I ask you why, the bible states...?

First, the Bible does not say that the Genesis story is allegory.

Second, the Bible does NOT SPECIFICALLY STATE that the earth is between 6000 and 8000 years old. This has been calculated by men based on known dates of certain events along with the genealogies cited in the Bible.

I agree with a literal interpretation of the Bible. HOWEVER, if you also agree, you have to be careful in what you claim "the Bible states", and be prepared to correctly defend it...or state it correctly.

NOTE to Yahoo Answers: It sure would be nice if we could use WYSIWYG text editing, so that we can use bold text and italics rather than CAPITAL letters for emphasis....even one size smaller fonts for quotes. HTML in the questions and answers boxes would work just fine.

The Bible does not say how old the Earth is.

The word that was translated as "day" doesn't necessarily refer to a literal 24 hour period.

The original Hebrew does not necessitate a literal interpretation, and there have been many Christians and Jews throughout history who believed that the creation account was an allegory. Origen of Alexandria wrote in the 3rd century that not only did he not believe it was literal, but he didn't think that "anyone" doubted it was an allegory. Pretty strong words, wouldn't you say?

Where in the Bible does it say that it's 100% literal? It doesn't. I think it's very interesting to note that the Tree of Life mentioned in Genesis is also mentioned in Revelation, except that the tree is in heaven. How do we know that the events in Genesis, specifically the "fall" of mankind, was not supposed to have taken place in heaven, rather than on Earth? It's also interesting that many early Christians believed that Jesus came to open the way to heaven, and that after "Adam" and "Eve" disobeyed God and learned right from wrong, the way to heaven was barred.

I could go on and on about this, but my point is this: I think that if people take the Bible too literally, they miss the point, which was supposed to be much deeper. Saint Augustine of Hippo taught much the same thing, which is that many parts of the Bible were meant to be true on different levels, not necessarily always literally true.

And for the record, even Paul wrote that some parts of the Bible were allegory; he refers to the story of Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar as having been allegorized later on in the early days of Christianity. I can provide the exact passage upon request.

The Bible does not state an age for the earth - but it does provide some clues that suggest the earth is billions of years old. The bible does not state the earth was created in seven days, it infers it was created in an instant. The seven days in Genesis refers to the restoration of the already existing earth after it became void and lifeless. About the only statement you have accurate is that there is no indication in the text that Genesis should be read any way but literally.

LOL there is not a verse in the bible that says it's six thousand years old. Not one. This is a belief based on one man's equation. The bible doesn't give an age for the earth. Try again. maybe after you've actually tried reading it.

That is false...1) As Pope Pius XII said, the very first question is, What is the genre of this literature ?

2) The Catholics never say that, the only time they use that word is to affirm the FOUR senses of Scripture (see attachment)

3) If you found in the Bible where it said It is allegory or even It isn't allegory -- since the Bible is 73 books once separate but assembled by the Church, you would be giving the Church's teaching anyway !!!

=================

The senses of Scripture

115 According to an ancient tradition, one can distinguish between two senses of Scripture: the literal and the spiritual, the latter being subdivided into the allegorical, moral and anagogical senses. The profound concordance of the four senses guarantees all its richness to the living reading of Scripture in the Church.

116 The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: "All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal."83

117 The spiritual sense. Thanks to the unity of God's plan, not only the text of Scripture but also the realities and events about which it speaks can be signs.

1. The allegorical sense. We can acquire a more profound understanding of events by recognizing their significance in Christ; thus the crossing of the Red Sea is a sign or type of Christ's victory and also of Christian Baptism.84

2. The moral sense. The events reported in Scripture ought to lead us to act justly. As St. Paul says, they were written "for our instruction".85

3. The anagogical sense (Greek: anagoge, "leading"). We can view realities and events in terms of their eternal significance, leading us toward our true homeland: thus the Church on earth is a sign of the heavenly Jerusalem.86

====================

Actually, in English we have many other genres, or literary patterns. Each of these has, as it were, rules for understanding it. Most of our genres were inherited from Greece and Rome. So long as we do our reading within that great Greek and Roman culture stream, we are able to make our adjustments of understanding-as it were, to set the dials in our head- automatically. But someone from a different culture would have to learn to make those adjustments, to learn what is or is not asserted in each genre.

Now it is obvious that Scripture belongs to a very different culture stream from ours, the ancient Semitic. Can we just assume that the ancient Semites used the same genres as we do? Of course not. That would be foolish. In fact, we would not even be faithful to Scripture if we treated it as if it had been written by a modern American. We would not be trying to find out what the ancient inspired author really meant to assert. Instead, we would be imposing our own ideas on his words. To do that is called Fundamentalism. Fundamentalists ignore genre, acting instead as if Scripture had been written by a modern American. For example, they will say that since Genesis says God made the world in six days, that means it was done in six times twenty-four hours.

Before reading any book of Scripture, we need to determine the genre being used. The genre may even vary within a biblical book. Pius XII put it this way in his great encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu (1943): "What is the literal sense in the words and writings of the ancient oriental authors is often not so obvious as with writers of our time. For what they meant to signify by their words is not determined only by the laws of grammar and philology, nor only by the context; it is altogether necessary that the interpreter mentally return, as it were, to those remote ages of the East, so that, being rightly helped by ... history, archeology, ethnology, and other fields of knowledge, he may discern ... what literary genres ... those writers of the ancient time wished to employ and actually employed."

Vatican II put it this way: "Since all that the inspired authors or sacred writers assert should be regarded as asserted by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly faithfully, and without error teach the truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to be confided to Sacred Scripture" (Constitution on Divine Revelation, par. 11; emphases added).

This approach, through an understanding of genres, permits us to solve numerous problems that once were considered insoluble

======================

The Catholic Church and the beliefs that can't be accommodated to allegory

What Does the Catholic Church

Teach about Origins?

http://www.knightsofourlady.org/Newsletters/what_c...

It is not allegorical, but neither do you understand its literal meaning.

Notice:

Genesis 2:3--And God proceeded to bless the seventh day and make it sacred, because on it he HAS BEEN RESTING from all his work that God has created for the purpose of making.

(Capitals mine to show the important part of the scripture)

Notice that when Moses wrote this statement, he wrote the verb "to rest" in the past participle conjugation of the verb, a conjugation form used to show that an action began in the past and is still continuing at the point of the writing. For example, the phrase "Charlie HAS BEEN SWIMMING for an hour" means that Charlie began swimming in the past (about an hour ago) and is still swimming at the time of the statement, and is likely to be swimming for some time into the future.

So when Moses wrote this statement, God was still resting. God began resting in the past, and was still resting at the time Moses wrote Genesis about 3,000 years later.

Now some translations say that "God rested" on the seventh day, suggesting that God began resting and ended resting at some point in the past. How do we know which translation is the correct one?

How about another scripture?

Hebrews 4:1-5--Therefore, since a promise is left of entering into his rest, let us fear that sometime someone of YOU may seem to have fallen short of it. 2) For we have had the good news declared to us also, even as they also had; but the word which was heard did not benefit them, because they were not united by faith with those who did hear. 3) For we who have exercised faith do enter into the rest, just as he has said: “So I swore in my anger, ‘They shall not enter into my rest,’” although his works were finished from the founding of the world. 4) For in one place he has said of the seventh day as follows: “And God rested on the seventh day from all his works,” 5) and again in this place: “They shall not enter into my rest.”

Notice that the Apostle Paul writes that it is still possible for Christians in his time to enter into God's rest, an action that would be impossible if God had already ended His rest. So when the translation I use shows Moses writing that God was still resting in his time, that is the correct translation. The 7th day of rest was still ongoing in Moses' time, was still ongoing in Paul's time (4,000 years later), and Paul wrote it in such a way as to show God's day of rest is actually still going on today (now over 6,000 years later).

Now if the 7th day of rest is still ongoing today over 6,000 years later, then logic says that all the other days were thousands to millions to even billions of years long. The word translated "day" is not referring to 24-hour periods, but simply "long periods of time." The universe was created in 6 "long periods of time," not 6 24-hour periods with a 7th 24-hour period of rest.

The Bible does NOT state that the earth is 6-8,000 years old. The Bible says that the universe is millions to billions of years old, just as science says. It is not allegorical, you just didn't understand the language. The church you speak of (presumably the Catholic church though other churches have said similar things) also did not understand the Bible's language.

The Bible and science agree, the universe is millions to more likely billions of years old. And there is no way that Moses nor the Apostle Paul could have known that unless God told them that information. Science figured it out, but not before Moses and Paul had lived and died already; so the only way Moses and Paul could have known what science eventually discovered is if God told them. Excuses are not needed, science has proven yet again that God exists.

Search all-knowledge. How do you define the word "earth?"