Why Creationists Believe in a Young Earth

[Notedstrangeperson]

Most YEC creationists say that the Earth is roughly 6,000 years old - some go as high as 10,00 and some go as low as 4,000. Why?


We cannot say "Because the Bible says so" because the Bible does not mention the age of the Earth or the universe at all. I suspect part of the reason it's hard to get an accurate date is because Creationists themselves don't know where these figures come from. Various people thought the world began ...

• 3761 BC (Jewish Calender)
• 3952 BC (Bede, 8th century monk)
• 5199 BC (Roman Catholic church)

One man - Archbishop Usher of Armagh, 1650 - went even further and calculated many of the major events of the Bible:

• Creation began on Sunday 23rd October 4004 BC
• Adam and Eve were expelled from the garden on Monday 10th November
• Noah's Ark reached dry land on Wednesday 5th May 2348 BC
• Christ was actually born in 4 BC, exactly four thousand years after the begining of creation

Say what you will, you can't accuse him of not being thorough.
Most modern creationists take the simplier approach. 2 Peter 3:8 and Pslam 90:4 both say that one thousand years is like a day with the Lord. The Earth and the universe were created in six days, ergo they are only 6000 years old.

Do creationists, who base the age of the Earth on Biblical chronology, realise the influencial people they're disagreeing with?

 

[CabVet]

• Creation began on Sunday 23rd October 4004 BC
• Adam and Eve were expelled from the garden on Monday 10th November

Took them all of 12 days to break the rules that God himself gave them? Some perfect creation that was.

 

[AV1611VET]

Most YEC creationists say that the Earth is roughly 6,000 years old - some go as high as 10,00 and some go as low as 4,000. Why?

So as not to confuse you guys with OEC?

We cannot say "Because the Bible says so" because the Bible does not mention the age of the Earth or the universe at all.

It doesn't have to.

If you're a YEC, all you need is a calculator.

I suspect part of the reason it's hard to get an accurate date is because Creationists themselves don't know where these figures come from.

'Date' for what?

Now you're looking for a specific date?

Various people thought the world began ...

• 3761 BC (Jewish Calender)
• 3952 BC (Bede, 8th century monk)
• 5199 BC (Roman Catholic church)

How about you get a calculator and do it yourself, then?

Let us know what you come up with -- or are you afraid someone will criticize your figures?

One man - Archbishop Usher of Armagh, 1650 - went even further and calculated many of the major events of the Bible:

• Creation began on Sunday 23rd October 4004 BC
• Adam and Eve were expelled from the garden on Monday 10th November
• Noah's Ark reached dry land on Wednesday 5th May 2348 BC
• Christ was actually born in 4 BC, exactly one thousand years after the begining of creation

Say what you will, you can't accuse him of not being thorough.

Are you trying to make some kind of point?

Once again, get a calculator and find out how old the earth is by YEC standards yourself.

Who knows? you may just find out that the Jews, Mr. Bede, or the Roman Catholic church was right.

Hmmm -- maybe that's why you won't do it, eh?

Most modern creationists take the simplier approach.

What's a 'modern creationist'?

2 Peter 3:8 and Pslam 90:4 both say that one thousand years is like a day with the Lord.

Hmmm -- might want to read that Psalm 90:4 over again, eh, scientist?

The Earth and the universe were created in six days, ergo they are only 6000 years old.

Well, I'm not a YEC, and I can't speak for them, but I don't believe they subscribe to the day-age theory.

You seem to be bouncing around like a scientist's super ball or something.

Do creationists, who base the age of the Earth on Biblical chronology, realise the influencial people they're disagreeing with?

I doubt it -- I certainly don't.

I just use Mr. Ussher's figures for clarity.

I suppose I could use a calculator and figure it myself; but I'm kinda like you, in that I'd rather just talk about it than do the figuring myself.

Note: I did at one time make a half-hearted effort, and came up with 6100 years.

 

[Phred]

Let me get this straight.

Creationists say that they believe that God told man when the earth and the universe was created. So they believe it. And that's that. But they can't all agree. Some say one thing, some say another. They all say that God told them and that's why they're right and everyone else is wrong. They say that they know this because it's in the Bible. Or whatever holy scripture they're reading today. And the Bible is only as good as the interpretation you're going by. Either your own or someone else's. And that, of course, is only as good as the guy that wrote it and told everyone that God told him what happened. It's like a game of Holy Telephone. God told Moses who wrote it down and you get to try and interpret what it means. Give or take.

The only thing you guys seem to agree on is that the whole darn thing was created by a god. At some point.

Then there's science. Which studies what's here are tells us what it finds. So if God created the universe and the earth then science studies what God created and tells us what God did.

If someone paints a work of art do you want to look at the painting to learn about it or would you rather have someone look at it, then tell someone about it who will tell someone else about it who will write a book of poetry about it then you get to interpret what they wrote to try and understand the painting..?

Well?

 

[AV1611VET]

Let me get this straight.

Creationists say that they believe that God told man when the earth and the universe was created.

If He did, I'm not aware of it.

Well?

Well, what?

Even the OP said He didn't tell us:

We cannot say "Because the Bible says so" because the Bible does not mention the age of the Earth or the universe at all.

Straight now?

 

[cupid dave]

Most YEC creationists say that the Earth is roughly 6,000 years old - some go as high as 10,00 and some go as low as 4,000. Why?



We cannot say "Because the Bible says so" because the Bible does not mention the age of the Earth or the universe at all. I suspect part of the reason it's hard to get an accurate date is because Creationists themselves don't know where these figures come from. Various people thought the world began ...

• 3761 BC (Jewish Calender)
• 3952 BC (Bede, 8th century monk)
• 5199 BC (Roman Catholic church)

One man - Archbishop Usher of Armagh, 1650 - went even further and calculated many of the major events of the Bible:

• Creation began on Sunday 23rd October 4004 BC
• Adam and Eve were expelled from the garden on Monday 10th November
• Noah's Ark reached dry land on Wednesday 5th May 2348 BC
• Christ was actually born in 4 BC, exactly four thousand years after the begining of creation

Say what you will, you can't accuse him of not being thorough.
Most modern creationists take the simplier approach. 2 Peter 3:8 and Pslam 90:4 both say that one thousand years is like a day with the Lord. The Earth and the universe were created in six days, ergo they are only 6000 years old.

Do creationists, who base the age of the Earth on Biblical chronology, realise the influencial people they're disagreeing with?

You are right.

May I add that poor reading comprehension has allowed people to ignore that the Clock was not "Created" until the 4th "day".

At that time, Genesis specifically tells us that this Solar Time Piece would, thereafter, be for "days, seasons, years"....

 

[Davian]

...
Well, I'm not a YEC, and I can't speak for them, but I don't believe they subscribe to the day-age theory.
...

In your opinion, how long ago - in years - did biological life first apear on Earth?

 

[juvenissun]

Most YEC creationists say that the Earth is roughly 6,000 years old - some go as high as 10,00 and some go as low as 4,000. Why?


We cannot say "Because the Bible says so" because the Bible does not mention the age of the Earth or the universe at all. I suspect part of the reason it's hard to get an accurate date is because Creationists themselves don't know where these figures come from. Various people thought the world began ...

• 3761 BC (Jewish Calender)
• 3952 BC (Bede, 8th century monk)
• 5199 BC (Roman Catholic church)

One man - Archbishop Usher of Armagh, 1650 - went even further and calculated many of the major events of the Bible:

• Creation began on Sunday 23rd October 4004 BC
• Adam and Eve were expelled from the garden on Monday 10th November
• Noah's Ark reached dry land on Wednesday 5th May 2348 BC
• Christ was actually born in 4 BC, exactly four thousand years after the begining of creation

Say what you will, you can't accuse him of not being thorough.
Most modern creationists take the simplier approach. 2 Peter 3:8 and Pslam 90:4 both say that one thousand years is like a day with the Lord. The Earth and the universe were created in six days, ergo they are only 6000 years old.

Do creationists, who base the age of the Earth on Biblical chronology, realise the influencial people they're disagreeing with?

This might just be the key.

According to your interpretation to the Bible, why do you think Peter did not say 1 day ~ 100 years or 1 day ~ 10,000 years (language-wise, is 1000 a word easier to use than 100 or 100,000? Words for time unit in Hebrew?) Peter said this about 2000 years ago, why would he make such nonsensical statement in one of his important letter? I guess you would interpret this verse allegorically. If so, what is your understanding to this verse? Most likely, it would be "God's time (scale) is different from our time". Well, does that answer your YEC question?

 

[AV1611VET]

In your opinion, how long ago - in years - did biological life first apear on Earth?

6016

 

[Davian]

In your opinion, how long ago - in years - did biological life first apear on Earth?

6016

Young enough, then.

And how many times had our Milky Way galaxy rotated up to that point? A rough guess is fine.

 

[Erth]

Do creationists, who base the age of the Earth on Biblical chronology, realise the influencial people they're disagreeing with?

Some do and some don't. Some Young Earth Creationists are aware that a wide variety of ages have been assigned to Earth by Young Earth Creationists. There are people who believe in the Young Earth dogma who aren't Creationists as well. I saw the argument once that we should listen to the fathers of the Church on this matter. The same person who said that admitted that different fathers had different opinions, ranging from 5000 to 12000 years or something like that. He didn't say that they concluded what they said based on the bible. Rather it seemed that he thought that God had given to them collectively the limits within which the age of the Earth must be. But he did not say why it should even matter if the age of the Earth is within those limits or not.

What I'm trying to say here is that it seems to me that people who believe that the Earth is Young are committed to thinking so no matter what. I agree with you that it's not in the bible.

 

[Jazer]

Do creationists, who base the age of the Earth on Biblical chronology, realise the influencial people they're disagreeing with?

There is nothing wrong with the Bible. Adam and Eve lived in the Garden of Eden 6,000 years ago just like the Bible says. Science can verify all of that. Clearly there was a beginning 6,000 years ago. You can not have a beginning without an end. Something ends and something new begins. Someday, perhaps soon this age will end and a new age will begin. Some call it the end of the world, but the world itself will not end. Just the Age or Era we live in will end and there will be a new beginning. They call that the 1000 year reign of Christ when there will be no war for 1,000 years. When they will beat the sword into a plow. How nice that will be to put money into feeding people rather then into killing people.

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

There is nothing wrong with the Bible. Adam and Eve lived in the Garden of Eden 6,000 years ago just like the Bible says.

Except it doesn't. Other Christian scholars tried caculating when creation began and none of them ended up with a figure as high as 6,000.

 

[AV1611VET]

And how many times had our Milky Way galaxy rotated up to that point? A rough guess is fine.

What do you mean by 'that point'? the point when the earth was created?

If so, the answer is: 0 times.

If you mean today, then I get this figure:

The Milky Way galaxy travels faster at the outer edge, than at the center.

We are on the outer edge, and thus moving at about 5,840,889,207 (9.8 billion kilometers) miles per year.

Thus 5.84 billion miles x 6016 years = about 35 trillion miles to date.

The diameter of our galaxy is calculated at 100,000 light years, and one light year is 5,878,499,810,000 miles.

So at the furthest point, the circumference is 5.9 trillion x 2Πr, or 37 trillion miles.

37 trillion / 35 trillion = just over 1 time our galaxy has rotated.

Assuming my math is correct.

What's your point?

 

[Davian]

...
Well, I'm not a YEC, and I can't speak for them, but I don't believe they subscribe to the day-age theory.
...

In your opinion, how long ago - in years - did biological life first apear on Earth?

6016

Young enough, then.

And how many times had our Milky Way galaxy rotated up to that point? A rough guess is fine.

What do you mean by 'that point'? the point when the earth was created?

If so, the answer is: 0 times.

So you would have life on Earth beginning about 6000 years ago; the cosmos included galaxies already formed and with the appearance of having rotated. How is this different from YEC?

What about the galaxies that are in the process of colliding and merging? Were they formed that way, in a variation of last-Thursdayism?

If I were to make a WAG, based on our earlier conversations, I would say that typical YECers attempt to fit the evidence (selectively) into their beliefs, whereas you assert your beliefs as true even when in contradiction to the evidence. Then you can use that 'evidence can take a hike' crutch of yours.

Now for this:

If you mean today, then I get this figure:

The Milky Way galaxy travels faster at the outer edge, than at the center.

The question was about *rotations*, not relative speeds.

We are on the outer edge, and thus moving at about 5,840,889,207 (9.8 billion kilometers) miles per year.

Thus 5.84 billion miles x 6016 years = about 35 trillion miles to date.

The diameter of our galaxy is calculated at 100,000 light years, and one light year is 5,878,499,810,000 miles.

So at the furthest point, the circumference is 5.9 trillion x 2Πr, or 37 trillion miles.

37 trillion / 35 trillion = just over 1 time our galaxy has rotated.

Assuming my math is correct.

What's your point?

Good gravy. Where did you get those numbers?

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

So you would have life on Earth beginning about 6000 years ago; the cosmos included galaxies already formed and with the appearance of having rotated. How is this different from YEC?

What about the galaxies that are in the process of colliding and merging? Were they formed that way, in a variation of last-Thursdayism?

If I were to make a WAG, based on our earlier conversations, I would say that typical YECers attempt to fit the evidence (selectively) into their beliefs, whereas you assert your beliefs as true even when in contradiction to the evidence. Then you can use that 'evidence can take a hike' crutch of yours.

Don't expect a non-snippy answer from AV on those counts. He hates his Embedded Age nonsense being called YEC, and he hates being accused of last-Thursdayism. Because he's heard these (legitimate) accusations so many times before, he'll simply brush them off and insult your lack of originality (in his eyes).

 

[begt]

Good gravy. Where did you get those numbers?

He got them from scientific sources I guess (says the guy who says science can take a hike).

 

[Davian]

Don't expect a non-snippy answer from AV on those counts. He hates his Embedded Age nonsense being called YEC, and he hates being accused of last-Thursdayism. Because he's heard these (legitimate) accusations so many times before, he'll simply brush them off and insult your lack of originality (in his eyes).

I know. This is just my way of having him point out his own hypocrisy.

 

[Davian]

He got them from scientific sources I guess (says the guy who says science can take a hike).

I don't think you'll find a scientific source that will have the Milky Way galaxy completing a rotation in less than 6000 years, or has Earth near the outer edge.

 

[begt]

I don't think you'll find a scientific source that will have the Milky Way galaxy completing a rotation in less than 6000 years, or has Earth near the outer edge.

I see heh. I only glanced at the figures