The Science of God

Dr Gerald Schroeder's unique insight into the creation week and the question of creation vs evolution.
Is it 6 days or 15-16 billion years?

Reproduced for educational purposes under the fair use clause.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• The
• Science
• of
• God
• evolution
• creation
• genesis
• big
• bang
• Creationism
• Debate
• Richard
• Dawkins
• Darwin
• Design
• Genesis Creation Narrative
• Intelligent
• Truth
• Theory
• Proof
• Logic
• Belief
• Evidence
• Reason
• Earth
• Morality
• Theism
• Challenge
• Kent
• Hovind
• Delusion
• Theist
• Response
• Universe
• Selection
• Creationist
• Biology
• Rational
• Harris
• Holy
• Christopher
• Natural
• Exist
• Experience
• Ethics
• Origin
• Existence
• Spirit
• Myth
• On The Origin Of Species
• Human
• Does
• Morals
• Project
• proudpatriotpapa
• Theamazingatheist
• History

[bryangrossman]

That is rationalizing … He would have never come up with these ideas if he weren't influenced by modern knowledge... No one from the past, as much as he tries to “rationalize” what he is reading says the universe is 15 million years old. He is trying to stretch the Torah and the bible to fit modern interpretation of the age of the universe...

[ProudPatriotPapa]

@bryangrossman irregardless the pieces fit the scriptures description of creation.

[bryangrossman]

@ProudPatriotPapa I propose the only reason you and he see it that way is because you are "bending" the words to have this meaning. These words didn't have this meaning until science discovered it and this is simply a way of making the words relevant to the science.... In a hundred years when more detailed theories are formed in science... I am sure there will be people who will further bend it's words again to make it fit. If you torture the bible long enough you can make it say anything.

[ProudPatriotPapa]

@bryangrossman The same can be said of science

[bryangrossman]

@ProudPatriotPapa How so?  Religion is static.. that is the words in the bible and related document are not changing. So to gleam new meaning from them you have to, "reinvent" what the words mean. For example, for a very long time many people thought the world was flat... and that the earth was "fixed in the heavens" and "as un-moving as the mountains".. Science discovered that these things are not true... then people had to find in the bible where it "agreed" with the science.

[ProudPatriotPapa]

@bryangrossman Just because people frequently misunderstand a text does not make the text wrong,but recognizing a mistake and correcting it is the correct thing to do in both science and religion.Science has had to do this on a regular basis as they learn more,why would this not be true of our understanding of the divine as well?

[FlashMeterRed]

@ProudPatriotPapa the difference is the science of the future hasn't been written yet. it won't be until it has been discovered. the bible has. if it takes only a little delving into scripture to see that the bible has predicted the age of the universe (and many other selected pieces of science according to other such arguments) it should only take a little extra delving to know science before it ever catches up...

[rulz492]

Stopped watching at "dates the world to being at least 15 billion years old."

The world is 4.54 billion years old, the universe is 13.8 billion years old. Clearly this video has no merit if it tries to claim that the Earth is at least 1.2 billion years older than the universe.

Enjoy your veil of ignorance.

[bryangrossman]

@ProudPatriotPapa Some theists see the ever changing view of science as a fault and make fun of that fact. They don't understand that it's because of that fact that make science great and more "true" than any old text... I'm sorry I do respect you and your steadfast belief... but I could never "obsess" over 2000 year old texts and there relevance to my life. To me they have none.... I would rather look at reality, science give me that.

[bryangrossman]

@ProudPatriotPapa Science on the other hand is ever changing, ever refining what we know. Science never even tries to say it has all the answers. Science even admits what may be true now could change tomorrow depending on what new evidence is discovered. So in a way religion is at all times trying to stay relevant trying to "catch up". There is no new "discoveries" to be made in religion only new "understandings" of what the words MIGHT mean. ...