Just how old is the earth anyway?

[jasoncran]

hmm. interesting thought. yes a young earth if true would damage the toe seriously! as that time frame needed to elvove would be out the window.

 

[ENDTIMER]

I forgot to click on the persons name that I was quoting, but it was Handy.

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.


I would like to say hello again to this forum. I am new here and have been reading a lot
of the posts. I personally don't believe that the Bible teaches us exactly how old the Earth
is, but if someone can lead me to that/those scriptures, please do so.

I would also like to add this. You said Genesis clearly starts out with the earth already
being here. I think it clearly states: In the beginning God created the heaven and earth.
So the earth was NOT here as you stated. IMHO !! God then went on to create light and
divided it from the darkness, etc.

I take that to mean that God created the earth, everything in and on it and did it all in six
days. I don't believe that the earth was just floating around in space and then God decided
to create something on a rock spinning around. He added the earth in with all of the other
things during the six days before He rested.

I am 64 years old and 6,000 seems like a long time to even me, but, millions or billions of
years is hard for me to grasp. I guess if you aren't getting older, you are getting dead. I hope
this isn't too much off topic.
ENDTIMER

 

[handy]

Endtimer, welcome to the board and to the discussion. I was not as clear as I should have been when I said that Genesis starts out with the earth being made. What I meant was that the earth was in place prior to the first day of creation. God's first act of creation on this earth was "Let there be light", and prior to the creation of light, the earth was in place. Now, I don't argue for a moment that the earth could have been created a split second before God said "Let there be light", but nor am I going to argue that the earth couldn't have been around for a long time before that.

If we look at some of reasons for why the earth cannot be billions of years old, most of them are because the earth could not have supported life billions of years ago. I agree, it seems unlikely that life has been on earth for billions of years.

But, it does seem likely that our universe is billions of years old. God created the heavens as well as creating the earth before He said, "Let there be light." It seems very likely that God created this universe a very long time ago, and yes, atheists notwithstanding, God very well could have waited billions of years before bringing life to this planet, very possibly because He was waiting until the time the planet was in a state to sustain life. I guess that really boils down what I'm pondering here. That Genesis is the story of life here on earth, but the earth itself was created with the universe, and the universe, I believe is much older than 6000 years.

 

[Mysteryman]

This thread is not suppose to be about life. Then it is about life. Then it is not about life. Then it is about life .

No matter what anyone says, the question of how old this earth is, will never be answered.

So that leaves me questioning the real purpose of this thread ? :help

 

[seekandlisten]

I guess that really boils down what I'm pondering here. That Genesis is the story of life here on earth, but the earth itself was created with the universe, and the universe, I believe is much older than 6000 years.

The Genesis story is about God breathing 'life' into mankind from my understanding. The Bible speaks of 'life' and 'death' all the way through it with many times not referring to our physical life. Adam did not 'surely die' physically when he ate of the tree so I would think that points to what kind of 'life' was breathed into Adam and Eve in the Genesis story. Every method we have for dating shows the earth to me much older than 6000 years and the Bible does not contradict this. Just my 2 cents.

 

[handy]

This thread is not suppose to be about life. Then it is about life. Then it is not about life. Then it is about life .

No matter what anyone says, the question of how old this earth is, will never be answered.

So that leaves me questioning the real purpose of this thread ? :help

As the originator of this thread, I can tell you that the purpose of the thread is to question the dogmatism that comes from folks stating unequivocally that the earth is 6000 years old, or 6 billion years old, rather than admitting that the Bible doesn't teach the age of the earth.

I don't think it really matters what a person's opinion about the age of the earth is. But, even though I cannot see that it matters, since the Bible isn't the least bit clear on it, I see that there are a lot of folks who will divide over this issue, from some folks saying that a person cannot even consider themselves a Christian if they don't embrace YEC to other folks saying that a person must be a superstitious whack-job if they think that the earth is younger than billions of years. To me, if there was ever a subject in which we Christians can "agree to disagree" this should be it, but I find a lot of lines drawn in the sand over this issue.

 

[John]

[youtube:2oq563rc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_VvbfQpkmg[/youtube:2oq563rc]

 

[freeway]

Mark 10:6
And Jesus answered and said to them, “Because of the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. 6 But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.

Here is one of the main reason I believe the earth is young and by one means the only reason. Here Jesus is telling the crowd that God created man at the beginning of "creation" not a billion yrs later but during the first week. So if we trace the genealogy back to Adam around 6000 yrs but how long was Adam and Eve in the garden is not said. To me Jesus should know, after all he did it..

 

[westtexas]

So if we trace the genealogy back to Adam around 6000 yrs but how long was Adam and Eve in the garden is not said.

I agree that scripture does not say how long Adam and Eve were in the garden but I do believe that it puts some outer limits on it. Gen 3 has Adam and Eve being expelled from the garden, Gen 4 has Cain and Abel being born outside of the garden and then Gen 5:3 says Seth was born when Adam was 130 yrs old. Gen 5:5 says "all the days that Adam lived were 930 yrs; and then he died" So I believe that scripture disagrees with evolutionists who try to put Adam and Eve in the garden for thousands and thousands of yrs.
How old is the earth?
Westtexas

 

[watchman F]

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

Now it's my turn:



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

That is right Vic you tell'em. The gap theory is anti biblical way for so called christian to make friends with false teachers of men. The Earth is almost 6,000 years old. When we hit he 6,000 years mark Christ will return to set up the 7th day, millennial reign, the final 1,000 years of human history before eternity. 6,000 years or toil, and then 1,000 years of Sabbath rest.

 

[lordkalvan]

A couple of threads addressed this topic in the Christianity and Science forum before fizzling to an end. There may be some points made in these (from both 'sides') that could be of interest if you didn't follow the discussions:

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=40943

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=41795

 

[GojuBrian]

handy,

It's an interesting discussion. A coworker of mine in a past job used to ponder on it alot. He believed the earth is much older than I believed it is. We never came to an agreement or a definite conclusion.

My answer is also, "I don't know" and better yet, "it's none of my business."

I have trouble keeping up with how old everyone in my family is. When I atleast get that down I may go from there.

 

[Guest]

The Earth is about 4.6 billion years. Every bit of scientific evidence points to this. While I do not believe in ultimate truths,(only probabilities) the evidence for the age of the Earth is so overwhelming that I find it rather interesting that some people ignore the findings. Of course there are some people who still believe in a flat earth: to me the mindset is similar.
http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublonskopf/Flatearthsociety.htm

 

[logical bob]

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.

Hi mjjcb - I hope my pitching in doesn't aggravate you too much!

The view that the earth is around 4.5 billion years old isn't the opinion of atheists, it's the opinion of scientists. It isn't based on wanting to discredit any religious idea, it's based on evidence. Believing what the evidence points to isn't failing to be open-minded - quite the reverse. Science is about being open-minded enough to accept the evidence wherever it leads and whether that suits your preconceptions or not. If the evidence suggested the earth was 6000 years old, that's what scientists would think. If an error in the theory is discovered tomorrow and the calculation revised then scientists will revise their opinions accordingly.

 

[jasoncran]

i will comment on a this, a friend and a former professor who was a health science teacher was call an arceologist for believing in the creation story. yes that was how they spelled that insulting word. he also was told by the head of the biology deptpartment head that he couldnt imagine someone not accepting evolution.

hardly open minded.

that is being planted in the college students. i could see requiring evidence to back your claim, but to say thats settled isnt exactly wise to instill. as the toe should be allowed to rexamined and so on. someday one person may doubt it and not have enough evidence to prove his hunch, but another might.

if the toe isnt allowed to be falsifalble then what has science become? are all scientist this way, no but i think some are closed minded.

 

[logical bob]

Hi Jason, we're discussing the age of the earth not evolution here, but you still raise some important points about science so I'll respond.

he also was told by the head of the biology deptpartment head that he couldnt imagine someone not accepting evolution.

I find it difficult to get my head around someone understanding evolution and rejecting it, but this forum is a daily learning experience. :P

i could see requiring evidence to back your claim, but to say thats settled isnt exactly wise to instill.

Well, nothing in science is ever absolutely settled. Evolution and the age of the earth and the universe are at least as settled as gravity, electromagnetism, thermodynamics and lots of things that nobody objects to. There would be no point the head of a biology department suggesting otherwise.

as the toe should be allowed to rexamined and so on.

Absolutely. And it is. The theory is constantly re-examined and refined.

if the toe isnt allowed to be falsifalble then what has science become?

It is falsifiable. If a proposition can't be falsified then it isn't scientific. Please take this on board because it's a really important point.

To the OP - sorry for a bit of a derail, but I would say this. Don't look for the biblical position on the age of the earth when we're able to know how old it is. If you believe the Bible to be a source of truth and yet your interpretation is in conflict with reality then your interpretation needs to change, because reality isn't going to.

Please understand that I'm not being hostile here. It seems to me that you disrespect the Bible by placing it in conflict with reality and I can't see why you'd want to do that.

 

[jasoncran]

hmm can one prove what one believes by faith? science is limited , though you may disagree.

i wish science would stop trying figure out why we are here and how, and just examine what is out there and how it works.

when you get into why and how does that not become a religion? i can bring up quotes on some famous scientists on that stuff. one being hawkins and the other dawkins.

science isnt a philosphy, that is what i meant by that. and it has become that to some.

the former proffesors understand evolution but he also aware of the laws of probability and that is why he rejects that. to claim that we all came from nothing and its ordes itself by chance, and will stay ordered without anything to keep it foolish to him, and i agree. ( he is address the big bang theory)

 

[Mike]

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.

Hi mjjcb - I hope my pitching in doesn't aggravate you too much!

Ouch! What did I say, what did I say!??? Sometimes your matter-of-fact dismissal of anything faith related seems quite bold, but I thought we were friends... When I first got on the boards, I found myself engaged in a debate with you. I was caught off guard by your assertiveness, but I think I've come to be more familiar with you and find you very steady and stay just shy of being indignant and disrespectful of our faith. (that's sort of a compliment)

The view that the earth is around 4.5 billion years old isn't the opinion of atheists, it's the opinion of scientists. It isn't based on wanting to discredit any religious idea, it's based on evidence.

I've watched a number of Christian/atheist debates and many of them make the point that "the earth is billions of years old and God used all time time to wait to create His prized creation?" It's a clear point that doesn't use science to say that He didn't but intended to persuade. Zindler and Hitchens seem to always include this in their arguments. So, scientists who don't have an agenda to discredit Christianity might not use it, but those who engage in debate do.

Believing what the evidence points to isn't failing to be open-minded - quite the reverse. Science is about being open-minded enough to accept the evidence wherever it leads and whether that suits your preconceptions or not. If the evidence suggested the earth was 6000 years old, that's what scientists would think. If an error in the theory is discovered tomorrow and the calculation revised then scientists will revise their opinions accordingly.

throughout this thread you'll see Christians accept a wide range of ages for earth. I don't see how Christians can be considered closed-minded. My statements were directed toward atheists, such as yourself, not scientists. I'm not sure where you made that leap from what I said.

Personally, I could possibly accept that it is this old, but I'm leaning not to. It wouldn't effect my faith, but I simply have a hard time conceiving of such a period of time. I've also heard arguments that are persuasive (and way above my head) that involve thermodynamics and cite flaws in tests with light bending, changing speed, etc. If you're inclined to review such data in response to this, I'll not likely be able to follow you all the way through it. It'll probably be beyond my comprehension as is the evidence used to refute it. (being humbly honest here)

How could I be aggravated when I see that cute little avatar pop up on my screen. Is that a self-portrait?

 

[happyjoy]

hmm can one prove what one believes by faith? science is limited , though you may disagree.

i wish science would stop trying figure out why we are here and how, and just examine what is out there and how it works.

when you get into why and how does that not become a religion? i can bring up quotes on some famous scientists on that stuff. one being hawkins and the other dawkins.

science isnt a philosphy, that is what i meant by that. and it has become that to some.

the former proffesors understand evolution but he also aware of the laws of probability and that is why he rejects that. to claim that we all came from nothing and its ordes itself by chance, and will stay ordered without anything to keep it foolish to him, and i agree. ( he is address the big bang theory)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

 

[freeway]

I think the age of the world and human population goes hand in hand. reason being is that this huge age theory is what is needed for humans to evolve into modern day man. If God is giving us false informative or deceptive info then why do we find evidence for a young earth. And why is the population of our planet at a level that fits for human life to only be around 4000 yrs. I'm not saying that I have this all figured out. but why the discrepancies in all this. Plus and this is the clincher I believe the bible says it a young earth..

World Population
The population of the planet in 1985 was: 5 billion
in 1977: 4 billion
in 1900: 1 billion
in Jesus’ day: 1/4 billion
If man has been here for 3 million years, as scientist claim, the current population should be 150,000 people per square inch!!

http://www.digisys.net/users/ddalton/cr ... lution.htm
I see alot of these statements and as a christian I just can't dismiss them....