6,000 Years Old And Counting
Jul. 8th, 2009 09:00 amIn the 17th Century, Archbishop James Ussher of Armagh worked out his own timeline for the history of the Biblical world, starting with the precise moment when God said "Let there be light" -- nightfall preceding October 23, 4004 B.C.
It was a well-meant calculation, but it has a few problems -- inconsistency of written records, lack of a formal calendar for much of the period covered in the Bible, and ignorance of science. (Not to mention that, if Light was created at nightfall, then either there wasn't a night, or it took God several hours to pull the trigger. Not precisely omnipotent, but hey.) For the most part, it's been abandoned as a serious chronology.
But not by everyone. Many Biblical literalists insist that God spake in 4004 B.C., and all the evidence of anything before that time -- fossils, geologic layers, older civilization, whatever -- was put there by God to test the faith of his children.
And some of those children are using their concept of the age of the earth to influence environmental law. In this case, the argument literally is, the earth is 6,000 years old, and somehow it survived before environmental regulation, and we need the money, and you'll never even know the uranium mine is there.
Short-term profit at the expense of the only environment we have. Blind faith. Mistrust of science because they feel it threatens their faith.
I just don't get it. And I don't think I ever will.
It was a well-meant calculation, but it has a few problems -- inconsistency of written records, lack of a formal calendar for much of the period covered in the Bible, and ignorance of science. (Not to mention that, if Light was created at nightfall, then either there wasn't a night, or it took God several hours to pull the trigger. Not precisely omnipotent, but hey.) For the most part, it's been abandoned as a serious chronology.
But not by everyone. Many Biblical literalists insist that God spake in 4004 B.C., and all the evidence of anything before that time -- fossils, geologic layers, older civilization, whatever -- was put there by God to test the faith of his children.
And some of those children are using their concept of the age of the earth to influence environmental law. In this case, the argument literally is, the earth is 6,000 years old, and somehow it survived before environmental regulation, and we need the money, and you'll never even know the uranium mine is there.
Short-term profit at the expense of the only environment we have. Blind faith. Mistrust of science because they feel it threatens their faith.
I just don't get it. And I don't think I ever will.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 01:14 pm (UTC)Myself, I think it's flat because somebody forgot to put the cap back on and left it out overnight.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 01:16 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 01:25 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 01:30 pm (UTC)O M G.
Her daughter had an upset stomach, but they cuddled up and prayed together, and she FELT BETTER!
She was angry at her husband, but that was just Satan trying to bust up her marriage, so she prayed and got over it!
*headdesk*
(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 01:37 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 01:43 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 01:46 pm (UTC)But then, the root word of fundamentalist is "fundament". As, that upon which you *sit*.
*sigh* you're not SUPPOSED to get it, it *doesn't* make sense. It's like Chewbacca. Chewbacca does not make sense. You must acquit!
(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 01:58 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 02:03 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 02:41 pm (UTC)As to the age of the earth I'll be the first to admit that I don't really know. God doesn't tell us, and I'm not sure the argument is worth having in most situations. The two sides will never agree and such arguments typically degenerate into name calling, at least in my experience.
Most Christians don't reject the totality of science, that would be outright foolish. There are points at which they disagree with the interpretation of evidence or what constitutes evidence but that can be a healthy debate. In fact we should debate the evidence and keep testing it, pointing out the places where there's been fraud or distortion, on both sides of the argument, if only to keep people honest.
Part of being a good steward is taking care of what we've been blessed with. I've been a supporter of nuclear energy for a long time, if only because it would power so much of the country and free up resources that would could put elsewhere. Now I also think that we should invest in natural gas, coal to oil, solar, wind, hydro-electric, hydrogen fuel cell technology, and other energy technology. We need to look at all options to see what's best for the country in both economic and ecological terms.
I've thought long and hard about what I believe and these are the conclusions that I've come to after much thought and prayer on the matter.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 02:45 pm (UTC)Yah, few Jesuits have gone round and round on that one.
Let's not get started on free will.
I see this whole argument being used way too often to justify whatever short-sighted greedhead and ultimately damaging extractive resource use that the faith-based exploiter feels like taking advantage of. Cyanide heapleach mining, leveling mountains, failing to restore tailings as far as the eye can see to a non-poisonous, non-radioactive status...
(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 03:10 pm (UTC)(The part that really got me about her blog post about Satan was I just wanted to thwap her upside the head and say "Maybe your husband was just being a DICK!")
But its all very scary when very real, measurable environmental things are being ignored because something intangible is going to take care of us, or save us, or render it a moot point.
I mean, maybe. But what if you're wrong? There's no leeway for even suggesting that maybe you should make an effort, as well as counting on God. Its like the joke with the "I sent three boats, what more did you want?!" punchline.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 03:22 pm (UTC)"'Holistic healing' does not, or at least should not, mean 'faith healing'. 'Holistic' means 'encompassing all' -- as in 'Trust in Allah, but tie up your camel'. Fine, pray if it makes you feel better, but go see a frigging doctor, too!"
(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 03:43 pm (UTC)http://www.echoschildren.org/CDlyrics/WORDGOD.HTML
However.
No matter what you believe, you can't turn your brain off. That's the real problem. Faith does NOT preclude thought.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 03:56 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 03:59 pm (UTC)But even WITH that, I can't see how it can possibly used to argue with environmentalists or support a uranium mine. So, even IF the earth had survived for 6,000 years w/out environmental regulation.... a) 6,000 years isn't very long and b) most of that 6,000 years was spent without the technology for uranium mining... or even a reason to mine uranium in the FIRST place!
He's not just an idiot by sane people's logic, he's an idiot by his OWN logic.
From the holy book of Gaiman and Pratchett.
Date: 2009-07-08 04:36 pm (UTC)This too was incorrect. By almost a quarter of an hour. The whole business with the fossilized dinosaur skeletons was a joke the paleontologists haven't seen yet."
- Good Omens
Seriously though, I believe in God, but why on earth would I care when the earth was created? If you believe in any form of modern Christianity you're taking so much stuff on total faith that trying to "prove" anything with science by figuring out when the world was create is beyond stupid. Now using the facade of religion to try and rationalize the destruction of the environment out of greed? Is despicable.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 04:44 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 04:48 pm (UTC)And, sadly, I'm getting more and more convinced that we're pointed straight at extinction.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 04:49 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 04:52 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 04:55 pm (UTC)...the guy down the street is twenty years old, and somehow he survived before he started taking methamphetamines, so obviously we don't need drug laws...
Yeah, I bet they'd go for that like children go for castor oil.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 05:00 pm (UTC)If* the earth is actually far, far older than 6000 years, wouldn't that make the "it's done okay so far" argument stronger?
Oh. That's right. Scientists must be wrong about the age of the earth, or else they might be right about the need to protect what's left of the environment. Absolute right and wrong is what fundamentalists traffic in; they exist in a single-bit binary system.
* "If" is here used to mean "most likely the case and generally accepted as fact by those not in need of emergency rectal craniectomy".
(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 05:01 pm (UTC)Love your definition of the word "if", btw. ;)
(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 05:05 pm (UTC)The whole point is that the planet survived for so long with us on it, and per the fundamentalists, that goes back to "In the beginning...".
Though yet again, we as a species have been around for somewhat longer than 6000 years. But there I go again, trying to bring science into it.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 05:53 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 05:57 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 06:05 pm (UTC)The idea of building any kind of modern legislation or policy around it is completely insane, of course, but given what he had to work with at the time he probably took a better shot at figuring out the broad outlines of history than I would've been able to.
I still think Biblical literalism or inerrantism might as well be idolatry, though. :P
(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 06:05 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 06:16 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 06:31 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 06:32 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 07:11 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 07:15 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-08 11:10 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-09 01:27 am (UTC)(and so biblical in its reference . . .)
(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-09 01:56 am (UTC)The courts have ruled on that one a number of times.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-09 06:07 am (UTC)I find this statement very surprising. We are able to calculate the age of the universe theoretically and experimentally and come up consistently with a number in the vicinity of 13 billion years. Absent a reason to doubt the methodology of both theory and experiment -- and I haven't seen one -- either God told us the age of the universe through the mechanism of designing a universe subject to observation via scientific method or God's a liar.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-09 06:15 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-09 06:17 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-09 06:34 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-09 09:52 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-16 08:09 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-16 08:15 pm (UTC)