The Genesis Code

Has anyone started a thread on this movie and its theory yet? I have been searching the site to no avail, but find it hard to believe no one else saw this amazing movie.

The theory in the movie lines up the book of Genesis with Stephen Hawking's theory of time travel and Einstien's theory of relativity...it is really mind blowing......has anyone watched it yet?

reply to post by timetothink


I have not seen it. Is it still in the cinema or is it on DVD/Blue Ray

I'll look into it later, I'm heading out to enjoy the sunshine...

It is currently on demand..looks to be an independent film, but it does have some known actors in it including Ernest Borgnign and Fred Thompson.

I highly recommend it...but you really need to pay attention...

Enjoy and let me know what you think.



www.thegenesiscodemovie.com...

reply to post by timetothink


Looks like something I would be interested in. I like delving into the ancient codes and ciphers and such. You may like the link in my signature.

anyways .... this thread led me to look into this Genesis Code, never heard of it before now. Thanks!

So.... has anyone else ever considered applying

the verses of the Bible to the verses of the

Bible???

The Genesis Code - Sees the nice God (animated anagram)

reply to post by ILikeStars


I hope you enjoy it....it looks at both sides...religion and science ...maybe they aren't as far apart as we think....just misread.

From the web site selling the DVD of the film:

Pick up a copy at... your local Christian retailer

That suggests that the treatment of the subject begins with certain preconceptions.

It doesn't seem to have been reviewed by any movie critics.

that's a shame because it's a good movie...if science can prove some things in the bible as being true why ignore it?

and one big question brought up by science in the movie is that no one at the time genesis was written had this scientific knowledge yet they get it right so where did it come from?

reply to post by timetothink

If science can prove some things in the bible as being true why ignore it?

We prove nothing when we begin by assuming that a statement in the Bible is true and then stretching and distorting scientific theories to make them fit the statement.

The Bible is written in poetic, often mysterious prose that can be interpreted in different ways. The ideas of modern physics are very abstract and impossible to understand without a special education – so they can easily be misinterpreted in different ways. Making one sort-of fit the other is pretty easy.

In fact, you can use this method to 'prove' just about any mythical or magical idea you like. We see it happen every day on ATS: people 'proving' that ancient Vedic myths from India are really descriptions of nuclear weapons and flying machines; people 'proving' that the ancient myths of Mesopotamia are really accounts of the creation of human beings by scientifically advanced aliens; people 'proving' that the mediaeval Mayan myths foretell a catastrophic collision between our planet and another that will happen in December this year.

Scientific proof works a different way. You take a statement and you test it by doing everything you can to disprove it. If the statement still holds up, you can accept it as true, though only for the time being; it's always susceptible to being disproved by some new experiment. Why would anyone want to put their religious faith through that process? Deliberately try to destroy their own faith, over and over again, to test if it is valid?

The whole point about faith is that it doesn't require proof. When something has been proved, you stop having faith in it, because faith has become unnecessary. If a person of faith is always trying to find proof of the things he believes in, it shows that his faith is weak and he is troubled by doubts.

One big question brought up by science in the movie is that no one at the time genesis was written had this scientific knowledge yet they get it right so where did it come from?

They didn't get it right. There are some rough correspondences. The fact that both Genesis and modern scientific accounts of the origin of the universe were written by human beings is more than enough to explain them.

Did you even watch the movie to see what they are talking about?

I have just watched an abbreviated version of the Genesis Code, preferring not to watch a painfully concocted student-engineered film...

And actually, they make some very good points. Physics does seem to agree with the Bible...TO A POINT.

I want to emphasize the "TO A POINT" part because Genesis is as far as it goes. Everything else remains unproven, except circumstantially. As in, the places existed, but we can't even be sure the people existed, let alone that they said what Christians believe they said.

Which means that 95% of the Bible is still thoroughly questionable. We're not even sure that of all the Jesus' that existed, there was even a Jesus of Nazareth.

Genesis may have been proven...I will admit this. But the rest of it remains highly obscure. And that, really, is what matters...considering Genesis is not the main principle of today's faith.

Jesus is.

reply to post by Starchild23


Hence the name of the movie...the Genesis code...

As I have said many times before I am a recovering catholic...I still believe in a force greater than us and have many questions about the bible.

But I have always believed that there was some truth in the the bible but that taking it literally was very wrong....this movie opens up the possibility that we have been looking at it wrong and to literally.

If man of ancient times was presented complicated physics explanations for the formation of the universe...they never would have understood them. The bible seems to be a layman's version of what was presented to them.

The general prejudice against christians and religion has done a disservice to the information that seems to be contained within the bible....that is the fault of men who have perverted it for their own uses...that needs to be ignored so we can learn from the texts themselves.

reply to post by Astyanax


I can understand not wanting to waste a couple of hours on this. There is a briefer synopsis of the ideas put forward in the movie, in the first link. I look forward to the sequel where biology shows that surviving being swallowed by a whale/fish for three days and nights is also clearly supported by science, if you pray.

Christians do seem to have it wrong. The bible is not competing with science. It is competing with all of the other countless mythological cultural beliefs.

www.thethinkingatheist.com...

It is hard to find neutral reviews re the claims in the movie. The one in the last link is a favorite, as the reviewer takes issue with the movie claiming the earth is older than 6000 years, and finds a couple of instances "taking the lords name in vain". Tut tut.

www.thegoodatheist.net...

www.rechelleunplugged.com...

biblescienceguy.wordpress.com...

I guess I am still not getting my point across....I believe someone/something presented the physics of the universe "creation" if you will, but not god-like creation to the ancient people. Unfortunatly, they either could not understand it or chose to hide it for their own nefarious reasons...using religion and magic instead to present it to the world. Now we have this bible that is coded...hidden deep inside all the garbage is, imo, real science that we are just beginning to understand about the universe. It is not about faith or magic etc but real science that has been perverted and used against us and now the bible is so looked down upon, people would rather scoff at it that pick it apart and see what can be learned from it.

I think it was brave of the christians to make this movie because it is such a powerful argument for science....and explanation for how the universe was created in 6 days from the perspective of time travel and relativity and light speed, not from the perspective of earth time.

Originally posted by timetothink
Did you even watch the movie to see what they are talking about?

I don't need to. I know enough physics, and enough current cosmological theory, to know that they contradict the Biblical account of Genesis pretty comprehensively.

I'll give you just one, obvious example. In Genesis, the process of creation is reported to have begun when God said 'Let there be light'. Well, that's not how the universe began at all. The universe began in darkness.

At approximately 1 second after the Big Bang neutrinos decouple and begin traveling freely through space.

Before decoupling occurs most of the photons in the universe are interacting with electrons and protons in the photon–baryon fluid. The universe is opaque or "foggy" as a result. There is light but not light we could observe through telescopes. The baryonic matter in the universe consisted of ionized plasma, and it only became neutral when it gained free electrons during "recombination," thereby releasing the photons creating the CMB. When the photons were released (or decoupled) the universe became transparent. Source

One second may not sound like a lot to you, but the early universe went through enormous changes in that first second. Read the rest of the link to find out more.

And the universe stayed dark, as far as we know, until the first stars began to shine, 150 million years or more after the Big Bang.

'Let there be light', eh?

If you would watch the part of the movie where they explain it you would understand, because right now you dont know what you are talking about...how could you if you didn't see it?

All the religous texts
are = Tolkien "Fellowship of the Ring"

A story taken to serious...

Sure at the time the places and people might have existed.
abit like a "Story based on real persons and places" BUT,
big but ahead, the actions, scenarios, situations are ALL
exagerated....

Jesus may have been a verry smart guy, bright ideas and a
big heart. A good friend maybe was fallowing him around.
Starting writing about him, but the stories were like abit
imaginative.

The thesis of Aviezer's book, In the Beginning… Biblical Creation and Science, is that contrary to common misconceptions, cutting edge scientific developments have actually brought physics into closer harmony with Genesis than ever before. Aviezer analyzes the biblical days of creation one at a time, matching up the events described with elements of the scientific theory of the universe's origins. But first he makes one proviso upon which the rest of his hypothesis depends: the "days" referred to in Genesis should not be understood as 24 hour periods but as important stages in the development of the world. This interpretation is drawn from many traditional Bible commentaries, based on the fact that before the creation of the sun on the fourth day, the terms day and night could not possibly have carried their commonplace meanings. Filling the Gaps Aviezer's premise is that the Big Bang theory confirms the first verse of the Bible, but that in contrast to modern physics, which by its own admission is unable to discern what happened before the Big Bang, Genesis clearly describes the cause: "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." God's command "let there be light" refers to the appearance of the primeval fireball, containing all the matter and energy of the present-day universe, and the chaos--tohu va-vohu--described in the Bible matches the random and chaotic condition of the universe in its initial state. Finally, "God separated the light from the darkness" refers to the formation of atoms, the consequent freeing of photons and the flooding of the universe with electromagnetic radiation

reply to post by Astyanax
www.myjewishlearning.com...


this will you get you started on understanding...you have to open your mind and not take the bible literally like I keep saying.
But without browsing thru the movie, replying to this thread is a waste of time for both of us.



Here is more information from the scientist and his book which the movie took it's info from:

The case carefully advanced by Aviezer hit the headlines with the publication of Gerald Schroeder's bestselling Genesis and the Big Bang, a more radical book in terms of both style and content. Since Schroeder advances essentially the same ideas as Aviezer, I'll focus on two key differences between the writers' arguments. First: Aviezer was content to interpret the "days" of creation figuratively. Not so Schroeder. For him, Genesis is a literal account of the scientifically established process of creation. He resolves the contradiction between six days and 15 billion years by invoking Einstein's theory of relativity, which asserts that rather than being an absolute value, the flow of time is influenced by motion and gravitational force. Time being relative, six days in one frame of reference could well be equivalent to 15 billion years in another. Since there was no possibility of objectively measuring the time involved in the creation process, Schroeder draws the audacious conclusion that six days represented the elapsed time from none other than God's perspective. This claim raises difficult religious questions. Since relativistic time dilation is a function of motion and gravity, are we to understand that these forces operate on God, in other words that God is part of the physical universe? It seems that in an attempt to extricate himself from an annoying textual problem (the discrepancy between the age of the universe according to Genesis and the Big Bang theory), Schroeder has opened the door on a much more significant theological one. Second: Schroeder claims that people who think that Genesis clashes with modern physics have not read the Bible carefully enough

www.myjewishlearning.com...

reply to post by timetothink

(Long quote from external source)

this will you get you started on understanding.

I understand that it is complete nonsense. There was no 'primeval fireball'. Genesis clearly states that creation began with the words 'Let there be light'. Chaos precedes creation in Genesis, it doesn't come afterwards.

As for the conceit that the 'days' of Genesis are really very long periods of time, it is as old as the hills. It was what my father said to me the first time I asked the question how God could have created the world in seven days. In my school choir we used to sing O God, Our Help in Ages Past, a hymn that contains the line

A thousand ages in Thy sight are like an evening gone.

That hymn was published in 1706. So much for the groundbreaking new analysis in your movie. Actually, the idea that God's days are longer than yours and mine is a lot older than that – it goes all the way back to King David.

For a thousand years in Thy sight are but as yesterday, when it is past, and as a watch in the night – Psalms 90:4

Oh, and by the way: the time that elapsed between the Big Bang and the appearance of light in the universe was about one second. How does that fit into God's timescale of creation as described in the film?

You have to open your mind and not take the bible literally like I keep saying.

What annoys me isn't the implied disagreement with Biblical literalism – I couldn't care less about that – but the affront to truth from religious crackpots peddling rubbish like this and calling it science. The world is full of poorly-informed people who will see this stupid movie and go away thinking it is all true. You're one of them. And that's a damn' shame, because the truth about this movie is that it is nothing but a tissue of lies.

You are the idiot because you are denying the science and physics....and you also think I am a religious crackpot...you know nothing about me...I don't even go to church or believe in GOD...you closed mind shows how ignorant you are....you wont even read the scientists theory and face the fact that the bible might have nothing to do with religion.

I can tell the people replying to my thread are not even reading my posts...what a bunch of ignorant closed minded fools.... I am talking the opposite of religion and you keep bringing it back to religion....

I am not the one with the religious hang ups.