6 days =15 billion years?

[Mudflap]

I'm a little new here, so I don't know if this is the right place to post this. Gerald Schroeder, a scientist who got his Ph.D from MIT and has written books on the relationship of science and spitiuality has a very interesting theory. He basically says at the time of the big bang time was slower, a second would equal a million million second in todays time, because time is relative to where you are (e.g. 2 years on this planet could be 3 minutes on another). Anyway he made a bunch of calculations and it's hard to put into simple terms because it is a complex theory, but he backs it all up by science and he comes out with the calculation of around 15-16 billion years as the age of the earth before Adam. I'm still digesting his theory but thought I'd share it with you guys, here his site: http://www.geraldschroeder.com/age.html

I like this part:
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 day also lasted half of the previous day, 2 billion years.
The fourth day - one billion years.
The fifth day - one-half billion years.
The sixth 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?

Then this-
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.

Interesting stuff.

[franktalk]

Mudflap ,

There are many theories about the creation of the universe. Many people like the ones that make God a naturalist and He just starts the creation off and evolution then takes over. In order for this to happen they need vast amounts of time to hide the evolutionary process. In fact it is so slow we can't observe it in recorded history. I tend to think that Genesis is correct and it is us that need to change our thinking in order for Genesis to be literal.

So with this in mind let me tell you what I think may have happened in the creation week. I think God made all of space and placed the earth in the center. He then expanded space.

Isa 42:5 Isa 45:12 Isa 51:13 Jer 10:12 and others

Space and time are related to each other. So if God expanded the heavens the clocks on the edge of space would go faster, pendulum clocks by the way. Atomic clocks act differently. So it is possible that the edge of the universe experienced 14.5 billion years and the earth experienced 7800 years of which 6 days were the creation week. Now it is also possible that God wanted us to see His creation so He expanded space some more to increase the speed of light so the light from the edge of the universe would get to the earth. Then as space relaxed light would slow down. This would have a direct effect on atomic clocks and this is why atomic dating is in error. I assume a nonlinear past and most of science does not.

Like I said there are many theories out there to choose from. I pick one that does not change Genesis. Now there are many fine Christians that believe in an old earth and I can't say they are wrong. But I chose to change the things of man because man is so prone to error.

[Augustine2004]

Franktalk, to be frank with you, I don't think there's such a theory. Humphreys' is not in any way developed mathematically. It has not gotten out of the speculation stage. He has made no 'unique' or 'unusual' or 'unexpected' predictions that experimentalists could check.

[franktalk]

Augustine2004 ,

The problem with science is that it is limited in it's ability to describe events that deal with the unseen. Our past is an unseen and as such we have a very limited number of left over fingerprints in which to unravel the past. It is easy for me to assume that we just don't know enough to know much at all. This is upsetting for some who really think they know what happened.

I think the work that Thomas Van Flandern did in working with atomic and orbital clocks uncovered a fingerprint of the past. This lead to:

http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/astr...dRedshift.html

Quantized redshift. Which makes the expanding model fall apart.

By the way, if the universe is stretched by a force outside of the universe then will time dilate? I have no idea. There is no way to reference this into our known world. So if we can't make a formula work because of our own limits then we can't explain everything. I accept this.

[rogue06]

As an aside, the medieval Jewish scholar Isaac ben Samuel of Acre, a disciple of Nahmanides, calculated that the universe is 15,340,500,000 years old based on the concept that in the eyes of God a day equals a thousand years. Considering that Isaac ben Samuel died in the 14th century, it doesn’t appear that latter, modern naturalism tainted his reckoning.

[Pumbelo]

I don't buy such arguments. It's kinda cool, but no, sorry.

[rogue06]

I don't buy such arguments. It's kinda cool, but no, sorry.

Actually I agree. I just find it interesting that a theologian was declaring the universe to be over 15 billion years old in the late 13th early 14th century based solely on his interpretation of Scripture.

[KBertsche]

Mudflap ,

There are many theories about the creation of the universe. Many people like the ones that make God a naturalist and He just starts the creation off and evolution then takes over. In order for this to happen they need vast amounts of time to hide the evolutionary process. In fact it is so slow we can't observe it in recorded history. I tend to think that Genesis is correct and it is us that need to change our thinking in order for Genesis to be literal.

I don't believe many try to "make God a naturalist and He just starts the creation off and evolution then takes over." You are describing Deism, which is heresy. The true naturalists (e.g. Dawkins) deny God altogether, and ascribe self-existence (e.g. divine qualities) to nature. Christian theistic evolutionists (e.g. Francis Collins) see God as intimately involved (immanent) in evolution, and nature as contigent on God for its continues existence (cf. Ps 104; Job 38-42). They are NOT deists.

In fact, I believe YECs are more deistic than TEs. Many YECs seem to insist on miracles because they think that God is not in charge of natural processes. They have the idea that nature runs on its own like a clock or machine, without needing God for its normal operation; God is only involved when He does miracles. This is unbiblical. Nature's very existence depends every instant on God's upholding of it (Heb 1:3; Col. 1:17).

[Augustine2004]

KBertsche, What Is your definition of ‘miracle?’ Mine is any act by God that has any effect on anyone’s life whether he realizes it or not.

[KBertsche]

KBertsche, What Is your definition of ‘miracle?’ Mine is any act by God that has any effect on anyone’s life whether he realizes it or not.

That is not a normal definition of "miracle". Generally by "miracle" people mean something unusual or out of the ordinary, which cannot be explained by the normal laws of nature.

For example, according to dictionary.com:

1. an effect or extraordinary event in the physical world that surpasses all known human or natural powers and is ascribed to a supernatural cause.
2. such an effect or event manifesting or considered as a work of God.
3. a wonder; marvel.
4. a wonderful or surpassing example of some quality: a miracle of modern acoustics.

[Glenn P]

Like I said there are many theories out there to choose from. I pick one that does not change clash with my interpretation of Genesis.

This is what I think you should have said.

[Glenn P]

KBertsche, What Is your definition of ‘miracle?’ Mine is any act by God that has any effect on anyone’s life whether he realizes it or not.

When everything is a miracle, nothing is.

[Augustine2004]

All right, let me amend my definition. If an explanation based on the laws of nature as we currently know them cannot be found that seems at least plausible, then what is to be explained may be called a miracle.

[freethinker]

http://www.geraldschroeder.com/age.html

IWhen 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]

Interesting stuff.

Please do not poison your mind by taking that stuff seriously.
Claims made on the page are internally inconsistent, which is a sure sign of the charlatan.
e.g. "In the beginning there was no matter, therefore no time" yet in the next sentence the author states that after 10 microseconds time started moving. (hint: if there is no time there are no 10 microseconds).

Some more random nonsense from the site:
"Time is relative to location."[False. It is relative to speed.]
"Time is a dimension" [No it isn't.]
"Planets have been observed where time is slowed down so that three local minutes equal 2 years on our planet." [They may exist but are NOT observed. They're all about 14.5 billion years away.]
"You can go to such a planet for three minutes and come back. Your friends are then 2 years older." [No in fact they will be 29 billion years older at least. But you could move one light year from earth at light speed and back and your friends would have gained 2 years on you. ]
"15 billion years = 6 days" [Hmm. There is an almost spherical area in space about 14.5 billion light years away where this is true. There is also an almost identical area where 15 billion = 5.9 days or 15 billion = 1 minute and so on. The author obviously hopes that the use of the word "billion" baffles the non-scientists.]
I wanted to read more but my stomach couldn't take it anymore.

[Glenn P]

All right, let me amend my definition. If an explanation based on the laws of nature as we currently know them cannot be found that seems at least plausible, then what is to be explained may be called a miracle.

So anything as yet not explained is a miracle.

I give up hope in the next generation of Christian intellectuals more and more every day.