Skip to comments.
The Age of the Universe
AISH ^
| 1-30-2005
| Dr. Gerald Schroeder
Posted on 02/12/2006 4:08:17 AM PST by AmericaUnited
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-54 next last
I recently found this most facinating article, in which the author reconciles the Biblical account of creation in 6 days, and science's claim that it has occured during a span of 15 billion years.
To: AmericaUnited
To: PatrickHenry; Ichneumon; RadioAstronomer
Gerald Schroeder earned his BSc, MSc and PhD at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. You guys have to admit... this author is not one who scoffs at science, or is a science nincompoop.
To: AmericaUnited
"
Perhaps time is different from the perspective of King David, than it is from the perspective of the Creator. Perhaps time is different."
Ecclesiastes 3:15
"That which hath been is now; and that which is to be hath already been; and God requireth that which is past."
4
posted on
02/12/2006 4:18:07 AM PST
by
azhenfud
(He who always is looking up seldom finds others' lost change.)
To: AmericaUnited
5
posted on
02/12/2006 4:20:03 AM PST
by
Fzob
(Why does this tag line keep showing up?)
To: AmericaUnited
His "days" fit perfectly with Jesus's statement recorded here:
Matt 24:22 "And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened."
and here:
Mark 13:20 "And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect's sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days."
6
posted on
02/12/2006 4:24:36 AM PST
by
azhenfud
(He who always is looking up seldom finds others' lost change.)
To: AmericaUnited
7
posted on
02/12/2006 4:25:50 AM PST
by
KeyWest
(Help stamp out taglines!)
To: snarks_when_bored
8
posted on
02/12/2006 4:33:42 AM PST
by
meanie monster
(http://guptonator.myvideochat.net)
To: AmericaUnited
The Bible is not a science text, neither in biology nor in cosmology. To use it as such or expect it to be usable as such demeans both faith and science. If your understanding of science has no value, base it on faith. If your religious faith has no value, seek scientific proof.
The two are separate for a reason. They address separate human needs.
I wouldn't want food in the chambers of my heart nor blood in my stomach but each are nourished, in a way, by the other. To expect them both to operate the same way is foolish. Likewise science and faith.
Why is this so hard to understand for so many?
9
posted on
02/12/2006 4:41:02 AM PST
by
muir_redwoods
(Free Sirhan Sirhan, after all, the bastard who killed Mary Jo Kopechne is walking around free)
To: Evolution
To: AmericaUnited; PatrickHenry; Ichneumon; RadioAstronomer
The calculations come out to be as follows: The first of the Biblical days lasted 24 hours, viewed from the "beginning of time perspective." But the duration from our perspective was 8 billion years.
The second day, from the Bible's perspective lasted 24 hours. From our perspective it lasted half of the previous day, 4 billion years.
The third 24 hour day also included half of the previous day, 2 billion years.
The fourth 24 hour day -- one billion years.
The fifth 24 hour day -- one-half billion years.
The sixth 24 hour day -- one-quarter billion years.
When you add up the Six Days, you get the age of the universe at 15 and 3/4 billion years. The same as modern cosmology. Is it by chance?
I don't know about 'chance" but as a Christian, who is also a Scientist, I found this an interesting way of reconciling the two timelines.
11
posted on
02/12/2006 5:25:36 AM PST
by
DoctorMichael
(The Fourth-Estate is a Fifth-Column!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
To: muir_redwoods
"The two are separate for a reason. They address separate human needs"
Who says so, your? Why are you the authority that says the two must be separate?
To: DoctorMichael
I don't know about 'chance" but as a Christian, who is also a Scientist, I found this an interesting way of reconciling the two timelines. It's the best explanation I ever read. And it seems to make perfect sense.
To: jimbergin
"Why are you the authority that says the two must be separate?"
I was wondering the same thing. I find often the people who say the two must be separate are atheists.
14
posted on
02/12/2006 5:52:33 AM PST
by
mlc9852
To: All
I'm completely confident that mankind is unfit to rule this planet and place ALL hope in there being a Superior being that will come and RULE this planet.
God speed the Kingdom of God!
15
posted on
02/12/2006 5:57:07 AM PST
by
winston2
(In matters of necessity let there be unity, in matters of doubt liberty, and in all things charity:)
To: jimbergin
"
Who says so, your? Why are you the authority that says the two must be separate?" Because they obviously are separate. They don't agree and the science is verifiable, the Bible is not. The faith is not subject to reason. Why is this so hard to explain?
16
posted on
02/12/2006 6:07:07 AM PST
by
muir_redwoods
(Free Sirhan Sirhan, after all, the bastard who killed Mary Jo Kopechne is walking around free)
To: DaveLoneRanger
Can you activate the ping list? Thanks!
To: wallcrawlr
To: DoctorMichael
Yet 24 hours is a somewhat arbitrary amount. I recently read somewhere that 1.5 billion years ago, a "day" on Earth was quite a bit shorter - something like 11 hours!
19
posted on
02/12/2006 6:35:40 AM PST
by
djf
To: AmericaUnited
...the author reconciles the Biblical account of creation in 6 days, and science's claim that it has occured during a span of 15 billion years.No he doesn't.
20
posted on
02/12/2006 6:43:56 AM PST
by
Rudder
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-54 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
