[sci/rel] A scientist finally explains the age of the universe vs the Bible "age"

Warren Bone

Membership Revoked
I know this is a long read, but for those of us "scientific biblical types" who have always tried to reconcile the age of the universe at 15 billion years with the six days of the Bible (or 5,000 years of history) ...this guy does a most excellent job of explaining what some of us have tried to say in our own words.

It's worth your time! [You might want to read it at the link provided]
------------------------------
http://www.aish.com/societyWork/sciencenature/Age_of_the_Universe.asp

According to a possible reading of ancient commentators' description of God and nature, the world may be simultaneously young and old.

One of the most obvious perceived contradictions between Torah and science is the age of the universe. Is it billions of years old, like scientific data, or is it thousands of years, like Biblical data? When we add up the generations of the Bible, we come to 5700-plus years. Whereas, data from the Hubbell telescope or from the land based telescopes in Hawaii, indicate the age at about 15 billion years.

Let me clarify right at the start. The world may be only some 6000 years old. God could have put the fossils in the ground and juggled the light arriving from distant galaxies to make the world appear to be billions of years old. There is absolutely no way to disprove this claim. God being infinite could have made the world that way. There is another possible approach that also agrees with the ancient commentators' description of God and nature. The world may be young and old simultaneously. In the following I consider this latter option.

In trying to resolve this apparent conflict, it's interesting to look historically at trends in knowledge, because absolute proofs are not forthcoming. But what is available is to look at how science has changed its picture of the world, relative to the unchanging picture of the Torah. (I refuse to use modern Biblical commentary because it already knows modern science, and is always influenced by that knowledge. The trend becomes to bend the Bible to match the science.)

So the only data I use as far as Biblical commentary goes is ancient commentary. That means the text of the Bible itself (3300 years ago), the translation of the Torah into Aramaic by Onkelos (100 CE), the Talmud (redacted about the year 500 CE), and the three major Torah commentators. There are many, many commentators, but at the top of the mountain there are three, accepted by all: Rashi (11th century France), who brings the straight understanding of the text, Maimonides (12th century Egypt), who handles the philosophical concepts, and then Nachmanides (13th century Spain), the earliest of the Kabbalists.

This ancient commentary was finalized long before Hubbell was a gleam in his great-grandparent's eye. So there's no possibility of Hubbell or any other modern scientific data influencing these concepts.

A universe with a beginning.

In 1959, a survey was taken of leading American scientists. Among the many questions asked was, "What is your concept of the age of the universe?" Now, in 1959, astronomy was popular, but cosmology -- the deep physics of understanding the universe -- was just developing. The response to that survey was recently republished in Scientific American -- the most widely read science journal in the world. Two-thirds of the scientists gave the same answer: "Beginning? There was no beginning. Aristotle and Plato taught us 2400 years ago that the universe is eternal. Oh, we know the Bible says 'In the beginning.' That's a nice story, but we sophisticates know better. There was no beginning."


After 3000 years of arguing, science has come to agree with the Torah.

That was 1959. In 1965, Penzias and Wilson discovered the echo of the Big Bang in the black of the sky at night, and the world paradigm changed from a universe that was eternal to a universe that had a beginning. After 3000 years of arguing, science has come to agree with the Torah.

It all starts from Rosh Hashana.

How long ago did the "beginning" occur? Was it, as the Bible might imply, 5700-plus years, or was it the 15 billions of years that's accepted by the scientific community?

The first thing we have to understand is the origin of the Biblical calendar. The Jewish year is figured by adding up the generations since Adam. Additionally, there are six days leading up to the creation to Adam. These six days are significant as well.

Now where do we make the zero point? On Rosh Hashana, the Jewish New Year, upon blowing the shofar, the following sentence is said: "Hayom Harat Olam -- today is the birthday of the world."

This verse might imply that Rosh Hashana commemorates the creation of the universe. But it doesn't. Rosh Hashana commemorate the creation of the Neshama, the soul of human life. We start counting our 5700-plus years from the creation of the soul of Adam.

We have a clock that begins with Adam, and the six days are separate from this clock. The Bible has two clocks.

That might seem like a modern rationalization, if it were not for the fact that Talmudic commentaries 1500 years ago, brings this information. In the Midrash (Vayikra Rabba 29:1), an expansion of the Talmud, all the Sages agree that Rosh Hashana commemorates the soul of Adam, and that the Six Days of Genesis are separate.

Why were the Six Days taken out of the calendar? Because time is described differently in those Six Days of Genesis. "There was evening and morning" is an exotic, bizarre, unusual way of describing time.

Once you come from Adam, the flow of time is totally in human terms. Adam and Eve live 130 years before having children! Seth lives 105 years before having children, etc. From Adam forward, the flow of time is totally human in concept. But prior to that time, it's an abstract concept: "Evening and morning." It's as if you're looking down on events from a viewpoint that is not intimately related to them.

Looking deeper into the text.

In trying to understand the flow of time here, you have to remember that the entire Six Days is described in 31 sentences. The Six Days of Genesis, which have given people so many headaches in trying to understand science vis-a-vis the Bible, are confined to 31 sentences! At MIT, in the Hayden library, we had about 50,000 books that deal with the development of the universe: cosmology, chemistry, thermodynamics, paleontology, archaeology, the high-energy physics of creation. At Harvard, at the Weidner library, they probably have 200,000 books on these same topics. The Bible gives us 31 sentences. Don't expect that by a simple reading of those sentences you'll know every detail that is held within the text. It's obvious that we have to dig deeper to get the information out.

The idea of having to dig deeper is not a rationalization. The Talmud (Chagiga, ch. 2) tells us that from the opening sentence of the Bible, through the beginning of Chapter Two, the entire text is given in parable form, a poem with a text and a subtext. Now, again, put yourself into the mindset of 1500 years ago, the time of the Talmud. Why would the Talmud think it was parable? You think that 1500 years ago they thought that God couldn't make it all in 6 days? It was a problem for them? We have a problem today with cosmology and scientific data. But 1500 years ago, what's the problem with 6 days for an infinitely powerful God? No problem.

So when the Sages excluded these six days from the calendar, and said that the entire text is parable, it wasn't because they were trying to apologize away what they'd seen in the local museum. There was no local museum. The fact is that a close reading of the text makes it clear that there's information hidden and folded into layers below the surface.

The idea of looking for a deeper meaning in Torah is no different than looking for deeper meaning in science. Just as we look for the deeper readings in science to learn the working of nature, so too we need to look for the deeper readings in Torah. King Solomon in Proverbs 25:11 alluded to this. "A word well spoken is like apples of Gold in a silver dish." Maimonides in The Guide for the Perplexed interprets this proverb: The silver dish is the literal text of the Torah, as seen from a distance. The apples of gold are the secrets held within the silver dish of the Torah Text. Thousands of years ago we learned that there are subtleties in the Text that expand the meaning way beyond its simple reading. It's those subtleties I want to see.

Natural history and human history.

There are early Jewish sources that tell us that the Bible's calendar is in two-parts (even predating Leviticus Rabba which goes back almost 1500 years and says it explicitly). In the closing speech that Moses makes to the people, he says if you want to see the fingerprint of God in the universe, "consider the days of old, the years of the many generations" (Deut. 32:7) Nachmanides, in the name of Kabbalah, says, "Why does Moses break the calendar into two parts -- 'The days of old, and the years of the many generations?' Because, 'Consider the days of old' is the Six Days of Genesis. 'The years of the many generations' is all the time from Adam forward."

Moses says you can see God's fingerprint on the universe in one of two ways. Look at the phenomenon of the Six Days, and the development of life in the universe which is mind-boggling. Or if that doesn't impress you, then just consider society from Adam forward -- the phenomenon of human history. Either way, you will find the imprint of God.

I recently met in Jerusalem with Professor Leon Lederman, Nobel Prize winning physicist. We were talking science, and as the conversation went on, I said, "What about spirituality, Leon?" And he said to me, "Schroeder, I'll talk science with you, but as far as spirituality, speak to the people across the street, the theologians." But then he continued, and he said, "But I do find something spooky about the people of Israel coming back to the Land of Israel."

Interesting. The first part of Moses' statement, "Consider the days of old" - about the Six Days of Genesis - that didn't impress Prof. Lederman. But the "Years of the many generations" - human history - that impressed him. Prof. Lederman found nothing spooky about the Eskimos eating fish at the Arctic circle. And he found nothing spooky about Greeks eating Musika in Athens. But he finds something real spooky about Jews eating falafel on Jaffa Street. Because it shouldn't have happened. It doesn't make sense historically that the Jews would come back to the Land of Israel. Yet that's what happened.

And that's one of the functions of the Jewish People in the world. To act as a demonstration. We just want people in the world to understand that there is some monkey business going on with history that makes it not all just random. That there's some direction to the flow of history. And the world has seen it through us. It's not by chance that Israel is on the front page of the New York Times more than anyone else.

What is a "day?"

Let's jump back to the Six Days of Genesis. First of all, we now know that when the Biblical calendar says 5700-plus years, we must add to that "plus six days."

A few years ago, I acquired a dinosaur fossil that was dated (by two radioactive decay chains) as 150 million years old. My 7-year-old daughter says, "Abba! Dinosaurs? How can there be dinosaurs 150 million years ago, when my Bible teacher says the world isn't even 6000 years old?" So I told her to look in Psalms 90:4. There, you'll find something quite amazing. King David says, "One thousand years in Your (God's) sight are like a day that passes, a watch in the night." Perhaps time is different from the perspective of King David, than it is from the perspective of the Creator. Perhaps time is different.

The Talmud (Chagiga, ch. 2), in trying to understand the subtleties of Torah, analyzes the word "choshech." When the word "choshech" appears in Genesis 1:2, the Talmud explains that it means black fire, black energy, a kind of energy that is so powerful you can't even see it. Two verses later, in Genesis 1:4, the Talmud explains that the same word -- "choshech" -- means darkness, i.e. the absence of light.

Other words as well are not to be understood by their common definitions. For example, "mayim" typically means water. But Maimonides says that in the original statements of creation, the word "mayim" may also mean the building blocks of the universe.

Another example is Genesis 1:5, which says, "There is evening and morning, Day One." That is the first time that a day is quantified: evening and morning. Nachmanides discusses the meaning of evening and morning. Does it mean sunset and sunrise? It would certainly seem to.

But Nachmanides points out a problem with that. The text says "there was evening and morning Day One... evening and morning a second day... evening and morning a third day." Then on the fourth day, the sun is mentioned. Nachmanides says that any intelligent reader can see an obvious problem. How do we have a concept of evening and morning for the first three days if the sun is only mentioned on Day Four? There is a purpose for the sun appearing only on Day Four, so that as time goes by and people understand more about the universe, you can dig deeper into the text.

Nachmanides says the text uses the words "Vayehi Erev" -- but it doesn't mean "there was evening." He explains that the Hebrew letters Ayin, Resh, Bet -- the root of "erev" -- is chaos. Mixture, disorder. That's why evening is called "erev", because when the sun goes down, vision becomes blurry. The literal meaning is "there was disorder." The Torah's word for "morning" -- "boker" -- is the absolute opposite. When the sun rises, the world becomes "bikoret", orderly, able to be discerned. That's why the sun needn't be mentioned until Day Four. Because from erev to boker is a flow from disorder to order, from chaos to cosmos. That's something any scientist will testify never happens in an unguided system. Order never arises from disorder spontaneously and remains orderly. Order always degrades to chaos unless the environment recognizes the order and locks it in to preserve it. There must be a guide to the system. That's an unequivocal statement.

The Torah wants us to be amazed by this flow, starting from a chaotic plasma and ending up with a symphony of life. Day-by-day the world progresses to higher and higher levels. Order out of disorder. It's pure thermodynamics. And it's stated in terminology of 3000 years ago.

The creation of time.

Each day of creation is numbered. Yet there is discontinuity in the way the days are numbered. The verse says: "There is evening and morning, Day One." But the second day doesn't say "evening and morning, Day Two." Rather, it says "evening and morning, a second day." And the Torah continues with this pattern: "Evening and morning, a third day... a fourth day... a fifth day... the sixth day." Only on the first day does the text use a different form: not "first day," but "Day One" ("Yom Echad"). Many English translations make the mistake of writing "a first day." That's because editors want things to be nice and consistent. But they throw out the cosmic message in the text! Because there is a qualitative difference, as Nachmanides says, between "one" and "first." One is absolute; first is comparative.

Nachmanides explains that on Day One, time was created. That's a phenomenal insight. Time was created. You can't grab time. You don't even see it. You can see space, you can see matter, you can feel energy, you can see light energy. I understand a creation there. But the creation of time? Eight hundred years ago, Nachmanides attained this insight from the Torah's use of the phrase, "Day One." And that's exactly what Einstein taught us in the Laws of Relativity: that there was a creation, not just of space and matter, but of time itself.

Einstein's Law of Relativity.

Looking back in time, a scientist will view the universe as being 15 billion years old. But what is the Bible's view of time? Maybe it sees time differently. And that makes a big difference. Albert Einstein taught us that Big Bang cosmology brings not just space and matter into existence, but that time is part of the nitty gritty. Time is a dimension. Time is affected by your view of time. How you see time depends on where you're viewing it. A minute on the moon goes faster than a minute on the Earth. A minute on the sun goes slower. Time on the sun is actually stretched out so that if you could put a clock on the sun, it would tick more slowly. It's a small difference, but it's measurable and measured.


The flow of time varies one location to another location. Hence the term: the law of relativity.

If you could ripen oranges on the Sun, they would take longer to ripen. Why? Because time goes more slowly. Would you feel it going more slowly? No, because your biology would be part of the system. If you were living on the Sun, your heart would beat more slowly. Wherever you are, your biology is in synch with the local time. And a minute or an hour where ever you are is exactly a minute or an hour.

If you could look from one system to another, you would see time very differently. Because depending on factors like gravity and velocity, you will perceive time in a way that is very different. The flow of time varies one location to another location. Hence the term: the law of relativity.

Here's an example: One evening we were sitting around the dinner table, and my 11-year-old daughter asked, "How you could have dinosaurs? How you could have billions of years scientifically - and thousands of years Biblically at the same time? So I told her to imagine a planet where time is so stretched out that while we live out two years on Earth, only three minutes will go by on that planet. Now, those places actually exist, they are observed. It would be hard to live there with their conditions, and you couldn't get to them either, but in mental experiments you can do it. Two years are going to go by on Earth, three minutes are going to go by on the planet. So my daughter says, "Great! Send me to the planet. I'll spend three minutes there. I'll do two years worth of homework. I'll come back home in three minutes, and no more homework for two years."

Nice try. Assuming she was age 11 when she left, and her friends were 11. She spends three minutes on the planet and then comes home. (The travel time takes no time.) How old is she when she gets back? Eleven years and 3 minutes. And her friends are 13. Because she lived out 3 minutes while we lived out 2 years. Her friends aged from 11 years to 13 years, while she's 11 years and 3 minutes.

Had she looked down on Earth from that planet, her perception of Earth time would be that everybody was moving very quickly because in one of her minutes, hundreds of thousands of our minutes would pass. Whereas if we looked up, she'd be moving very slowly.

But which is correct? Is it three years? Or three minutes? The answer is both. They're both happening at the same time. That's the legacy of Albert Einstein. It so happens there literally billions of locations in the universe, where if you could put a clock at that location, it would tick so slowly, that from our perspective (if we could last that long) 15 billion years would go by... but the clock at that remote location would tick out six days.

Time travel and the Big Bang.

But how does this help to explain the Bible? Because anyway the Talmud and Rashi and Nahmanides (that is the kabala) all say that Six Days of Genesis were six regular 24-hour periods not longer than our work week!

Let's look a bit deeper. The classical Jewish sources say that before the beginning, we don't really know what there is. We can't tell what predates the universe. The Midrash asks the question: Why does the Bible begin with the letter Beit? Because Beit (which is written like a backwards C) is closed in all directions and only open in the forward direction. Hence we can't know what comes before -- only after. The first letter is a Beit - closed in all directions and only open in the forward direction.

Nachmanides expands the statement. He says that although the days are 24 hours each, they contain "kol yemot ha-olam" -- all the ages and all the secrets of the world.

Nachmanides says that before the universe, there was nothing... but then suddenly the entire creation appeared as a minuscule speck. He gives a dimension for the speck: something very tiny like the size of a grain of mustard. And he says that is the only physical creation. There was no other physical creation; all other creations were spiritual. The Nefesh (the soul of animal life) and the Neshama (the soul of human life) are spiritual creations. There's only one physical creation, and that creation was a tiny speck. The speck is all there was. Anything else was God. In that speck was all the raw material that would be used for making everything else. Nachmanides describes the substance as "dak me'od, ein bo mamash" -- very thin, no substance to it. And as this speck expanded out, this substance -- so thin that it has no essence -- turned into matter as we know it.

Nachmanides further writes: "Misheyesh, yitfos bo zman" -- from the moment that matter formed from this substance-less substance, time grabs hold. Not "begins." Time is created at the beginning. But time "grabs hold." When matter condenses, congeals, coalesces, out of this substance so thin it has no essence -- that's when the Biblical clock of the six days starts.

Science has shown that there's only one "substance-less substance" that can change into matter. And that's energy. Einstein's famous equation, E=MC2, tells us that energy can change into matter. And once it changes into matter, time grabs hold.

Nachmanides has made a phenomenal statement. I don't know if he knew the Laws of Relativity. But we know them now. We know that energy -- light beams, radio waves, gamma rays, x-rays -- all travel at the speed of light, 300 million meters per second. At the speed of light, time does not pass. The universe was aging, but time only grabs hold when matter is present. This moment of time before the clock begins for the Bible, lasted about 1/100,000 of a second. A miniscule time. But in that time, the universe expanded from a tiny speck, to about the size of the Solar System. From that moment on we have matter, and time flows forward. The Biblical clock begins here.

Now the fact that the Bible tells us there is "evening and morning Day One" (and not "a first day") comes to teach us time from a Biblical perspective. Einstein proved that time varies from place to place in the universe, and that time varies from perspective to perspective in the universe. The Bible says there is "evening and morning Day One".

Now if the Torah were seeing time from the days of Moses and Mount Sinai -- long after Adam -- the text would not have written Day One. Because by Sinai, hundreds of thousands of days already passed. There was a lot of time with which to compare Day One. Torah would have said "A First Day." By the second day of Genesis, the Bible says "a second day," because there was already the First Day with which to compare it. You could say on the second day, "what happened on the first day." But as Nahmanides pointed out, you could not say on the first day, "what happened on the first day" because "first" implies comparison -- an existing series. And there was no existing series. Day One was all there was.

Even if the Torah was seeing time from Adam, the text would have said "a first day", because by its own statement there were six days. The Torah says "Day One" because the Torah is looking forward from the beginning. And it says, How old is the universe? Six Days. We'll just take time up until Adam. Six Days. We look back in time, and say the universe is approximately 15 billion years old. But every scientist knows, that when we say the universe is 15 billion years old, there's another half of the sentence that we never say. The other half of the sentence is: The universe is 15 billion years old as seen from the time-space coordinates that we exist in on earth. That's Einstein's view of relativity. But what would those billions of years be as perceived from near the beginning looking forward?

The key is that the Torah looks forward in time, from very different time-space coordinates, when the universe was small. But since then, the universe has expanded out. Space stretches, and that stretching of space totally changes the perception of time.

Imagine in your mind going back billions of years ago to the beginning of time. Now pretend way back at the beginning of time, when time grabs hold, there's an intelligent community. (It's totally fictitious.) Imagine that the intelligent community has a laser, and it's going to shoot out a blast of light, and every second it's going to pulse. Every second --- pulse. Pulse. Pulse. It shoots the light out, and then billions of years later, way far down the time line, we here on Earth have a big satellite dish, and we receive that pulse of light. And on that pulse of light is imprinted (printing information on light is called fiber optics - sending information by light), "I'm sending you a pulse every second." And then a second goes by and the next pulse is sent.

Light travels 300 million meters per second. So the two light pulses are separated by 300 million meters at the beginning. Now they travel through space for billions of years, and they're going to reach the Earth billions of years later. But wait a minute. Is the universe static? No. The universe is expanding. That's the cosmology of the universe. And that does not mean it's expanding into an empty space outside the universe. There's only the universe. There is no space outside the universe. The universe expands by its own space stretching. So as these pulses go through billions of years of traveling, the universe and space are stretching. As space is stretching, what's happening to these pulses? The space between them is also stretching. So the pulses really get further and further apart.

Billions of years later, when the first pulse arrives, we say, "Wow - a pulse!" And written on it is "I'm sending you a pulse every second." You call all your friends, and you wait for the next pulse to arrive. Does it arrive another second later? No! A year later? Maybe not. Maybe billions of years later. 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. That's standard astronomy.

15 billion or six days?

Today, we look back in time. We see 15 billion years. Looking forward from when the universe is very small -- billions of times smaller -- the Torah says six days. They both may be correct.

What's exciting about the last few years in cosmology is we now have quantified the data to know the relationship of the "view of time" from the beginning, relative to the "view of time" today. It's not science fiction any longer. Any one of a dozen physics text books all bring the same number. The general relationship between time near the beginning when stable matter formed from the light (the energy, the electromagnetic radiation) of the creation) and time today is a million million, that is a trillion fold extension. That's a 1 with 12 zeros after it. It is a unit-less ratio. So when a view from the beginning looking forward says "I'm sending you a pulse every second," would we see it every second? No. We'd see it every million million seconds. Because that's the stretching effect of the expansion of the universe. In astronomy, the term is "red shift." Red shift in observed astronomical data is standard.

The Torah doesn't say every second, does it? It says Six Days. How would we see those six days? If the Torah says we're sending information for six days, would we receive that information as six days? No. We would receive that information as six million million days. Because the Torah's perspective is from the beginning looking forward.

Six million million days is a very interesting number. What would that be in years? Divide by 365 and it comes out to be 16 billion years. Essentially the estimate of the age of the universe. Not a bad guess for 3300 years ago.

The way these two figures match up is extraordinary. I'm not speaking as a theologian; I'm making a scientific claim. I didn't pull these numbers out of hat. That's why I led up to the explanation very slowly, so you can follow it step-by-step.

Now we can go one step further. Let's look at the development of time, day-by-day, based on the expansion factor. Every time the universe doubles, the perception of time is cut in half. Now when the universe was small, it was doubling very rapidly. But as the universe gets bigger, the doubling time gets longer. This rate of expansion is quoted in "The Principles of Physical Cosmology," a textbook that is used literally around the world.

(In case you want to know, this exponential rate of expansion has a specific number averaged at 10 to the 12th power. That is in fact the temperature of quark confinement, when matter freezes out of the energy: 10.9 times 10 to the 12th power Kelvin degrees divided by (or the ratio to) the temperature of the universe today, 2.73 degrees. That's the initial ratio which changes exponentially as the universe expands.)

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?

But there's more. The Bible goes out on a limb and tells you what happened on each of those days. Now you can take cosmology, paleontology, archaeology, and look at the history of the world, and see whether or not they match up day-by-day. And I'll give you a hint. They match up close enough to send chills up your spine.

Published: Sunday, January 30, 2005

Gerald Schroeder earned his BSc, MSc and PhD at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He is the author of GENESIS AND THE BIG BANG, the discovery of harmony between modern science and the Bible , published by Bantam Doubleday; now in seven languages; and THE SCIENCE OF GOD, published by Free Press of Simon & Schuster, and THE HIDDEN FACE OF GOD, also published by Free Press of Simon & Schuster. He teaches at Aish HaTorah College of Jewish Studies.
--------------------------

What do you think? My comment is: BRAVO! Excellent explanation!

warren.
 

imaginative

keep your eye on the ball
Bump

Great Read.

I had to bookmark that also

Does he theorize that man was around prior to Neshama, the soul of human life.?

Im going to read that again.
 

lynnie

Membership Revoked
I think it is just easier to accept Barry Setterfield's research on the decrease of the speed of light and young earth origins......but thanks anyway.....
 

Warren Bone

Membership Revoked
I don't think he discusses that; at least not in this article.

I might just order one or more of his books.

warren.
 

rhino8

Membership Revoked
Interesting Mental Excercise

This is nothing but Mental Masterbation

Total Crap.

Relativity has nothing to do with the word of GOD

6 Days meant 6 days (24 hour periods).
 

American Rage

Inactive
rhino8 said:
This is nothing but Mental Masterbation

Total Crap.

Relativity has nothing to do with the word of GOD

6 Days meant 6 days (24 hour periods).

Yeah, and we all know it too b/c God said it in English!;)


Rage
 

Libertarian

Deceased
I recall that Steve Martin movie (The Jerk IIRC) as he explains to Bernadette Peters how one hour felt like a day and 23 minutes felt like seven hours and a week felt like two and a half months and so on. It was quite funny.

Rhino, you know that the earth is rotating at a slower rate today than it did in the past, right? Perhaps God's workday was only 18 hours and 26 minutes long?
 

Christian for Israel

Knight of Jerusalem
lynnie said:
I think it is just easier to accept Barry Setterfield's research on the decrease of the speed of light and young earth origins......but thanks anyway.....
i agree with you sis, the changes in the speed of light (noted recently by scientists) explains this discrepency in a better way.
 

Warren Bone

Membership Revoked
Maybe I should request this be moved to Religion forum?

Folks there might have some thoughts on the subject.

warren.
 

Aardaerimus

Anunnaku
I agree

mental masturbation... There are a lot of problems with gap theories. If we're going to dumb down God then why bother believing the bible at all? It is better to believe in Cosmic Evolution than to marry two extremely opposing views.

1.) God creates plants on the 3rd day then on the 4th day (1 billion years later) creates the sun... Any 6th grader should be able to teach you about photosynthesis, and a host of problems with having plants alive in the darkness of night on a completely frozen planet.

2.) The bible is like an amazingly crafted computer program; Supernatural some would venture to say. If you corrupt even a small part of it you will see the results of your corruption further down the chain and the whole program becomes unreliable. For example, the very same book (Genesis, in which we have corrupted the length of a day to = 1 billion years) it is stated that Adam lived 930 years. So we take (930years * 365days per year) * 1,000,000,000years per "day" then Adam lived 341275000000000 years. So we end up having to throw out another piece of the bible to adopt our new code. Then we also give room for other gap theorists who propose that there were people and civilizations before Adam. This places death before sin and thus alters the code even further down the line in the new testament where it tells us that because of the <b>first</b> man (Adam) we all die. It generates numerous other problems.

And this perception is even more retarded yet: "God could have put the fossils in the ground". I pity any ignorant soul that thinks that way. Creationists have no fear of fossils. We understand as well as anyone else how a fossil is formed. The only thing we dissagree on is how long it takes to make one, and where they all came from.

As far as starlight and time goes, I think the best theory I've heard yet is by Dr Russel Humphreys a PHd physicist. I think the author is deliberately using the "God put fossiles in the earth" to dumb down the idea of God creating "mature" light (meaning already reaching the earth at the time of creation). I should briefly note that this is not so absurd by way of a similar scripture stating directly that the trees were created fully mature and bearing fruit (it takes most trees years to bear fruit, meaning that God created them at full maturity):

Gen 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, [and] the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed [is] in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
Gen 1:12 <b>And the earth brought forth grass, [and] herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit</b>, whose seed [was] in itself, after his kind: and God saw that [it was] good.

If you accept this, then why is it difficult to accept the maturity of light? Also, against placing fossils in the ground, that would place death again before sin which alters the face of scripture. God didn't kill anything until after Adam and Eve sinned.

Now back to Dr Russel Humphrey's theory for those who simply cannot buy into "mature light" at creation:
I dunno if I can do it justice, but in a nutshell he states something that science fairly recently stumbled upon. It has nothing to do with the speed of light, rather it has everything to do with time. This was touched on slightly in this article though in a different way I think. The flow of time, while continuous is affected by massive bodies and gravitational sources in space. The more gravity and density the slower the time. This was stumbled upon when one atomic clock was placed in denver and one in Grenwich (?) at different elevations. The one at lower elevation (closer to earth's center) was slower (by a scarecly noticeable amount in all fairness) and the one at higher elevation was faster. Space is filled with bodies and "wells" of gravity and also areas that have little or no gravitational influence at all. If time can be affected even minutely at but a few thousand feets difference on a relatively small celestial body, imagine the difference in areas with little or no gravitational influence. Space is like a trampoline, and celestial bodies are like bowling balls sitting upon it literally bending space and time. So even if light is traveling at it's near constant speed (around 186,000mps) , it's actual "movement" will be adjusted faster/slower by the time in the area that it currently occupies. It has nothign to do with speed but everything to do with time. If time in deep space unhindered by gravity is screaming fast in comparrison to earth time (which would stand as the birthspot of all things) then even if earth is 6,000 years old parts of the universe (with the least mass) would be "far older" by earth time, yet still the same age as the earth in their own time.

I'm sure I trashed his theory but I gave it a go. Science still knows very little about space, time, and light. There are a lot of assumptions made and believed in still but hard facts are still in the learning.

I know it seems like a copout, but I personally believe that God created all things at full maturity (this does not include fossils which require death). I believe that fossiles are the direct result of a global flood about 4000 years ago (many interresting coincidences surrounding that too, such as the oldest living specimens we can observe such as redwoods and the ancient bristlecone pine are pretty much right near 4000 years old). Rapid burial explains perfectly many polystrata fossiles (objects that span multiple layers of strata that are supposed to be of periods that are millions of years apart. Delicate invertabrates that cannot lie around long enough for them to be both buried and buried with enough speed and pressure to preserve them. Not even the more durable structures such as massive dinosaur bones would last more than a few years, especially intact. I've seen deer carcases vanish in days by scavengers. Sun bleached bones will even deteriorate in the open. Yet we still find perfectly preserved animals many with feathers, skin, tentacles and other soft body impressions that seemed impervious to weathering, bacterial and chemical disintegration, and scavengers... Go figure. I've seen fossilized fish in the middle of giving birth. I've seen birds, feathers and all (which I promise will not last long enough to be buried by slow natural processes). As difficult as it would be to keep a creature in tact for fossilization we should by all probablility find VERY FEW fossiles, yet we find millions even billions. And they're everywhere. I had a goldfish once that died. He lay about for a shortwhile and as a kid I was curious how fast he would decompose. In about 2 weeks he was unmolested by scavengers and his flesh was rotted off. In about 3 weeks the intact little skeleton began to fall apart. A few days later the fragments were nowhere to be found. Yet I've seen thousands of tiny softbodied fish perfectly preserved fins scales and all. Why? Because they where caught by surprise by massive amounts of sediments washing overthem. Capturing them still swimming like mad to get away. What would cause an insane amount of sediment suddenly, and enough pressure to compact it? A great deal of water sweeping across fertile land. Even in our most nasty silt dumping deltas today you'll not find millions of preserved fish carcasses beneath the mud. we even find fossiles of creature that shouldn't have dwelled in places of high sediment. It was not slow.

At any rate. These people are foolish to try to compromise scripture to marry two incompatible beliefs. If you want to believe the world is 4.5 billion years old then do so, but don't try to make God stupid in your quest for equalibrium.
 

fairbanksb

Freedom Isn't Free
The comments are useful. It takes these people many years of research to come up with these theories. I wish people would allow a little time to read and mull around these articles before totally discounting them as crap or mental maturbation.

Total crap. 6 days means 6 24hr days. And yet the bible says

One day with the Lord is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

Aardaerimus,
I read your very first comment and said, duh!!!, of course. How can plants live with out the sun. But then GOD said let there be light and he divided the light from the darkness. The light he called Day and the darkness night. And evening and morning were the First day. So I'm not saying your wrong, I just need to study some more. What light did he create on day 1 if the sun, moon and stars weren't created until day 4.

CFI.
I haven't read Sutterfield but I have listened to the theory as put forth by Lambert Dolphin. That also makes alot of sense.

What is encouraging to me is that so many scientists are at least reaching out to reconcile the Biblical account. How many other theories are out there. I like hearing them.
 

fruit loop

Inactive
I've always thought time was measured differently.

A day to God may be ten thousand years. I think God created evolution...who else would have the patience, the mastery, to create something like Carlsbad Caverns, which took millennia to form? Only He could see the big picture for that long.

The long ages of people in the Bible.....maybe it should be 900 months or something instead of 900 years. Often in older times, birthdays weren't observed as such....it was "So and so of fifteen summers." 900 years divided by 12 months would actually be age 75 or so. Makes sense, doesn't it? We know languages have changed and evolved. Maybe that 's a mistranslation, and living 75 years in a time when most people died around 40 or so WOULD be an achievement.

Dinosaurs? God decided to do something different. So he caused a cataclysm and erased and started over. Why not? He did it with Noah and the flood, right?

Maybe not true, but it's an explanation of sorts
 

Christian for Israel

Knight of Jerusalem
aard, i think you and i are talking about the same thing. you say gravity caused variations in time, i say variations in the speed of light. the speed of light may not have a direct bearing on time, but it is the basis for our MEASUREMENT of time, therefore your theory may be based on a form of measurement that is thought to be constant but in fact changes due to gravitic influence. that would also explain the long lifespans btw. if light were traveling faster then what was really hundreds of years passing would be perceived as only weeks or months.

as to the 'day is as a thousand years', i believe that relates to the idea that creation took 6 days, therefore duration of the earth will be 6000 years. God rested on the seventh day which means we will rest a thousand years (millenium). then the old earth will pass away and a new eternal earth will appear.
 

Aardaerimus

Anunnaku
Frootloop

The long ages of people in the Bible.....maybe it should be 900 months or something instead of 900 years. Often in older times, birthdays weren't observed as such....it was "So and so of fifteen summers." 900 years divided by 12 months would actually be age 75 or so. Makes sense, doesn't it? We know languages have changed and evolved. Maybe that 's a mistranslation, and living 75 years in a time when most people died around 40 or so WOULD be an achievement.

Well, Fruitloop, that still leaves Adam living (75years * 365days) * 1,000,000,000 ypd = 27375000000000 years. Unless you were going on your own tangent. If you were going a different direction, then there's an easy way to explain the long lives before the flood, and more evidence of such. Their are a host of things that tear down the human body today. A severely dammaged genetic code, Ultra Violate Light, a food source that is lacking in sufficient nutrients, pollution, lack of oxygen, etc, to name a few. Our cells do not keep up with the dammage we sustain daily. Our bodies mature much too quickly and we cease to produce chemicals vital to fight the battle against nature. We age and we die.

Now, if our genetic code was pure and flawless (Adam & Eve), and the genetic code for our food source was equally flawless, and the environment was warm pure and had greater amounts of Oxygen (something that has been proven by various discoveries, including amber with trapped air bubbles containing 50% more oxygen than our present atmosphere) then why couldn't we expect a much much longer lifespan as our bodies would heal much more rapidly? This is evident in dinosaurs and other creatures of the fossile record. Man wasn't the only thing living for a very long time. Reptiles grow their whole lives so if they lived a long time we should see evidence of Massive creatures (some which could not have survived in todays environment due to very small nostrils and lungs) in the "fossil record". The ancient earth was covered with many massive beasts such as the apatasaurs and even critters that we have still today such as the dragon fly have appeared with upwards of 2 foot wing spans in fossils. Today you'll notice very very few "behemoth" creatures. The largest we have are whales and elephants, most still smaller than their ancient ancestors. Less oxygen, more UV light, and a weaker magnetic field allowing in more cosmic radiation, etc are all recipies for genetic mutation, smaller weaker creatures, and quicker death.

Now, another thing to look at is the biblical record. IF you were correct then we should see an abrupt drop in human ages at a random point in the old testmant, when they finally fixed their "birthday system". But we don't. Rather we see a steady decline in age directly following the biggest catastophe the world has ever seen, the flood. We can watch them taper steadily from 900 to 600 to 400 to 200 to 120 right on down to modern life spans. The earth was shattered and continents were ripped apart, there was a flip in the magnetic field, and earth was plunged into an ice age. The mid Atlantic ridge leaves the best artifact of that disaster. It's a giant scar. There is nowhere NEAR the plant life today that existed before that disaster. Far less oxygen is produced, and far less earthwarming greenhouse gasses like CO2. Earth is still colder than it used to be and far more hostile to life. We have precious little protection from the sun. So we age and die more quickly and try to sustain ourselves with vitamin supplements and chemical balancers. It's only getting worse as time tears it all down.

I'm sorry I had to leave out a great deal of detail, but in a nutshell it's easy to see but noone likes to be called a fool or scientifically challenged so they'll try to marry two opposing religions to find a happy watered down medium that is neither scientifically sound, nor biblically sound.
 

BoneDaddy

Membership Revoked
I posted some time ago a comment on another board concerning the same subject.....

What if god were traveling at the speed of light while forming the universe?
And yet again, the question comes up. The articles hypothesis is plausible, and of course "relative."

The unknown is the unknown.
 

alchemike

Veteran Member
good read and interesting information but as always, just theory...

no one has the answers...

anyway, where is it writ large that the human monkey should be able to provide a full and complete accounting of the universe and all it's machinations???

that is simply hubris...

a human being trying to teach another human being about transcendence and god and all of this sort of thing is about the same as a grain of sand trying to explain the same to another grain of sand...

fun to speculate...but ridiculous to believe...

o)<

mike
 

Aardaerimus

Anunnaku
alchemike

fun to speculate...but ridiculous to believe...

Those of us with hope get excited about each and every new discovery that brings us one step closer to the inevitable knowledge of the unseen.
 

BoneDaddy

Membership Revoked
Aardaerimus said:
Those of us with hope get excited about each and every new discovery that brings us one step closer to the inevitable knowledge of the unseen.

Such as a unified field theory.
 

Aardaerimus

Anunnaku
BoneDaddy

Exactly, if that's what your hope lies in. Whatever floats your boat. ;)


Edit to add:

Alchemike:

no one has the answers...

I think that statement is just about as presumptuous as the person who says they have all the answers ;)
 

Delta

Has No Life - Lives on TB
I've read at least one of this fellow's books. Very interesting. There might be more on TB2K with a search on his name.

This guy explains the difference between several billion years and six days in terms of the relative motion of one's point of view (to grossly simplify the matter). Another way to do it is to consider the point of view of God vs. the angels actually doing the work. To the angels moving the rocks, hauling the water, and lighting the stars, it seemed like six million years. To God, having to meet the deadlines with permits and plans, and pay the bill, it seemed like only six days.
 

bigwavedave

Deceased
To the angels moving the rocks, hauling the water, and lighting the stars, it seemed like six million years. To God, having to meet the deadlines with permits and plans, and pay the bill, it seemed like only six days.

on time and under budget. no angels were harmed in the making of this universe.
 
Top