Just how old is the earth anyway?

[handy]

I know that a lot of folks believe that the Bible teaches that the earth is only 6000 years old. I know that the Bible never says this outright, I don't think anyone actually claims that it does. But, from what I understand, the 6000 year date comes from adding up the various ages of the various men in various genealogies, applying that number to somethings that we can know the time for, do some more addition and the number comes to about 6000 years.

Myself, I have two problems with this method of dating the earth. It might be a good way of explaining how long folks have been on the earth, but it doesn't seem a good way to come to an accurate number about the age of the earth itself. At least, I don't see how some folks can be as dogmatic about it as they are, given the fact that this "date" is clearly based upon man's interpretation of genealogies and not stated text. God did not give us the date He created the earth, so why be so dogmatic about it?

Secondly, Genesis clearly starts out with the earth already being there. Nothing was on it, and it was covered with water, but it was there.

Now, I want to say right now that I don't, do not, absolutely don't want this to become a discussion about a pre-Adamic civilization. That's a topic for a different thread. This topic is solely about how old this planet is.

I know that a lot of folks get het up about this topic, because it seems as if we concede that the earth might be much, much older than 6000 years, we are then conceding that evolution is correct and Genesis is wrong, but I don't see why we need to make that leap. If we take the fossil record out of the equation and just look at the geological make up of the third rock from the sun, it looks like a very old rock indeed.

Is it really biblical to say that the earth is 6,000 years old?

 

[John]

I think the Earth is very young, perhaps not 6000 but definitely not 10+ billion.

 

[Sparkey]

Question: How old is Bishop Ussher?
Answer: He's dead.

Can anybody accept my answer? Okay - now on to the question that the thread asks:
Answer: I don't know.

Can anybody accept this answer? Not in my experience.

~Sparrow

You may PM me if you wish me to prove my assertion that the people who frequent this section of Christian Forums can not accept the fact that I don't know the age of the earth. I do have proof of THIS -- but nobody has proof of their pet answer to the OP question.

 

[Mysteryman]

I know that a lot of folks believe that the Bible teaches that the earth is only 6000 years old. I know that the Bible never says this outright, I don't think anyone actually claims that it does. But, from what I understand, the 6000 year date comes from adding up the various ages of the various men in various genealogies, applying that number to somethings that we can know the time for, do some more addition and the number comes to about 6000 years.

Myself, I have two problems with this method of dating the earth. It might be a good way of explaining how long folks have been on the earth, but it doesn't seem a good way to come to an accurate number about the age of the earth itself. At least, I don't see how some folks can be as dogmatic about it as they are, given the fact that this "date" is clearly based upon man's interpretation of genealogies and not stated text. God did not give us the date He created the earth, so why be so dogmatic about it?

Secondly, Genesis clearly starts out with the earth already being there. Nothing was on it, and it was covered with water, but it was there.

Now, I want to say right now that I don't, do not, absolutely don't want this to become a discussion about a pre-Adamic civilization. That's a topic for a different thread. This topic is solely about how old this planet is.

I know that a lot of folks get het up about this topic, because it seems as if we concede that the earth might be much, much older than 6000 years, we are then conceding that evolution is correct and Genesis is wrong, but I don't see why we need to make that leap. If we take the fossil record out of the equation and just look at the geological make up of the third rock from the sun, it looks like a very old rock indeed.

Is it really biblical to say that the earth is 6,000 years old?

I will pose a question to you then. > Was there "Life" on this earth prior to Genesis 1:2 ?

 

[Sparkey]

Let's cut to the chase, shall we?

Here's a link to an article found in WIKI: Dating Creation

 

[handy]

I know that a lot of folks believe that the Bible teaches that the earth is only 6000 years old. I know that the Bible never says this outright, I don't think anyone actually claims that it does. But, from what I understand, the 6000 year date comes from adding up the various ages of the various men in various genealogies, applying that number to somethings that we can know the time for, do some more addition and the number comes to about 6000 years.

Myself, I have two problems with this method of dating the earth. It might be a good way of explaining how long folks have been on the earth, but it doesn't seem a good way to come to an accurate number about the age of the earth itself. At least, I don't see how some folks can be as dogmatic about it as they are, given the fact that this "date" is clearly based upon man's interpretation of genealogies and not stated text. God did not give us the date He created the earth, so why be so dogmatic about it?

Secondly, Genesis clearly starts out with the earth already being there. Nothing was on it, and it was covered with water, but it was there.

Now, I want to say right now that I don't, do not, absolutely don't want this to become a discussion about a pre-Adamic civilization. That's a topic for a different thread. This topic is solely about how old this planet is.

I know that a lot of folks get het up about this topic, because it seems as if we concede that the earth might be much, much older than 6000 years, we are then conceding that evolution is correct and Genesis is wrong, but I don't see why we need to make that leap. If we take the fossil record out of the equation and just look at the geological make up of the third rock from the sun, it looks like a very old rock indeed.

Is it really biblical to say that the earth is 6,000 years old?

I will pose a question to you then. > Was there "Life" on this earth prior to Genesis 1:2 ?

FOUL! Penalty for you, MM! Post that question in a different thread please! Now: totopic

 

[handy]

Spar! Hi there, I haven't seen you around for a while.

Thanks for sharing the link, and the link shows that many of the world's traditions point to the earth being several thousand years old.

But, the $64,000 question is: Is it Biblical to assert, assert to the point of being dogmatic, that the earth is only 4000+/- years old?

Again, I can see life on earth being that 'young' perhaps, counting genealogies can point to that, but what of the planet itself?

 

[Sparkey]

Hey there, Dora!

Good to see you again. My best answer (and I have studied to the length of my ability) is simply this: "I don't know."

It is my consideration that the good Lord has indeed cloaked some things in mystery. The book of Job is one of the best sources to get His "opinion". The gist of it is: "Where were YOU when I..."

Some people are too arrogant to hear that, methinks. Perhaps there is a "better" biblical answer to the question? I don't know it.

~Sparrow

 

[handy]

I'm in full agreement with you, Sparrowhawk. I don't know either. I believe wholeheartedly that God certainly has the power to call the earth forth complete as it was, 6000 years ago, but I don't see that the Bible teaches this and our geological data certainly doesn't support it. I don't think we do know.

But, folks certainly can be adamant that the earth is only 6000=/- years old, even to the point of asserting that if some do not believe this, then they cannot be bible believing Christians.

I've often wondered why the dogmatism over something that is clearly a man-made interpretation of a part of the Bible which doesn't even deal with the age of the earth.

Perhaps there is a "better" biblical answer to the question? I don't know it.

Neither do I. Does anyone?

 

[Mysteryman]

The earth is more than 6000 years old, because there was "Life" on this earth prior to Gen. 1:2.

The Word of God tells us that there are three earths. The first earth and then the third earth. We can find this easily within scripture. So, where is the second earth within scripture ?

II Peter 3:5 & 6 & 7 and II Peter 3:13

 

[Vic C.]

Now it's my turn:



Please do not take one more step toward your off the wall pre-Adamic theories.

 

[handy]

:nod Thank you, Vic.

Now, without going any further towards a pre-Adamic civilazation or getting into the idea that there was life on this planet prior to the events in Genesis 1, I did read the texts you gave and my conclusion is that they are inconclusive in regards to the age of this rock we live on.

 

[samuel]

Since Adam would not have had any certain age prior to sin, there is a small glitch here. There is no accounting of the time, spent in the garden. This could be responsible for additional time, I however still cling to a 6000 - 10,000 year earth age.

Some account the seven days of creation, as 1000 years to God is as one day. Therefore they say the earth is 6000 years at present, and the final 1000 equaling 7000 will be fulfilled by the Millennium (time/day of rest), then the recreation of a new earth. This is also supported by old Jewish literature.

 

[seekandlisten]

But, the $64,000 question is: Is it Biblical to assert, assert to the point of being dogmatic, that the earth is only 4000+/- years old?

Hey handy,

Well without getting into talking about 'life' on this planet and only looking at the age we have an age of 4.5 billion years which was arrived at by radiometric age dating. This age can have an error of + 1%. As to whether this is an absolute truth, probably not, but it is the closest we have in our understanding. It is quite clear that the earth is older then thousands of years, it's also quite clear that its older than millions of years, and when we get to the billions, well is it really an issue if there is room for a little bit of error on 4.5 billion years?

Now there is zero evidence that the earth is 6-10000 years old, scientifically or Biblically, so why do people cling to this 'dogma' is beyond me. I think elsewhere in the Bible it states something along the lines of 'God' telling us to recognize what is in front of us and the rest will be revealed. Well according to what we know, science, the earth is 4.5 billion years old. If we are going to ignore the 'evidence' that is right in front of us how does one expect to learn more? Young earth, totally absurd and based on nothing but the dogmatic unbelief in reality. Does one simply make the Bible line up with their beliefs or are they open for 'truth'.

cheers

 

[seekandlisten]

Hey handy,

I thought I'd make this point in a separate post as it is in reference to life on earth which may be taken to be 'pre-Adamic'. I will delete if you think this is off topic. I'll try and find a source if you think this applies to this thread but I watched a show on how they traced present day people's DNA back 200,000 years in establishing the way humans have spread out across the planet and our ancestry. It was quite interesting and shows that through DNA we can trace our ancestors back at least 200,000 years to Africa, shown through a test group of people. Again, I'll look for a source if your interested, or delete if this goes against your topic for this thread.

cheers

 

[John]

Here is a chart showing how many arrive at 6000.

 

[jasoncran]

seekandlisten we dont accept the theory of evolution as biblical. the idea of the earth may be older or not. i'm in agreement with veteran's view as that is what i taught how we come to the conclusion the earth's age. but we may never know as were arent God and he choose not to reveal it to us.

 

[freeway]

Before becoming a Christian, "atheist" I believe the earth was whatever science said it was. Although it seem to change as years went by I still believed in there knowledge of said age and really did not question their findings. They after becoming Christian I began to take a closer look. First off I will admit I don't know the age of our planet. However I don't believe it to be billions of years old. For my part the main reason is if death did not enter into the world until the fall of man. They how do we see decay of 4.5 billion years while the bible shows man and his fall to be around 6000 yrs? Just a few other things that came up later in my Christian life, ie the decay of the gravity field, erosion, salt in the ocean, no living things beyond the 10,000 yr mark, population of man. etc etc etc. If we where around for billions of years, then thing just don't add up.. Now does all this effect my salvation NO, because if it did the bible would be very clear on this subject... but it is fun to talk about it anyway.. One last thing without the billions of yrs, evolution does not work.. but that is already being debated in another topic.
I tried to stay in topic...

 

[Mike]

I wasn't going to chime in, because it seems as a Christian or otherwise, "I don't know" should be everyone's answer. The Christian is much more likely to say those words than an atheist in my experience.

At first I got a little worked up, because seekandlisten came in to the conversation, and I thought we were on the "Christians Only" forum. I mean no offense, seekandlisten. I just had the wrong board, and you just got through saying in another thread you are a quasi-atheist. With atheists on the board here, and to others I would bring this up. When we talk about the earth being millions of years old, let alone billions, this is where I've heard atheist feel like they're gaining momentum. They've argued "The earth has been around for XXX amount of years, and I'm supposed to believe God's plan was to wait millions or billions of years to bring humans into existence for the last few thousand, and then 2,000 years after His Son arrives in the flesh, people are waiting for His return. I don't buy it." - Atheists words, not mine. They don't capitalize God, but I can't bring myself not to.

Okay, so there you have it. I rely on what people tell me about other peoples interpretation of yet other peoples data says. I'm 4th down the line, waiting for the data to be dumbed down enough for me to get a handle on. So, I don't get wrapped around the axle on this. The original science is beyond my scope of understanding until it gets filtered and consolidated. Atheists seem to be far in error to the one side of earth's age, and some Christians seem to me to be rejecting evidence that it's older than they think it is. Some Christians differ, but atheists do not want to let go of an earth billions of years old as they feel it supports their argument about the relatively minuscule period where man was created.

All this to say, I feel Christians are more open minded about the earth's age than are atheists.

just sayin'...

 

[westtexas]

I'm in full agreement with you, Sparrowhawk. I don't know either. I believe wholeheartedly that God certainly has the power to call the earth forth complete as it was, 6000 years ago, but I don't see that the Bible teaches this and our geological data certainly doesn't support it. I don't think we do know.

Hello Handy, I personally believe in the 6,000 yr +/- range simply due to the geneologys which have been discussed. I also believe in a literal 6 day creation. I'm not quite sure how old geological data says the earth is, but just for discussion sake let me say 25 million yrs. I do not have a problem at all agreeing with science and say our Lord created a 25 million yr old earth and He did it 6,000 +/- yrs ago. Where I cannot agree with science is if they carbon-date anything human much more than 6,000 yrs. old as I believe this goes against the geneologys listed and thus disagrees with scripture.
Westtexas