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.
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.
In fact, if an object contains (radioactive) carbon, this should be a clue that the object may not be any older than 50,000 years.Misconception #2: Carbon dating can be used to date virtually anything Another misconception people have about carbon dating is that it can be used to date virtually anything.Carbon dating can only be used to date objects that were once living or even apart of a living organism. It cannot be used to directly date inorganic objects, such as rocks (other radioactive dating methods are used to date radioactive rocks).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. that radiocarbon measurements on the shroud should be performed blind seem to the author to be lacking in merit … group and the candidate laboratories devolved into a P. However, in a 1990 paper Gove conceded that the "arguments often raised, …Ironically, despite its popularity, it is also one of the most misunderstood methods of dating.Many people mistakenly believe carbon dating can be used to date objects that are millions or even billions of years old.The Shroud of Turin (Turin Shroud), a linen cloth that tradition associates with the crucifixion and burial of Jesus, has undergone numerous scientific tests, the most notable of which is radiocarbon dating, in an attempt to determine the relic's authenticity. Shredding the samples would not solve the problem, while making it much more difficult and wasteful to clean the samples properly.In 1988, scientists at three separate laboratories dated samples from the Shroud to a range of AD 1260–1390, which coincides with the first certain appearance of the shroud in the 1350s and is much later than the burial of Jesus. Samples were taken on April 21, 1988 in the Cathedral by Franco Testore, an expert on weaves and fabrics, and by Giovanni Riggi, a representative of the maker of bio-equipment "Numana".