The Bible doesn't give us a "definitive age" for anything. It reveals a tension between God's view from eternity (especially noticeable in Genesis 1–3 as A-G has pointed out) and the view from man's contingent, finite position within that eternity — i.e., "within God's Time" — which is (from our human point of view) "no-time," or timelessness.... Humans experience time in a way radically different than God does, Who sees everything in heaven and on earth "from Alpha to Omega" simultaneously — that is, ALL AT ONCE, as if in a single eternal moment.
We humans, on the other hand, are relentlessly conditioned to sense time as serial and irreversible, moving moment to moment from past to present to future.
Moreover, the Bible does not purport to be a textbook in physics.
You wrote:
The universe is immensely old [current estimate of ~14–15 billion years]. Figuring out whereby some perspective riding a beam of light it could only be a few thousand years old is an exercise in creationist apologetics.Well that would be your interpretation, now wouldn't it, allmendream? Still, I think such an interpretation would come as a surprise to Gerald Schroeder.... I strongly doubt he is doing "creationist apologetics." Looks more to me like he's trying to explicate a lesson in the relativity of time....
Why don't you read him, and find out for yourself?
We humans, on the other hand, are relentlessly conditioned to sense time as serial and irreversible, moving moment to moment from past to present to future.
Which is exactly why it is such a mistake to assume that our frame of reference is the one to use in interpreting Scripture.
This demand of presuming that scientists have a corner on the determining what is reality market and that their determination is the standard by which we interpret Scripture is rigidly dogmatic of them.
Evolutionists as a whole, tend to scorn anyone who disagrees with them, even to the point of condemning those of obviously significantly greater intellect that they, as if FRevos are brilliant enough to sit in judgment of men of genius and education like Schroeder.
The derision of those who don't think lock step with FRevos adherence to the ToE shows not only their lack of intellectual prowess, but the height of their arrogance.
Jewish Physicist Gerald Schroeder is standing on the shoulders of a giant:
Tegmark's metaphor of the frog and bird in his Level IV Parallel Universe makes the point very well (formatted for easier reading:)
Consider, for example, a world made up of pointlike particles moving around in three-dimensional space. In four-dimensional spacetime — the bird perspective — these particle trajectories resemble a tangle of spaghetti.
If the frog sees a particle moving with constant velocity, the bird sees a straight strand of uncooked spaghetti. If the frog sees a pair of orbiting particles, the bird sees two spaghetti strands intertwined like a double helix.
To the frog, the world is described by Newton’s laws of motion and gravitation. To the bird, it is described by the geometry of the pasta — a mathematical structure. The frog itself is merely a thick bundle of pasta, whose highly complex intertwining corresponds to a cluster of particles that store and process information.
Our universe is far more complicated than this example, and scientists do not yet know to what, if any, mathematical structure it corresponds.
Tegmark, Max, “Parallel Universes,” Scientific American, May, 2003
The words of God must be spiritually discerned.