How Old is the Earth? (1 Viewer)

[26 X World Champs]

OK gang, let's see where this goes? How old is the Earth? The reason I ask is that if it is more than 6300 years old the Bible is wrong, very wrong, meaning creationism is wrong, very wrong.

So which one of these are true?

Compiled by Rev. Jack Barr

Both creationists and evolutionists spend a great deal of time trying to find the exact age of the earth, and for a good reason. As extensive evidence continues to unfold that indicates the earth is less than 10,000 years old, the evolutionary theory falls apart. If the earth is truly less than 10,000 years old, it would be impossible for man to have evolved from a lower order in that amount of time.

Or this one:

How Old Is The Earth, And How Do We Know?

T he generally accepted age for the Earth and the rest of the solar system is about 4.55 billion years (plus or minus about 1%). This value is derived from several different lines of evidence.

Unfortunately, the age cannot be computed directly from material that is solely from the Earth. There is evidence that energy from the Earth's accumulation caused the surface to be molten. Further, the processes of erosion and crustal recycling have apparently destroyed all of the earliest surface.

The oldest rocks which have been found so far (on the Earth) date to about 3.8 to 3.9 billion years ago (by several radiometric dating methods). Some of these rocks are sedimentary, and include minerals which are themselves as old as 4.1 to 4.2 billion years. Rocks of this age are relatively rare, however rocks that are at least 3.5 billion years in age have been found on North America, Greenland, Australia, Africa, and Asia.

So which is it? Is there any possibility that the Earth is only 6000 years old? All the scientific evidence that the Earth is 4 billion years old is wrong? It's some weird joke by our Higher Power?

I would sincerely like to hear how the Earth can be 4 billion years old if the Bible says it's only 6000 years old?

Can anyone explain this to me, scientifically?

 

[Deus Ex Machina]

Of course the Bible is right on the age of the earth!

We've been told a whole lot of hullaballoo by modern "scientists" -- crazy ideas like heliocentrism, a spherical earth, evolution and the blasphemous notion that lightning is electricity rather than being the wrath of God. So, you see, our whole perception of the universe has been warped by the godless commie/liberal public education system.

And did you ever wonder why there is a limit on how high you can fly in an airplane? No it's not because of the decreased air pressure. It's because if you fly too high, your plane might hit the firmament!

 

[Mixed View]

:applaud

Of course the Bible is right on the age of the earth!

We've been told a whole lot of hullaballoo by modern "scientists" -- crazy ideas like heliocentrism, a spherical earth, evolution and the blasphemous notion that lightning is electricity rather than being the wrath of God. So, you see, our whole perception of the universe has been warped by the godless commie/liberal public education system.

And did you ever wonder why there is a limit on how high you can fly in an airplane? No it's not because of the decreased air pressure. It's because if you fly too high, your plane might hit the firmament!

Well said Dues

 

[GarzaUK]

:applaud

Well said Dues

So where do the dinosaurs come into all this? Did we make them exstinct by beating them with clubs?

Also what about the proof of two different species of Human co-existing in Europe 10,000 years ago?

You can't ignore the fossilized bones. Most Christians now admit that the earth is way older than what was realized.

Plus for the population of the human race goes from 2 - 6,000,000,000 in 6000 years? Even if you ignore disease factors, this is an impossibilty.

 

[Deus Ex Machina]

So where do the dinosaurs come into all this? Did we make them exstinct by beating them with clubs?

No. They went extinct because they couldn't fit onto Noah's Ark.

Also what about the proof of two different species of Human co-existing in Europe 10,000 years ago?

Proof? Who needs that? Most of the stories in the Bible are completely unverified, and yet the good book remains a bestseller.

You can't ignore the fossilized bones. Most Christians now admit that the earth is way older than what was realized.

Yeah, but who's digging up all those fossilized bones? It's those godless "scientists" again. Please give me a fair and unbiased source!

Plus for the population of the human race goes from 2 - 6,000,000,000 in 6000 years? Even if you ignore disease factors, this is an impossibilty.

Yes it can happen. If people follow God's laws and stop using birth control, we can breed like rabbits!

 

[26 X World Champs]

Of course the Bible is right on the age of the earth!

We've been told a whole lot of hullaballoo by modern "scientists" -- crazy ideas like heliocentrism, a spherical earth, evolution and the blasphemous notion that lightning is electricity rather than being the wrath of God. So, you see, our whole perception of the universe has been warped by the godless commie/liberal public education system.

And did you ever wonder why there is a limit on how high you can fly in an airplane? No it's not because of the decreased air pressure. It's because if you fly too high, your plane might hit the firmament!

:rofl

Thanks for putting the right spin on this issue! I'm still waiting to read posts from people who really do believe the Earth is only 6000 years old.

 

[walrus]

First let me say that if the Earth is not around 4.5 billion years old, someone (or something) went to a lot of time and trouble to make it appear as though it is, and I don't believe God is in the habit of leaving deceptive evidence around.

That said, I believe that God created the heavens and the Earth. I also believe that the Earth (and universe) has evolved to it's present form in much the way that evolutionary scientists believe that it does. Genesis is not a science textbook, and was never meant to be. It is a simple story for a people whose idea of hi-tech was animal husbandry. Can you imagine God saying to Moses, "In the beginning I created the heavens and the Earth. At first the Earth was shapeless and without form - more or less a torus shaped cloud of molecular hydrogen. Then I said, let atoms of hydrogen come together so that they may increase their gravitational attraction and thus form an immense cloud of collapsing hydrogen. Then I said, Let there be Light!, and within that cloud pressure reached critical mass and simple hydrogen to helium fusion began to occur..." etc... When you get down to it, the Bible never really even says that creation lasted seven days. Here, from Easton's Bible Dictionary is the Hebrew word translated as "day" in Genesis:

Yowm (yome); Noun Masculine, Strong #: 3117

Definitions:
day, time, year
day (as opposed to night)
day (24 hour period)
as defined by evening and morning
as a division of time 1b
a working day, a day's journey
days, lifetime (pl.)
time, period (general)
year
temporal references
today
yesterday
tomorrow

KJV Word Usage and Count
day 2008
time 64
chronicles 37
daily 44
ever 18
year 14
continually 10
when 10
as 10
while 8
full 8 always 4
whole 4
always 4
miscellaneous 44

The words following the definitions with the numbers next to them are the other words that this same word is translated as in other parts of the Bible, and the number of times it is thus used. Keeping in mind that Genesis is a linguistic nightmare on the best days.

Here is a question I do want one of the fundamentalist creationist to answer though. On any given night I can go outside with my middle sized telescope and see the Andromeda Galaxy, the Clouds of Magellan, et. al. The nearest of these is approximately 190,000 light years distant. This distance has been confirmed by the dual methods of parallax measurement and doppler shift. If the Earth is only 6,000 years old, the light from those Galaxies should still be 184,000 light years away, therefore we should not see it. One person suggested to me that God created the light "en route" to us. This seems unneccesarily deceptive and complicated on God's part. I firmly believe that God didn't put anything in the universe that can not be rationally explained (even if that explanation is far beyond our current knowledge).

 

[Pacridge]

:rofl

Thanks for putting the right spin on this issue! I'm still waiting to read posts from people who really do believe the Earth is only 6000 years old.

You should check out a show on the "Angel Network” called "The Creation Network.” They honestly believe the earth is just over 6000 years old. They use some pretty hilarious facts to prove it too.

 

[GetVictd]

I don't believe God is in the habit of leaving deceptive evidence around.
This seems unneccesarily deceptive and complicated on God's part. I firmly believe that God didn't put anything in the universe that can not be rationally explained (even if that explanation is far beyond our current knowledge).

You Think HuH?

So would I have once but I read something or two in scripture and was baffled.


Matthew 13:10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?

Matthew 13:11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.

Matthew 13:12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.

Matthew 13:13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.

Matthew 13:14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:

Matthew 13:15 For this people's heart is waxed gross, and [their] ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with [their] eyes, and hear with [their] ears, and should understand with [their] heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

Matthew 13:16 But blessed [are] your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear.

Matthew 13:17 For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous [men] have desired to see [those things] which ye see, and have not seen [them]; and to hear [those things] which ye hear, and have not heard [them].

After I read this I was like hey! Why is Jesus being mysterious? But then I understood that it was most likely because His power was so great that He could heal/save anyone even unrighteous/undeserving.


as the prophet would say
Isaiah 55:8 For my thoughts [are] not your thoughts, neither [are] your ways my ways, saith the LORD.

So if He chooses to have us in discord over whether the earth was made 6000 or 3billion years ago...that's His business...Remember the called are called to walk by Faith not by Sight.

 

[sebastiansdreams]

You Think HuH?

So would I have once but I read something or two in scripture and was baffled.

Problem here is in the case of the parables, Jesus wasn't giving misguided information, just giving them stories that the apostles could later run with, it would seem. Because, as we know, the apostles either understood or were told the meanings of the parables. But it seems that rather than attempting to mislead the the people, as would be the case with evolutionary evidence, it was simply an overdulling or storytime method of teaching a greater lesson that they may understand at a later time (notice He was speaking in the present about them not being able to understand, not future).
As walrus has stated, and I agree, the word Yohm is certainly ambigious, and at the time it was originally translated, didn't make a difference at all. This was originially translated centuries before Darwin. Therefore, really, there was no reason to contest that the world was made in a week or that it was made in billions of years. But now that we have the science that shows us otherwise, we re-examine the word use, and find that it is ambigious, and can very feasibly mean period of time undertermined.
However, the truly ironic part is that everyone is always so concerned about that part, about how the world was made, within what time period everything occured. But the true problem is that if one is questioning the truth behind this story, then they have completely ignored the very first and most important verse. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. That is a much larger and bolder statement.
You wish to prove that the Bible is not true 26x? Then you're going to have to look at sources outside of it, because the Bible has been picked apart by plenty of people that have thrown up their hands in exasperation long before you were ever thought of. The reality is that it is a book of faith. I can not prove that God exists anymore than you can prove He does not. I cannot prove that Christ has saved me anymore than you can prove He hasn't. I can not prove any more that the Holy Spirit dwells in me any more than you can prove It does not. But, I have experienced something that you have not. If you could prove the Bible was wrong in the first few verses, why do you suppose millions still read it on a daily basis over nineteen hundred years after its compiliation? Pure brainless following just doesn't seem to cut it.

 

[GetVictd]

Problem here is in the case of the parables, Jesus wasn't giving misguided information, just giving them stories that the apostles could later run with, it would seem. Because, as we know, the apostles either understood or were told the meanings of the parables. But it seems that rather than attempting to mislead the the people, as would be the case with evolutionary evidence, it was simply an overdulling or storytime method of teaching a greater lesson that they may understand at a later time (notice He was speaking in the present about them not being able to understand, not future).
As walrus has stated, and I agree, the word Yohm is certainly ambigious, and at the time it was originally translated, didn't make a difference at all. This was originially translated centuries before Darwin. Therefore, really, there was no reason to contest that the world was made in a week or that it was made in billions of years. But now that we have the science that shows us otherwise, we re-examine the word use, and find that it is ambigious, and can very feasibly mean period of time undertermined.
However, the truly ironic part is that everyone is always so concerned about that part, about how the world was made, within what time period everything occured. But the true problem is that if one is questioning the truth behind this story, then they have completely ignored the very first and most important verse. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. That is a much larger and bolder statement.
You wish to prove that the Bible is not true 26x? Then you're going to have to look at sources outside of it, because the Bible has been picked apart by plenty of people that have thrown up their hands in exasperation long before you were ever thought of. The reality is that it is a book of faith. I can not prove that God exists anymore than you can prove He does not. I cannot prove that Christ has saved me anymore than you can prove He hasn't. I can not prove any more that the Holy Spirit dwells in me any more than you can prove It does not. But, I have experienced something that you have not. If you could prove the Bible was wrong in the first few verses, why do you suppose millions still read it on a daily basis over nineteen hundred years after its compiliation? Pure brainless following just doesn't seem to cut it.

Hi. Okay I can agree with you I don't think He was trying to misguide but rather it would seem He was enveloping a mystery about what He was saying, and it would seem mysterious, but only to people who weren't meant to understand. (probably not explaning myself well). I just think that certain things about the Bible will seem strange to people who don't or will just never have faith.



Okay to carry this question further see the following

http://www.bible-truth.org/GEN7.HTM

Vast deposits of fossilized plants, insects and animal life attest to the occurrence of a catastrophic flood on the earth. Fossils are formed only when they are rapidly buried by sediment and placed under pressure. During a great flood you would expect vast numbers of life on earth to be buried and preserved. It is not interesting that on earth today, few if any fossils are being preserved! Why? The force to make them in vast amounts, such as the Great Flood, is no longer operating.

Could not the flood have changed some things on earth giving them the impression of being older than they are?

 

[sebastiansdreams]

Could not the flood have changed some things on earth giving them the impression of being older than they are?

Look, if I've come to any conclusion about anything in this world, it's that pretty much anything is possible. Yes, it is possible that that is the case. However, I don't really see that necessarly needing to be the case. I mean we have tons of scientific evidence that mounds up to a very convincing argument that the world is older than 6000 years old. Moreover, it all goes down to the translation of one word that at the point of its translation, was indeed ambigious.
I guess my point is this: why does it matter? If you believe Genesis 1:1, then why does it matter if the word Yohm means one day or 3 Billion years? The reality is, that it doesn't. Is God incapable of making the world in 6 days? No. Do I think God did it that way in our case, science would point to no, and there's no reason the Bible needs it to either.

The problem I have with creationist science is that it is only response science. It is a science with a presupposed hypothesis with more theory than actual investigation. They have a model that the science is supposed to fit in, and they try to find ways that it fits. And sometimes, they'll find a hole where the key fits perfectly, but more times that not the evidence leads them down a road they ignore. It's a noble cause with a blinding effect. I think it is more likely that the larger amount of sceintific evidence piling up is a little more feasible.

 

[Blackflagx]

Well, I feel that the universe is infinite. I dont think it had a begining or will have an end. It has simply always existed. The earth, I would say has lasted billions of years. The different processes in the universe (really thats what the universe, and all matter is: processes) created the earth from something else. All matter in the universe is in a constant state of change and earth evolved from changing matter. I do not believe we were created and I certainly dont belive the rediculas fairy tales about how we are only 6000 years old. Yeah, Im a godless left wing wacko.

 

[walrus]

Well, I feel that the universe is infinite.

The universe is almost certainly not infinite. There are various evidences for this but one of the simplest is this - If the universe were infinite (and by extension populated with stars at the same ratio throughout) then any place you looked in the sky would contain a star. The night sky would be literally solid stars.

I dont think it had a begining or will have an end. It has simply always existed.

It is interesting that you discard the beliefs of the religious as "fairy tales" yet at the same time take a position that is totally contradicted by science. I don't know of one credible scientist who would claim that the universe always existed. The evidence of the big bang (which would be a beginning) is pretty solid. Whether the universe has an end or not remains to be seen.

The earth, I would say has lasted billions of years.

You would say? What did you do, take an eyeball estimation? I might say that the evidence of geology and astronomy points to an age of about 4.5 billion years - but my personal opinion really doesn't enter into it.

The different processes in the universe (really thats what the universe, and all matter is: processes) created the earth from something else.

Again, you depart from the scientists. The earth probably accreated from existing matter left over from the formation of the sun. It was not "created" from "something else".

All matter in the universe is in a constant state of change and earth evolved from changing matter.

The earth didn't evolve at all. Life evolves. A large ball of carbon and silica forms.

I do not believe we were created and I certainly dont belive the rediculas fairy tales about how we are only 6000 years old. Yeah, Im a godless left wing wacko.

You are certainly entitled to that opinion. I don't believe the earth is 6,000 years old either, however I do not feel that I have reached a level of enlightenment in which I can discard other's beliefs about the origin and meaning of life as "ridiculous fairy tales". My hat is off to you for achieving that level of wisdom. As to your being a godless left-wing wacko - I would have to know you better before making that determination. So far you just seem to be someone who is intolerant and disrespectful of the beliefs of others, and the left wing has always applauded itself for it's tolerance and open-mindedness. Maybe you are closer to those close-minded, fanatic, intolerant, God-loving conservatives than you think?

 

[sebastiansdreams]

Hmm, I think that pretty much wraps up anything I would have responded to that post. However, I have one minor note on one of the statements within.

Again, you depart from the scientists. The earth probably accreated from existing matter left over from the formation of the sun. It was not "created" from "something else".

When the word "create" comes up in matters of existing matter, I always point to artists. A painter does not himself form the paint he is using for an piece of art, but none the less, no one would deny that in the end the artwork was, indeed his own creation, though, in reality he did nothing more than take matter already existing and putting it together in a articulate and unique design. Did God create the matter from which the earth became the earth? I have not even the smallest idea where to begin to prove that one way or another, but, the reality is, it doesn't matter much.

 

[anomaly]

Firstly, the earth is most definitely around 4.5 billion years old. 6000 years is nonsense. Radioactive dating of isotopes with half lives longer than 4 billion years shows this, as isotopes with half lives of this length can be found in the earth in places. The amount there proportaional to the amount of non-radioactive elements can be used to determine just how much of the radioactive isotope was there, or atleast most of it. Thus, the half life can be compared to the decay rate of the isotope, and you've got your age of earth. Sure, the earth might be 4.3, 4.4, 4.6, or 4.7 billion years old, but in the argument at hand, these differences are irrelevent.

I see that the debate has shifted a bit to the existence of God. I once considered myself an atheist, now I must say I believe some God or creator or higher power must exist. The reason for this is simple: science shows that matter cannot come from nowhere. Matter can't just disappear, likewise it can't just appear, though it can be converted into energy, but again energy can't just appear...therefore something must have created all this matter we see. Until atheists can make matter just magically appear, I must say I'll have to accept being a theist (its not all that bad, really).

 

[Squawker]

I am stepping into an area I know very little about to put this into the discussion, not debate the topic itself. I recall reading in a similar debate something to the effect that in the beginning, the time frame was in thousands of years, which equaled one modern year. That explained the time frame and why inbreeding wasn't a problem. I could be remembering that wrong, so don't quote me on it.

 

[teacher]

Well, I feel that the universe is infinite. I dont think it had a begining or will have an end. It has simply always existed. The earth, I would say has lasted billions of years. The different processes in the universe (really thats what the universe, and all matter is: processes) created the earth from something else. All matter in the universe is in a constant state of change and earth evolved from changing matter. I do not believe we were created and I certainly dont belive the rediculas fairy tales about how we are only 6000 years old. Yeah, Im a godless left wing wacko.

15? Should have done earth science. Universe 13.5 billion. Earth 4.5 billion. Look up Doppler shift.

 

[KansasMeg]

I happen to believe that the of intricacy of evolution and the other findings of modern science are proof of intelligent design. Science and Christianity can co-exist! Let's face it, the Bible is not at all detailed in the creation of Earth and man. I believe that our scientific findings are there for us to discover, that we have been given clues to discover our past.

I don't understand why so many want to portray "evolutionism" and "intelligent design" as polar opposites.

 

[anomaly]

I happen to believe that the of intricacy of evolution and the other findings of modern science are proof of intelligent design. Science and Christianity can co-exist! Let's face it, the Bible is not at all detailed in the creation of Earth and man. I believe that our scientific findings are there for us to discover, that we have been given clues to discover our past.

I don't understand why so many want to portray "evolutionism" and "intelligent design" as polar opposites.

Well said. If there was a big bang for example, several billion years ago, someone or something must have caused the bang. Also, as I have previously stated in this forum, matter cannot simply appear. So no matter how much can be proven that inorganic compounds can develop into living organisms, the matter that makes up these living things must be created.

 

[milkrun]

Religion is a business that serves many purposes and creates wealth for many clever and dishonest people. It also serves to keep certain low class people in check with the threat of hellfire.

Jeffrey Dalmer, the mass murderer from Wisconsin, told police that he began his murder spree after he lost his faith or belief in God. No God, no Hell.

Any person who still has a mind that can think knows that the existence of a God is pure propaganda. The Universe didn't need to be created because it has always existed. The existence of nothing is impossible.

 

[KansasMeg]

Religion is a business that serves many purposes and creates wealth for many clever and dishonest people. It also serves to keep certain low class people in check with the threat of hellfire.

Yes, there are certain people (luckily they are a minority) who use their power positions in religion to get rich or to make political gains. But to say this is true in all cases, all the time, I just can't buy into that.

Jeffrey Dalmer, the mass murderer from Wisconsin, told police that he began his murder spree after he lost his faith or belief in God. No God, no Hell.

Not sure what you're getting at with this one. So you're saying that the unreligious are more likely to go on murder sprees?

Any person who still has a mind that can think knows that the existence of a God is pure propaganda.

We're all entitled to our opinions, but is name-calling really necessary? If you have a good point you won't need to lower yourself to those sorts of tactics.

 

[anomaly]

milkrun, how do you explain the existence of matter? It can't just have always existed. That is impossible. I must have come from somewhere. Energy can be converted to matter, and vis-versa, but how can you explain the existence of energy without using the existence of some God?

 

[milkrun]

Yes, there are certain people (luckily they are a minority) who use their power positions in religion to get rich or to make political gains. But to say this is true in all cases, all the time, I just can't buy into that.



Not sure what you're getting at with this one. So you're saying that the unreligious are more likely to go on murder sprees?



We're all entitled to our opinions, but is name-calling really necessary? If you have a good point you won't need to lower yourself to those sorts of tactics.

Name calling? Where?

 

[milkrun]

milkrun, how do you explain the existence of matter? It can't just have always existed. That is impossible. I must have come from somewhere. Energy can be converted to matter, and vis-versa, but how can you explain the existence of energy without using the existence of some God?

Try and imagine the non existence of the Universe, which includes matter and energy. "Nothing is Impossible"