Chrstianity and Science - how?

jordanconnect said:

I would love to get simply yes/no answers on these 4 questions to get some insight in how Christians view science.

Do Christians believe the universe has existed for 13 billion years?
Do Christians believe the Big Bang happened, and was the beginning of everything within the universe?
Do Christians believe that earth has existed for 4.5 billion years?
Do Christians believe neanderthals were living on earth 500,000 years ago?

Click to expand...

If you're really interested in this stuff...watch this video. BTW, the neanderthals are not in the video.

jordanconnect said:

I would love to get simply yes/no answers on these 4 questions to get some insight in how Christians view science.

Do Christians believe the universe has existed for 13 billion years?
Do Christians believe the Big Bang happened, and was the beginning of everything within the universe?
Do Christians believe that earth has existed for 4.5 billion years?
Do Christians believe neanderthals were living on earth 500,000 years ago?

Click to expand...

No to all.
And Why..? Man made up his own measuring stick and then measured stuff.
And then said this is how long it is .with no way to validate his own measuring stick.

Its like saying ..that rock is 3000 years old ..question. How do you know?answer,because I said so.

If the dating system is so flawed fake and lied about ,then the entire theory of the measurement of age is equally flawed.

So im left with
Belief in God's word .
And some will say" BUT it's just a man who wrote it.(but that can't be varified)
OR I'm left with the word of science.
BUT..just a man with a bias and and agenda wrote it. (And that's already been varified)

hedrick said:

I'm not sure quite what Neaderthals have to do with this discussion though.

Click to expand...

Go back and read the Op. Neanderthals and how their existence may, or may not be compatible with Christian theology was posed as one of the four questions asked by the creator of the thread.

hedrick said:

[I'm basing this on a rather long article on Neaderthals in Wikipedia.]

Click to expand...

Wikipedia is not the best source of definitive information on many subjects. In some areas, the site has been widely criticized for editorializing, politicizing and even censoring factual information. I suggest you look at some better sources.

Much of what you stated about Neanderthals is incorrect. The Human Genome Project proved years ago Neanderthals and modern man never interbred. No genes of Neanderthal have ever been found in the extant population of modern humans. The idea Neanderthals were absorbed by modern humans has been totally debunked and now represents "junk science".

There is also presently no archeological evidence Neanderthals co-habitated with, traded with, or had any contact with other human beings. The idea Neanderthals were wiped out (destroyed) by modern humans has also never been substantiated by any scientific evidence, and is regarded by mainstream anthropologists as being "erroneous" unfounded conjecture.

We do know anatomically speaking, Neanderthals were very similar to early homo sapien, sapien. Their brains were comparable in size to ours. They used fire and constructed various stone tools and weapons. They probably communicated verbally using some crude language, (at least the physical structure of their thorax suggests this was possible), and covered their bodies with animal skins as we did.

They created elaborate cave drawings, and even constructed crude reed "flutes" and played music. They also buried their dead in a ritualistic manner, which included the placement of personal relics and belongings in their grave sites. For a primitive, they exhibited a fairly well developed culture, unlike the earlier hominid creatures that emerged in South Africa.

The accepted theory for their extinction was their inability to adapt to environmental changes that occurred at the end of the last Ice Age around 20,000 years ago. Just as the American Plains Indian culture was nearly wiped out with the near extinction of the buffalo, a worse fate befell Neanderthals with the extinction of the Mamoth elephant and other massive beasts.

Neanderthal remains evidence a very "brutal" existence where severe breaks and fractures in their skeletons were frequently evidenced. This is attributed by anthropologists to their heavy crude weapons (stabbing spears), used to take extremely large and dangerous game at very close quarters.

Homo Sapien, sapiens', however developed lighter ranged weapons for taking smaller game at range, such as throwing sticks used to hurl arrows and lighter throwing spears. The sling is another example of an improved range weapon the Neanderthal never developed.

There is no scientific or archeological evidence to suggest Neanderthals and Homo Sapien, sapein warred with one another, or even competed for game. In fact, all existing prevailing evidence indicates these two creatures had absolutely no contact with one another whatsoever.

Another interesting aspect of Christian Creation theology and its' possible compatibility with science, is the Biblical story of Cain and Able. With the slaying of Able, "who tended sheep" and the subsequent banishment of Cain "who tilled the "ground" (Genesis 4:2), the story appears at least to offer an explanation why these two hallmarks of human achievement developed quite separately.

Science concludes the first evidence of the domestication of animals appears in Asia, while according to the Jerusalem University Department of Archeology, the earliest evidence of primitive agriculture occurs around the shores of the Dead Sea in Israel.

The story also begs the question.. "Who were the people of Nod with whom Cain found refuge" (Genesis 4:16-17) ? They could not possibly have been other descendants of Adam as some theologians suggest.. because Cain was banished, and cursed by God "so the earth would no longer yield its' produce to him" (Genesis 4:12) and Cain received a mark in his forehead that would have identified him to any other Adamic people existing at that time, (Genesis 4:15).

If any of Adam's other descendants had offered Cain sanctuary, they would have had to do so in direct conflict with the "Judgment of God".. which seems to me like a very suspect and implausible theory, especially since Genesis 4 makes no mention of any other Adamic people existing previous to Cain's banishment.

So once again, it appears the Biblical Creation narrative is completely compatible with science. The domestication of animals and primitive agriculture did develop in different parts of the world, and there were people other than Adam's descendants who existed in the world in Adam's time.

Would you please look at the article in Wikipedia? I don't claim expertise in the area. In scientific and theological areas I've generally found them pretty good. They show that until 2010 genetic studies suggest no interbreeding, but they cite papers from a variety of sources staring in 2010 that do suggest limited interbreeding. If you know the studies and know that they're "junk science," that would be interesting.

The "talk" section normally give you an sense of how much controversy there really is. My impression from that is that the argument against any interbreeding is not currently plausible.

jordanconnect said:

I would love to get simply yes/no answers on these 4 questions to get some insight in how Christians view science.

Do Christians believe the universe has existed for 13 billion years?
Do Christians believe the Big Bang happened, and was the beginning of everything within the universe?
Do Christians believe that earth has existed for 4.5 billion years?
Do Christians believe neanderthals were living on earth 500,000 years ago?

Click to expand...

1) That's a decent estimate.

2) Of course. It was a Catholic priest who first proposed the Big Bang.

3) Again, decent estimate.

4) Yes

Jordan

I don't know if you are still reading this.

It depends whether you want the scientific answer or the real one.

I speak as scientist and Christian! Involved at various times in both quantum physics, astronomy and cosmology,

First I would caution you on all your dates. The only answer is don't know,
Right now, science doesn't and can't be exact about the model. Observations show that perceived Universe expansion rates and galaxy rotation are such that the model simply doesn't work.

Some suggesting bringing back what Einstein coined " his biggest blunder" the cosmological constant,, or inserting a matter field to compensate. And depending what you do to get expansion right, the dates change as well. It is not as clear as you think.

But there is a far bigger philosophical problem. Your question posits a universe which has objective existence, In order to have an age. Where the battles fought over copenhagen interpretation shows the universe clearly does not have objective existence in science.

It exists only when observed. And is therefore subjective,
Einstein hated that but was forced to concede it was true.
Bell experiments proved it,

Quantum decoherence can explain why large things appear to have objective existence, when particles do not, but still sciences answer is no, it does not have objective reality, decoherence just makes it appear to exist.

How can something with only subjective existence have an objective age?

To get round those " Schrödinger's cat" type anomalies science posits an infinite number of multiverses, of all possible histories and futures, so which one do you mean when you talk about age

So the science you think describes an objective universe does not, it is a useful tool that has limits and breaks down at extremes. Hence the paradoxes.

Even Scientific model does not say it starts at Big Bang. It says the math breaks down so nobody knows.

I hope you now see the problem in science.
You are giving ages for something that science says only has subjective existence.

I.e. Science is philosophical clap trap.

So to reality

I think the moon does exist even when I am not looking at it, and I think my moon is the same as yours. So I can't agree with science, if it is assumed to be a fundamental basis of the universe, nor do I think there are an infinite number of me in an infinite number of universes, so I have to disagree there as well.


As an individual I believe the scientific model, is a very useful tool, nothing less but nothing more , and predicts within reason many things that we see, allowing us to harness nature.

But that is a far cry from science understanding, what it is in reality, what it is made of, what has happened, what will happen,how long it has been there or will be there, and why it exists, and whether it is obliged to follow the rules it normally does.

The scientific model has been pushed way beyond its useful limits, which is why the paradoxes appear. Not least because the universe has many dimensions, most we can't even perceive, so our science can never hope to be right.

If you read one of hawkings latest works he posits " model dependent reality" which is an admission that no one model can ever explain , and some things have contradictory models. It also in my view kills his theory of everything dead. Or the idea of any universal scientific model.

So the shrinking god of the gaps is a Falacy, because science explains nothing, so it is all gap!

Science can only predict what repeatable things do. Jury is out on the rest.

As to your dates who can say?

jordanconnect said:

I would love to get simply yes/no answers on these 4 questions to get some insight in how Christians view science.

Do Christians believe the universe has existed for 13 billion years?
Do Christians believe the Big Bang happened, and was the beginning of everything within the universe?
Do Christians believe that earth has existed for 4.5 billion years?
Do Christians believe neanderthals were living on earth 500,000 years ago?

Click to expand...

~Anastasia~ said:

Pity. It's rather an eye-opening exercise.

Click to expand...

I am exceedingly skeptical that you have the qualifications to independently assess the age of the universe.

JacksBratt said:

Secondly, they were caught emailing each other as to how they were going to explain the fact that the numbers don't fit the scaremongering model.

Click to expand...

I haven't checked but I will go out on a limb and guarantee that this is preposterous exaggeration.

I guarantee you will not be able to provide information from a credible source that shows that there is widespread deception re global warming as your post suggest.

At most, you will produce a few examples of deceitful scientists.

Well no kidding. No one is suggesting that all scientists are above deception. But there is no way what you are suggesting is true systemically.

stephen583 said:

Go back and read the Op. Neanderthals and how their existence may, or may not be compatible with Christian theology was posed as one of the four questions asked by the creator of the thread.

Click to expand...

Neanderthals were found from Iraq to Spain clearly indicating a migration from the cradle of civilization to the western shores of Europe. The garden of Eden was somewhere in Iraq. Perfectly comparable with Christianity.

Wikipedia is not the best source of definitive information on many subjects. In some areas, the site has been widely criticized for editorializing, politicizing and even censoring factual information. I suggest you look at some better sources.

Click to expand...

Wikipedia doesn't have adequate source material, it's a good place to prime the pump but not really a primary source.

Much of what you stated about Neanderthals is incorrect. The Human Genome Project proved years ago Neanderthals and modern man never interbred. No genes of Neanderthal have ever been found in the extant population of modern humans. The idea Neanderthals were absorbed by modern humans has been totally debunked and now represents "junk science".

Click to expand...

The initial sequence of the human genome had no Neanderthal DNA, in fact there were no comparative genomic involved. The extraction of DNA from Neanderthal fossils would not happen for ten years and the researchers conclude that our ancestors did interbreed.

You really need to get your facts straight.

There is also presently no archeological evidence Neanderthals co-habitated with, traded with, or had any contact with other human beings. The idea Neanderthals were wiped out (destroyed) by modern humans has also never been substantiated by any scientific evidence, and is regarded by mainstream anthropologists as being "erroneous" unfounded conjecture.

We do know anatomically speaking, Neanderthals were very similar to early homo sapien, sapien. Their brains were comparable in size to ours. They used fire and constructed various stone tools and weapons. They probably communicated verbally using some crude language, (at least the physical structure of their thorax suggests this was possible), and covered their bodies with animal skins as we did.

They created elaborate cave drawings, and even constructed crude reed "flutes" and played music. They also buried their dead in a ritualistic manner, which included the placement of personal relics and belongings in their grave sites. For a primitive, they exhibited a fairly well developed culture, unlike the earlier hominid creatures that emerged in South Africa.

The accepted theory for their extinction was their inability to adapt to environmental changes that occurred at the end of the last Ice Age around 20,000 years ago. Just as the American Plains Indian culture was nearly wiped out with the near extinction of the buffalo, a worse fate befell Neanderthals with the extinction of the Mamoth elephant and other massive beasts.

Neanderthal remains evidence a very "brutal" existence where severe breaks and fractures in their skeletons were frequently evidenced. This is attributed by anthropologists to their heavy crude weapons (stabbing spears), used to take extremely large and dangerous game at very close quarters.

Homo Sapien, sapiens', however developed lighter ranged weapons for taking smaller game at range, such as throwing sticks used to hurl arrows and lighter throwing spears. The sling is another example of an improved range weapon the Neanderthal never developed.

There is no scientific or archeological evidence to suggest Neanderthals and Homo Sapien, sapein warred with one another, or even competed for game. In fact, all existing prevailing evidence indicates these two creatures had absolutely no contact with one another whatsoever.

Click to expand...

Nonsense where are you sources?

mark kennedy said:

Nonsense where are you sources?

Click to expand...

Aside from scientific papers, I personally interviewed a professor of anthropology with a masters degree for over an hour at Tulane University in 2004.

At that time he assured me, there was absolutely no scientific evidence Neanderthals and modern man ever interbred, or even had any contact with one another.

Where's your evidence ? In what modern population was evidence of Neanderthal interbreeding with modern man found ? Post a link to a scientific source please. Otherwise, I've got to go with the guy with the masters degree in anthropology.

stephen583 said:

Aside from scientific papers, I personally interviewed a professor of anthropology with a masters degree for over an hour at Tulane University in 2004.

Click to expand...

That's why I asked you to look again. Genetic data available in 2004 was early. The papers Wikipedia cites showing interbreeding started showing up on 2010.

stephen583 said:

Aside from scientific papers, I personally interviewed a professor of anthropology with a masters degree for over an hour at Tulane University in 2004.

At that time he assured me, there was absolutely no scientific evidence Neanderthals and modern man ever interbred, or even had any contact with one another.

Where's your evidence ? In what modern population was evidence of Neanderthal interbreeding with modern man found ? Post a link to a scientific source please. Otherwise, I've got to go with the guy with the masters degree in anthropology.

Click to expand...

I don't care what kind of a degree you have, Google, 'Neanderthals interbreed with humans.'. I don't know where you get your information but my interest is comparative DNA. Your statement about the Human Genome Project proving something about Neanderthals is absolutely false. The technology to extract DNA from fossils did not exist in 2001. There have been DNA comparisons which was a pretty impressive accomplishment. You keep saying there's no proff humans and Neanderthals interacted and you blew your credibility with that bogus HGP statement.

There are articles in Nature, AAAS has an article, the BBC has an interesting article with a great picture from the Max Plank Institute. I think you've fallen behind in your reading, I'm at work or I'd find the Nature article.

jordanconnect said:

I would love to get simply yes/no answers on these 4 questions to get some insight in how Christians view science.

Do Christians believe the universe has existed for 13 billion years?
Do Christians believe the Big Bang happened, and was the beginning of everything within the universe?
Do Christians believe that earth has existed for 4.5 billion years?
Do Christians believe neanderthals were living on earth 500,000 years ago?

Click to expand...

Seems to be the case to me, but others disagree.

jordanconnect said:

I would love to get simply yes/no answers on these 4 questions to get some insight in how Christians view science.

Do Christians believe the universe has existed for 13 billion years?
Do Christians believe the Big Bang happened, and was the beginning of everything within the universe?
Do Christians believe that earth has existed for 4.5 billion years?
Do Christians believe neanderthals were living on earth 500,000 years ago?

Click to expand...

There are certainly some Christians who believe all/some of these things.

There are many Christians who believe in a LITERAL 6 day creation but not all Christians agree on that one.

jordanconnect said:

Do Christians believe the universe has existed for 13 billion years?

Click to expand...

The church worldwide is divided on this issue. Some do and others do not.

Do Christians believe the Big Bang happened, and was the beginning of everything within the universe?

Click to expand...

Same as above.

Do Christians believe that earth has existed for 4.5 billion years?

Click to expand...

Same as above

Do Christians believe neanderthals were living on earth 500,000 years ago?

Click to expand...

ibid.

Did you expect something different? Aren't these answers obvious?

expos4ever said:

I am exceedingly skeptical that you have the qualifications to independently assess the age of the universe.

Click to expand...

LOL!

I never said I had the qualifications to independently assess the age of the universe.

You said that you were not able to evaluate the evidence. And I said that was a pity.

(Incidentally, I believe in an old earth - at one point in this conversation I believe we were talking about evolution, which is a separate discussion, and it was to that evidence I was referring.)

The first major hurdle in evaluating evidence for evolution is access to at least some of it, and the second factor is sufficient education. I should also mention intellectual honesty - sometimes that is the most difficult of the three to manage.

It's not such an impossible thing. I was trained under some of the most eminent experts in the biological sciences. I worked at a fairly large repository of fossils, specimens, etc. And I set the task of developing a new curriculum for teaching evolution, demonstrating it rather that just presenting it as an already developed theory. And so I found the basis, the assumptions, the problems, and the gaps. No need to be scandalized - several scientific disciplines suffer from such things. It doesn't DISprove evolution. It's still the best explanation put forth by science. But it is not without its problems. What is evident is that evolution AS COMMONLY TAUGHT at the very least needs revisions. It is not the perfect explanation beyond any attempts to question or challenge that folks seem to believe it to be.

Once again, I'm not really interested in debate. People find reasons to believe what they believe, and for some of them, it is necessary. Some folks would find themselves in a psychologically untenable position if pushed to accept or discard certain beliefs. I leave them all to God's care.

~Anastasia~ said:

LOL!

I never said I had the qualifications to independently assess the age of the universe.

You said that you were not able to evaluate the evidence. And I said that was a pity.

(Incidentally, I believe in an old earth - at one point in this conversation I believe we were talking about evolution, which is a separate discussion, and it was to that evidence I was referring.)

The first major hurdle in evaluating evidence for evolution is access to at least some of it, and the second factor is sufficient education. I should also mention intellectual honesty - sometimes that is the most difficult of the three to manage.

It's not such an impossible thing. I was trained under some of the most eminent experts in the biological sciences. I worked at a fairly large repository of fossils, specimens, etc. And I set the task of developing a new curriculum for teaching evolution, demonstrating it rather that just presenting it as an already developed theory. And so I found the basis, the assumptions, the problems, and the gaps. No need to be scandalized - several scientific disciplines suffer from such things. It doesn't DISprove evolution. It's still the best explanation put forth by science. But it is not without its problems. What is evident is that evolution AS COMMONLY TAUGHT at the very least needs revisions. It is not the perfect explanation beyond any attempts to question or challenge that folks seem to believe it to be.

Once again, I'm not really interested in debate. People find reasons to believe what they believe, and for some of them, it is necessary. Some folks would find themselves in a psychologically untenable position if pushed to accept or discard certain beliefs. I leave them all to God's care.

Click to expand...

Fair enough, I misunderstood you as implying that you "knew better" than the scientific establishment. That was an over-reach on my part and I apologise.

expos4ever said:

Fair enough, I misunderstood you as implying that you "knew better" than the scientific establishment. That was an over-reach on my part and I apologise.

Click to expand...

No problem.

I saw you did get some laughs for it, at least.

jordanconnect said:

I would love to get simply yes/no answers on these 4 questions to get some insight in how Christians view science.

Do Christians believe the universe has existed for 13 billion years?
Do Christians believe the Big Bang happened, and was the beginning of everything within the universe?
Do Christians believe that earth has existed for 4.5 billion years?
Do Christians believe neanderthals were living on earth 500,000 years ago?

Click to expand...

Honestly, I don't personally believe that there is one definitive answer for all of these. However, don't take my word for it. I think it has a section about science in the Catechism, or you can ask a local priest if you wish. For a lot of people, though, it's all down to personal beliefs and/or interpretations of the Bible. Catholics shouldn't be too opposed to the Big Bang, though, as it was a Roman Catholic priest who proposed the idea!! Good luck