as good a way to end this as any.

 

[spn82756]

Fair enough, so your position is no matter how much the evidence supports an old earth that evidence is not good enough for you. I think that is as good a way to end this as any.

Not too different from what I said.

 

[buffalo]

I did not say it was bad, I said that it was “not good” and hence less than perfect. Arguments from the perfection of the pre-fall world fail on this point. There was at least one imperfection in the world before the Fall.

rossum

Where does the CC teach that the world was created “perfect”? Catholics know the world to be in a state of journeying. Are you claiming that Adam and Eve were created perfect like God?

 

[buffalo]

That’s your opinion and your problem. I know my faith in God. And I follow Catholic teaching. Maybe someday when you’re pope…and write your own catechism…you’ll convince me. Til then…ummmm…enjoy delusions of grandeur.

When he writes his catechism should it be based on the constant teaching and understanding of the Church given in God’s Revelation? Or should the catechism be written based on provisional science?

 

[spn82756]

When he writes his catechism should it be based on the constant teaching and understanding of the Church given in God’s Revelation? Or should the catechism be written based on provisional science?

Ahhh…so the current catechism is in error! Our recent popes of the 20th century are in error.

Burn me at the stake. The earth is not flat and the earth is not the center of the solar system. Oh my.

Because I believe in the awesome power of a God that stands outside of time and that billions of years is just a blink of an eye to him…cassini considers me to be a bad Catholic. He considers JP2 to be misinformed. As a matter of fact anyone that disagrees with him should line up along the atheist side of the wall. BLAH BLAH BLAH :banghead::banghead::banghead::harp:

 

[twinc]

Fair enough, so your position is no matter how much the evidence supports an old earth that evidence is not good enough for you. I think that is as good a way to end this as any.

what evidence are you claiming as evidence,reliable evidence is what is called for,it is noted that for the dating methods 75% come out in favour of a young earth - twinc

 

[spn82756]

what evidence are you claiming as evidence,reliable evidence is what is called for,it is noted that for the dating methods 75% come out in favour of a young earth - twinc

Can you provide three?