Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Indeed. If the author of the book of Genesis gave any thought to the age of the earth, he/she/it could have written Genesis 51:1 "Oh, and by the way, at the time of this writing, lo the 7th year of the reign of Ahmenhotep I, the world is exactly 3757 years old."And why would anyone care. Can we not entertain the concept that Adam is a literary character rather than a historical person?
Indeed. If the author of the book of Genesis gave any thought to the age of the earth, he/she/it could have written Genesis 51:1 "Oh, and by the way, at the time of this writing, lo the 7th year of the reign of Ahmenhotep I, the world is exactly 3757 years old."
Sure if you want to ignore scripture. So we inherited our sinful nature and death came to all men from a fictional character? All men from every nation came from a fictional character and we even have an entire genealogy beginning with a fictional character spanning 4000 years all the way to Christ. If that’s how we should view the story of Adam then why believe anything written in the Bible?And why would anyone care. Can we not entertain the concept that Adam is a literary character rather than a historical person?
Instead He chose to give us an exact number starting from the sixth day all the way to Jesus whom the entire world has based their calendar on.Indeed. If the author of the book of Genesis gave any thought to the age of the earth, he/she/it could have written Genesis 51:1 "Oh, and by the way, at the time of this writing, lo the 7th year of the reign of Ahmenhotep I, the world is exactly 3757 years old."
A genealogy of unknown provenance is aHuman Beings did that calculation, not God. Regardless, it's not a question that would be asked by God.
You by grace have the the one True understandingSure if you want to ignore scripture. So we inherited our sinful nature and death came to all men from a fictional character? All men from every nation came from a fictional character and we even have an entire genealogy beginning with a fictional character spanning 4000 years all the way to Christ. If that’s how we should view the story of Adam then why believe anything written in the Bible?
A genealogy of unknown provenance is a very thin strand ...
The age of the universe can be calculated from the Hubble constant (H), that is, the ratio between the recession speed of a galaxy, quasar, etc. and its distance. The value of the Hubble constant is about 69.8 km/s/megaparsec. The ratio of the speed of light (c) to H is about 4300 parsecs, corresponding to an age of 14.0 billion years.The cosmic microwave background is everywhere there's nothing about it that indicates a time frame. The hypothesis is that it formed because of a theory that there was a big bang and that hasn't been proven. It's one of a few theories of the beginning of the universe. Man has not gazed that far back yet.
Everyone what don't toe your chosen line is ignoring (all of) scripture?
No, that's not how this works. 13.7 billion years is one of the parameters in the model that fits the observational data.I agree the CMBR is the oldest observed. Since nothing has been observed beyond the CMB wouldn't 13.7 billion be a theory.
The time from BB to recombination comes from that same model. (And it's 380 thousand years, not million).Unless there's something I haven't read on that proves the BB was around 380 million years before the recombination and the beginning of the surface of the last scattering i assume.
The observational data is only 5% of the whole universe. The other 95% of the universe, dark energy and dark matter and where it came from and how old 95% of universe is, is still unknown.No, that's not how this works. 13.7 billion years is one of the parameters in the model that fits the observational data.
The time from BB to recombination comes from that same model. (And it's 380 thousand years, not million).
Now what's this got to do with the age of the Earth?
5% of it, the other 95% of the universe is unknown, its age and where dark energy and matter came from.The age of the Earth can be calculated from the Hubble constant (H), that is, the ratio between the recession speed of a galaxy, quasar, etc. and its distance. The value of the Hubble constant is about 69.8 km/s/megaparsec. The ratio of the speed of light (c) to H is about 4300 parsecs, corresponding to an age of 14.0 billion years.
Also, the Big Bang cosmology predicts both the existence and the non-uniformity of the cosmic microwave background; the observed non-uniformity (measured by the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe - WMAP - and the ESA Planck satellite) corresponds to an age of 13.8 billion years, in good agreement with the age derived from the Hubble constant.
The time between the origin of the universe and the recombination epoch (about 380,000 years) is calculated from the observed value of the Hubble constant.
Although the Big Bang cosmology has not been proved (no scientific theory can ever be proved, since it is always possible that new observations will disprove it), it explains the observations better than any alternative hypothesis so far proposed. If you can put forward a different hypothesis and can show that it explains the facts better than the Big Bang cosmology, you will become famous overnight.
Was there a Captain Ahab? Was there a whale they called Moby Dick? It doesn't really matter des it? There is still truth to be learned about friendship, duty, death, obsession, courage, etc. The authors of Genesis 1 & 2 were inspired to reflect on creation and in their own way made the points that creation is intentional, good, orderly and the work of a divine force beyond our imagining. I do not need to believe creation was 6,000 years ago.Sure if you want to ignore scripture. So we inherited our sinful nature and death came to all men from a fictional character? All men from every nation came from a fictional character and we even have an entire genealogy beginning with a fictional character spanning 4000 years all the way to Christ. If that’s how we should view the story of Adam then why believe anything written in the Bible?
Only for the genealogy-based factions of Christianity (like yours it would seem). The rest of Christendom doesn't worry about such things. (I was 20 or so years in before I even found out your kind existed.)And yet that genealogy is called upon time and time again to demonstrate to highly educated people why we believe what we believe.
Is there anything academia would really care about the ones in your book. I don't think they do.Do you think academia cares as much about the genealogies in the book of Mormon? the Bhagavad Gita? or Mein Kampf?
No such microscope is needed. (with a microscope, or "fine-toothed comb", microscopes do not have combs)Yet academia will crawl all over the genealogies of Matthew and Luke with a fine toothed microscope to find something wrong.
I see no evidence of the spiritual world and all such claimed text are unique unto themselves.The Bible is a unique message to us from the Spiritual world, and It makes even unbelievers traipse out in the deserts of our planet looking for data they say shouldn't exist.
I still haven't read the whole thing so I haven't gotten to the book of Jots & Tiitles.Every jot & tittle of the Bible is under scrutiny by our finest and most educated unbelievers.
I don't have sacred writings so I don't really care.And it must hurt some people tremendously that their sacred writings don't get equal airtime.
The whole universe comes together at once. That "other 95%" is detected with the same telescopes as the visible 5%. Dark matter almost certainly condensed from the hot plasma of the BB, we just don't know what particle(s) it is. The leading candidate for dark energy is some sort of vacuum energy of empty space, so it just comes into existence continuously as space expands.The observational data is only 5% of the whole universe. The other 95% of the universe, dark energy and dark matter and where it came from and how old 95% of universe is, is still unknown.
An assertion without any evidence backing it.Those are more than likely older than the normal matter which is 13.7 billion
That is a complete hypothesis, the only thing science knows about dark energy or dark matter is it reacts with normal matter.The whole universe comes together at once. That "other 95%" is detected with the same telescopes as the visible 5%. Dark matter almost certainly condensed from the hot plasma of the BB, we just don't know what particle(s) it is. The leading candidate for dark energy is some sort of vacuum energy of empty space, so it just comes into existence continuously as space expands.
An assertion without any evidence backing it.
And yet that genealogy is called upon time and time again to demonstrate to highly educated people why we believe what we believe.
Only for the genealogy-based factions of Christianity (like yours it would seem). The rest of Christendom doesn't worry about such things.
(I was 20 or so years in before I even found out your kind existed.)
I have no idea who "they are" any more or what this has to do with the price of bread or the age of the Earth.Ya -- they don't worry about it, then get pwned by highly educated people challenging them to explain why they believe what they believe.
We had both kinds -- Lutherans and Catholics. I think there might have been a few exotics like "Methodists" (who have a method? Who knows) and "Presbyterians" (must be some sort of odd sect with such an odd name). Religion bored me. Why should I have spent any time thinking about other religions or even caring which ones there were. I had better things to do.Some people have a sheltered past.
This is literally backward. We have no evidence of either dark matter or dark energy interacting with normal matter. We only have evidence of them changing the curvature of spacetime and the impact of that on the motion of astronomical objects.That is a complete hypothesis, the only thing science knows about dark energy or dark matter is it reacts with normal matter.
Since dark matter is most likely a particle, such a particle would be massive and stable and DM particles (whatever their quantum properties) would have popped into existence when the energy density of space was high enough to happen spontaneously. The further back in time in the BB model, the higher the energy density. Eventually *any* particle that is possible to form will if you go back far enough.Dark matter almost certainly condensed from the hot plasma is not known at all.
I thought I'd heard of most dark energy candidates and I've never heard of that one before. I think you need to cite your claim.A leading candidate for dark energy is it was before the big bang.
Religion bored me. Why should I have spent any time thinking about other religions or even caring which ones there were. I had better things to do.
Nope. Kept me from wasting my time worrying about other people's religions. Wasn't that into mine, so why would care about yours.Stunted your growth, didn't it?
Bliss.So for twenty years you didn't know "my kind" existed?
All good things come to an end.Well ... now you do.
Ignore buttons exist for a reason.And it appears you don't know what to make of us.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?