Christianity vs carbon dating
Christianity vs carbon dating - rachel and chris dating
Discovered by Willard Frank Libby and his colleagues in 1949, during his tenure as a professor at the University of Chicago, Libby invented what would eventually change the face of archaeology by giving a time frame to fossilized specimens.
A number of biblical scholars have used this information (combined sometimes with information elsewhere in the Bible) to construct accounts of how old the earth must be, with estimates ranging from about 6,000 to 10,000 years, in dramatic contradiction with the scientific estimate. The flood supposedly was so great that water covered every mountain on the planet.MANY scientists and theologians have made the argument that Christianity is not at odds with the scientific world view. It is true that many portions of the Bible (for example, the Ten Commandments) do not make empirical claims and hence have no conflict with science, a field which concerns itself solely with those questions that are (at least in principle) of a testable nature.What’s more, in those sections of the Bible that do make empirical claims about the way things were or will be, if one is willing to apply a sufficiently metaphorical interpretation to the text then whenever science and Christianity appear to contradict each other we can simply loosen or relax the religious interpretation until the disagreement disappears.Now consider whether the Church could encourage giving to Scripture a sense contrary to the holy Fathers and all the Latin and Greek commentators.” Today, however, the astronomical evidence for the earth’s movement around the sun is so strong that there is almost no one who doubts it, even among those who take the Bible to be an inerrant revelation of God’s word.It appears that in this instance there has been a shift of biblical interpretation over time to fit the scientific evidence.But then, of course, we are placed in the awkward position of choosing how literal each passage should be taken, leading to a multitude of possible biblical interpretations and little final consensus.
Perhaps this partially explains why some Christian groups forbid condoms, while others don’t, some prohibit abortion, while others don’t, some forbid masturbation, while others don’t, and so on and so forth.
The preceding argument may give the impression that the Christianity and science are not or cannot be in conflict (either because they deal with different subjects, or because interpretation adapts to harmonize with science).
It is undeniable, however, that a strictly literal and inflexible reading of the Bible deeply contradicts science, and it is simply not possible to reconcile these opposing points of view. Adam and Eve Scientists, supported by enormous amounts of evidence (including transitions in the fossil record, DNA similarities between species, experimentally induced evolution in laboratories, observed evolution of bacteria, and empirically validated prediction based in theory) argue that all life on earth evolved from microorganisms.
For example, around the year 1600 AD, in response to the scientist Galileo’s support for the heliocentric view of the universe, Cardinal Bellarmine wrote: “I say that, as you know, the Council (of Trent) prohibits expounding the Scriptures contrary to the common agreement of the holy Fathers.
And if Your Reverence would read not only the Fathers but also the commentaries of modern writers on Genesis, Psalms, Ecclesiastes, and Josue, you would find that all agree in explaining literally that the sun is in the heavens and moves swiftly around the earth, and that the earth is far from the heavens and stands immobile in the center of the universe.
These deranged fundamentalists are not interested in Science; they don't carry out any field work or research.