[AmericaUnited]

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.

[snarks_when_bored]

[AmericaUnited]

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.

[azhenfud]

"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."

[Fzob]

bump for later

[KeyWest]

bttt

[muir_redwoods]

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?

[DoctorMichael]

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.

[AmericaUnited]

Can you activate the ping list? Thanks!

[AmericaUnited]

Ping!

[Rudder]

...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.

[js1138]

This concept is generally known as Last Thursdayism.

[wallcrawlr]

Another age of the earth quiz.

Revelation 4:11Intelligent Design
See my profile for info

[Coyoteman]

===> Placemarker <===

[metmom]

Thanks for the thread. Very interesting. I've heard that understanding the Hebrew was a great help in properly understanding Genesis but have never come across so through an explanation.

[aimhigh]

Because depending on how much time this pulse of light has traveled through space, will determine the amount of stretching of space between the pulses.

This assumes the speed of light is constant. It may not be. And it fails to consider that God may have created an aged Universe. Adam wasn't created as a tiny fetus and laid on the ground.

[nmh]

Perhaps I missed it ... but in Hebrew the word "yom" means a twenty four hour day when used with morning, evening or a day number as 1, 2 etc.. WHY wasn't that mentioned. The "mystery" of a "day" could have been cleared up in one sentence.

I'll take the word of God over man ANYDAY!

I'm glad my God, did as He stated. He created the earth in six 24 hour days and on the 7th, He rested.

[Tribune7]

You'll like this.

[LiteKeeper]

YEC INTREP

[johnnyb_61820]

There are several issues: (1) ICR has done a textual analysis of the Genesis account and concluded that it is narrative, not poetry. (2) In Exodus 20:11 God is very clear saying "in six days God created" (3) The Bible also says that there was no carnivory before the flood. There was clearly carnivory in the geologic column. (4) Having such a view completely discounts the impact of a worldwide flood on the geological record. Creationists believe that the Paleozoic and Mesozoic are flood sediments (and some thing that part of the Cenozoic is as well). You have a massive unconformity at the pre-cambrian/cambrian boundary marking the beginning of the flood (where many geologists have noted the the basement has been "swept clean" before the next layer), and then the K/T boundary may well mark the end of the flood. If you take the millions of years view, where did this worldwide flood go? (5) Zircons provide evidence that radiometric dating is incorrect. There are two ways to date Zircons -- radiometrically, and by measure the amount of Helium that has escaped from the radiometric decay. The former measures in millions of years, the latter measures in thousands (6) The ubiquity of C14. It's everywhere in the geologic column. It shouldn't be anywhere after 90,000 years. It's even in diamonds, which are not subject to the contaminations which have been proposed to explain the other C14 data. (7) The long ages view of scripture was unheard of before the 1600s. If the text really meant that, then somehow it escaped the notice of everyone before us. (8) To keep up with the geologic timescales, it requires humans being in existance for hundreds of thousands of years or even millions of years before being gifted with a soul. During this time, they made war (even wearing chain mail), made toys, and other items. It (a) demolishes any possibility that sin entered through Adam, since we were clearly at war with each other beforehand, and (b) makes there literally no difference between soul-less pre-Adamites and soul-ful humans. The creationary model proposes that most Cenozoic sediments were post-flood, and that all these humans lived relatively recently.