• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Earth is ~6022 Years Old

Obama is also a Nazi.

;)
 
FreedomFromAll said:
AT least you placed your belief in the correct forum. I hate to break it to you but Christian text does not support your belief in a young Earth.

Of course you could post the scripture you think supports your claim. But you will not.
Click to expand...
Strange considering they get the idea that earth is 6000 years old from the bible.
 
multivita-man said:
Your "facts" depend on us believing some text that someone apparently wrote a few thousand years ago, not long after written language became a thing. That's not really reliable evidence, but faith is a powerful thing, I guess.
Click to expand...
Yeah. The 'word of God,' written by humans. Just the thought of that doesn't sound right.

If a super creator being wished to communicate with humans, it would be a lot more believable if that were done directly, instead of using other humans who 'somehow know.'

Written by humans. Full of contradiction. Not credible.

Plenty of humans have wonderful caring lives without it. And good citizens, too. Productive and contributing to society.

We live in societies. We have the freedom to believe as we wish. There is no official answer to the unanswered questions.

Science is answering many of those questions. Given enough time it is probable that all of them will be answered.

Our lives are interconnected. We can have the best lives possible when we recognize individual freedom of belief or disbelief, and all commit to promoting a great society. We are all part of the collective of humans on one lone planet, a spec in the universe. We are so dependent on one another that it is foolish to engage in fights with other humans. Such behavior is anti-social, therefore anti-human. Because humans live in societies.
 
The SAN people lived all across southern Africa from 140,000 to 100,000 years ago. Nomadic wanderers, they left rock art and evidence of burial rituals, including cremation.
 
VySky said:
As the book of Genesis details. There were 10 generations before and after the flood. As a result, the earth did not exist billions of years before Adam was created on the 6th day.

But...but.. what about radiometric dating you say? Sorry, it may be a popular belief that radiometric dating proves the earth is old. That's not true at all. The parent daughter relationship to determine rate of decay in a rock uses assumptions that are neither testable or provable. Using faulty assumptions yield faulty time periods.

Not only are flawed assumptions used but Radiometric testing has been proven unreliable.

Examples;

* Mt St Helen's crater in 1996 had so many daughter atoms it was determined to be 350,000 years old.
* Lava flows in New Zealand known to be only 50 years old yet radiometric testing concluded it was 3.5 million years
* Basalt flows atop the Grand Canyon were tested using 3 different dating techniques that calculated 916 million years, 1.143 billion years and 2.6 billion years.

Bottom line. God created the world in 6 days ~4000 years before the birth of Jesus.

The flawed anti-biblical assumptions used to interpret rocks age were the primer to start questioning God's word

Rely on scripture.
Click to expand...
6022 years plus or minus 4,500,000,000.

btw the Sumerian King List has a couple of guys who ruled for 10,000 years and one long lived dude who got to about 30,000. So the Sumerians disagree with you too.
 
soylentgreen said:
Strange considering they get the idea that earth is 6000 years old from the bible.
Click to expand...
They take the 6 creative days as 6 literal, 24 hour days...Adam was created around 4026 BCE...thus approximately 6,000 years ago...
 
Elora said:
They take the 6 creative days as 6 literal, 24 hour days...Adam was created around 4026 BCE...thus approximately 6,000 years ago...
Click to expand...
how amusing, we had this conversation once before and I seem to recall you denying that the bible tells us the world is 6000 years old.
 
Galactic Spin said:
I admit that I have no idea what that means.
Click to expand...
Love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, and self control are provided to humankind by God's Spirit--called the fruit of the Spirit by Paul.
 
How can we tell how old the Earth is until we look on the other side. We've only looked on this flat side.
 
VySky said:
As the book of Genesis details. There were 10 generations before and after the flood. As a result, the earth did not exist billions of years before Adam was created on the 6th day.

But...but.. what about radiometric dating you say? Sorry, it may be a popular belief that radiometric dating proves the earth is old. That's not true at all. The parent daughter relationship to determine rate of decay in a rock uses assumptions that are neither testable or provable. Using faulty assumptions yield faulty time periods.

Not only are flawed assumptions used but Radiometric testing has been proven unreliable.

Examples;

* Mt St Helen's crater in 1996 had so many daughter atoms it was determined to be 350,000 years old.
* Lava flows in New Zealand known to be only 50 years old yet radiometric testing concluded it was 3.5 million years
* Basalt flows atop the Grand Canyon were tested using 3 different dating techniques that calculated 916 million years, 1.143 billion years and 2.6 billion years.

Bottom line. God created the world in 6 days ~4000 years before the birth of Jesus.

The flawed anti-biblical assumptions used to interpret rocks age were the primer to start questioning God's word

Rely on scripture.
Click to expand...
lol
 
VySky said:
As the book of Genesis details. There were 10 generations before and after the flood. As a result, the earth did not exist billions of years before Adam was created on the 6th day.

But...but.. what about radiometric dating you say? Sorry, it may be a popular belief that radiometric dating proves the earth is old. That's not true at all. The parent daughter relationship to determine rate of decay in a rock uses assumptions that are neither testable or provable. Using faulty assumptions yield faulty time periods.

Not only are flawed assumptions used but Radiometric testing has been proven unreliable.

Examples;

* Mt St Helen's crater in 1996 had so many daughter atoms it was determined to be 350,000 years old.
* Lava flows in New Zealand known to be only 50 years old yet radiometric testing concluded it was 3.5 million years
* Basalt flows atop the Grand Canyon were tested using 3 different dating techniques that calculated 916 million years, 1.143 billion years and 2.6 billion years.

Bottom line. God created the world in 6 days ~4000 years before the birth of Jesus.

The flawed anti-biblical assumptions used to interpret rocks age were the primer to start questioning God's word

Rely on scripture.
Click to expand...

Lol
 
This explains everything. I thought you were just a troll, but now I understand you're insane lol

There are so many flaws in the argument, i just don't know where to begin. But I don't even have to explain radiometric dating, the tens of other ways we can confirm the age of the earth and have since carbon dating....the most important thing is - even if we had NO IDEA, your reading of an ancient book saying it's 6000 years old proves nothing. This is a fallacy, just like it would be for me to say "well the 6000 yo christian interpretation is false, so it's actually 94 years old as my belief tells me". Discrediting something doesn't make your fact-free belief more real. That alone makes your thread laughable
 
Galactic Spin said:
Indeed it does. Excellent point.

It shows that the eager willingness to believe utter nonsense infects a person beyond this childish iron age mythology.
Click to expand...
Great post.
It 's not a coincidence, at all. If you can believe flat earth or 6000yo earth, you can believe anything. Suddenly 9/11 truth becomes too real, vaccines cause autism, up is down, left is right, there are no parameters.
 
Elora said:
They take the 6 creative days as 6 literal, 24 hour days...Adam was created around 4026 BCE...thus approximately 6,000 years ago...
Click to expand...
I understand this is common thought among some Christians. However, for Jews--virtually from the beginning--it was metaphor. The births of Moab and Ammon were understood to personify the enemies of the Jews, the Moabites and Ammonites. They were sons of incest. The first story of Creation was written by Priests as responsive worship. This was how the Torah is viewed by Jews. It is their book of Holy Law (as I'm sure we all know). It is interesting that some Christians have come to view it as a book of history. I am not being critical of this view. Christians may Genesis correctly and Jew do not. I just wonder why.
 
butterfly said:
I understand this is common thought among some Christians. However, for Jews--virtually from the beginning--it was metaphor. The births of Moab and Ammon were understood to personify the enemies of the Jews, the Moabites and Ammonites. They were sons of incest. The first story of Creation was written by Priests as responsive worship. This was how the Torah is viewed by Jews. It is their book of Holy Law (as I'm sure we all know). It is interesting that some Christians have come to view it as a book of history. I am not being critical of this view. Christians may Genesis correctly and Jew do not. I just wonder why.
Click to expand...

What I wonder is why the early Christian church (council of Nicea) included the savage and dictatorial Old Testament in the Bible at all. The New Testament has the message of tolerance, charity etc but the Old Testament makes it all look hypocritical. It would also be a better book with only the unverifiable Miracles in it, but not the Flood or the Creation story, or the list of names establishing the "6000 years" myth.

If it weren't for doctrine and a fundamental adherence to One God, Jesus and Yahweh would appear to be rival Gods. Was this just a mistake by the Fathers of the Church?
 
Elora said:
They take the 6 creative days as 6 literal, 24 hour days...Adam was created around 4026 BCE...thus approximately 6,000 years ago...
Click to expand...
Where did Cain's wife come from?
Answer- from the village down the road. Adam and Eve weren't the ancestors of everyone in the world, just the ancestors of us, our tribe. The chosen ones, God's created people. Everyone else just evolved.
 
Ug make hammer said:
What I wonder is why the early Christian church (council of Nicea) included the savage and dictatorial Old Testament in the Bible at all. The New Testament has the message of tolerance, charity etc but the Old Testament makes it all look hypocritical. It would also be a better book with only the unverifiable Miracles in it, but not the Flood or the Creation story, or the list of names establishing the "6000 years" myth.

If it weren't for doctrine and a fundamental adherence to One God, Jesus and Yahweh would appear to be rival Gods. Was this just a mistake by the Fathers of the Church?
Click to expand...
Decisions made at Nicea are certainly interesting. Clearly they struggled under the weight of trying to find common ground. I get a hint in the record that 318 leaders formed the Council, the same number as the men born in the household of Abraham in Genesis 14:14.
 
ettoremathedi said:
This explains everything. I thought you were just a troll, but now I understand you're insane lol
Click to expand...

Describing a post as "insane" is within the rules. Directly accusing another poster of it, really isn't.

ettoremathedi said:
There are so many flaws in the argument, i just don't know where to begin. But I don't even have to explain radiometric dating, the tens of other ways we can confirm the age of the earth and have since carbon dating....the most important thing is - even if we had NO IDEA, your reading of an ancient book saying it's 6000 years old proves nothing. This is a fallacy, just like it would be for me to say "well the 6000 yo christian interpretation is false, so it's actually 94 years old as my belief tells me". Discrediting something doesn't make your fact-free belief more real. That alone makes your thread laughable
Click to expand...

I wonder if the "inspired by God" thing has always applied to the books of the Bible, or whether it's just a reaction to the growing counter-evidence from science. I wonder that sincerely.

Without divine inspiration, it would be easy to write all of God's works from the OT off as allegories (a bad but not supernatural flood, etc) and leave Jesus's miracles as simply lacking evidence one way or the other. No archaeology can ever prove or disprove that He cured a leper or turned water to wine with some herbs.

The bigger claims of the Old Testament though, are just sitting ducks. Why would such an unfortunate believer be willing to bring the subject up? I don't understand it.
 
butterfly said:
Decisions made at Nicea are certainly interesting. Clearly they struggled under the weight of trying to find common ground. I get a hint in the record that 318 leaders formed the Council, the same number as the men born in the household of Abraham in Genesis 14:14.
Click to expand...

Well Jesus made constant references to 'his dad' but to me it seems it could have been simple self-defense. Travelling about claiming to be THE god would have gotten him stoned, and not in a good way. Still it made a huge difference to the later evolution of Christianity to include the Jewish book on equal standing with the Christian book.

In school it was explained to me as a "before and after Christ" thing, with the implication that God changed his mind. A new covenant, blah blah. But that doesn't explain why they taught the old book. It's not fit for children imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom