How old is the Earth?

[ViaCrucis]

Christians generally fall into two sides these days.

1) There are Christians who accept a very old earth (about 4.5 billions years old) according to the general findings of recognized, mainstream science.

2) There are Christians who believe the earth is younger than that, based on their interpretation of Genesis and generally (though not always) acceptance of Usshur's chronology.

Neither is required to be a Christian (despite what some might say), and Christians have been free to interpret Genesis in many ways over the last two thousand years. There has never been a monolithic position, though often a number of Christianity's major thinkers such as Origen, Augustine and Thomas Aquinas took a non-literal reading.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Aibrean]

I'm #3

It's both old and young.

 

[Blackwater Babe]

How old is the Earth?

Approximately 4.5 billion years old. Give or take.

 

[AvgJoe]

How old is the Earth?

In the grand scheme of things, does it really matter?

John 3:16 does not say, "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him 'and believes the world is such and such years old' should not perish but have everlasting life."

Nope, doesn't say that. For those of us who have it wrong, we'll find the truth of the matter on the other side of Glory.

 

[Johnnz]

Around 12-13 billion years old

John
NZ

 

[renewed21]

In the grand scheme of things, does it really matter?

John 3:16 does not say, "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him 'and believes the world is such and such years old' should not perish but have everlasting life."

Nope, doesn't say that. For those of us who have it wrong, we'll find the truth of the matter on the other side of Glory.

Agreed. There will always be peripheral issues that you can occupy yourself with and I believe this is one. Try not to focus too much on these type of issues. There will never be complete agreement. This is my humble opinion.

 

[razeontherock]

I agree with renewed, agreeing with Joe. I came to this position after much questioning, and realizing that every position I've heard is flawed.

"I don't know" works well, and God told Job that Job didn't know. While not comfortable, it's a strong position

 

[PROPHECYKID]

Hi, I've recently become intrigued with this question. There are many who believe that the Earth is only 6,000 years old, as opposed to billions of years old. This is a debated topic, and I can't wrap my head around the fact that the Earth would be 6,000 years old. I've grown up surrounded by the scientific evidence of dinosaurs and ancient history. Not to say that the Bible doesn't propose valid argument on the contrary, but I just find this really hard to believe. What do you think? Is the Earth 6,000 or billions of years old? I've just been thinking about why God would send his only son down to Earth at that time? If the Earth and people have been around for so long, why 2,000 or so years ago? Thanks for any clarification.

This is an excellent video for you. It speaks about looking at creation from a scientific point of video vs the evolutionary theory but also helps you answer your question and give you scientific evidences concerning the age of the earth. You might want to skip the introductions and go to the 11:30 mark in the video.

The Science of Faith - David Asscherick and Sean Pitman on 3ABN - YouTube

 

[Johnnz]

I agree with renewed, agreeing with Joe. I came to this position after much questioning, and realizing that every position I've heard is flawed.

"I don't know" works well, and God told Job that Job didn't know. While not comfortable, it's a strong position

That is a flawed position. It denies the Lordship of Christ in that, as, with His role in creation, he is now to be silent on the very issue Scripture begins with - Creation. A well thought through Christian worldview can really challenge non Christian thinking, whereas uninformed, anti science ranting is simply counterproductive.

John
NZ

 

[razeontherock]

You are allowed to disagree, but to say that the historic position of the Church denies Christ? You're really not in a strong place to assert that from

 

[Johnnz]

You are allowed to disagree, but to say that the historic position of the Church denies Christ? You're really not in a strong place to assert that from

I dont understand what you have posted. But I have never said anything about denying Christ. Rather, I objected that some posts were virtually denying His lordship over His creation.

John
NZ

 

[SoldierOfSoul]

The age of the earth is 4.5 billion (give or take) years old based on current scientific understanding.

 

[Bible2]

Johnnz said in post #29:

. . . anti science ranting is simply counterproductive.

That's right. And there's no need for Biblical Christians to ever be anti-science, for there's no actual conflict between science and Biblical faith, for nothing discovered by science has ever proven anything in the Bible false. For example, even evolution doesn't prove creationism false, for evolution can co-exist with creationism, just as an automated process created by a human (e.g. a computer program which makes random, colorful pictures which can be seen as art) can co-exist with that same human sometimes performing a task himself, directly (e.g. painting some pictures himself by hand). That is, evolution can simply be a process created by God to allow new, adaptive species to arise naturally, and this process can co-exist with God sometimes creating new species himself, miraculously (cf. punctuated equilibria).

 

[Johnnz]

Dr Hugh Ross, a Christian astrophysicist, has some interesting material. His scientific/mathematical approach sidesteps biology with its various theories of survival and adaptation, and he brings together information to make a very reasonable argument against random causation.

John
NZ

 

[Blackwater Babe]

Dr Hugh Ross, a Christian astrophysicist, has some interesting material. His scientific/mathematical approach sidesteps biology with its various theories of survival and adaptation, and he brings together information to make a very reasonable argument against random causation.

John
NZ

Gotta love the way these Christian scientists who disagree with elements of scientific understanding, always do so in fields they aren't experts in?

 

[razeontherock]

BB, like your new tagline! I thought you were going to comment on the "random causation" bit ...

 

[renewed21]

That is a flawed position. It denies the Lordship of Christ in that, as, with His role in creation, he is now to be silent on the very issue Scripture begins with - Creation. A well thought through Christian worldview can really challenge non Christian thinking, whereas uninformed, anti science ranting is simply counterproductive.

John
NZ

One cannot automatically assume that if a person thinks the Earth is 4.5 billion years old or doesn't know its exact age then they are denying creation.

My personal thinking , (which may be completely false), is that yes, everything does comes from God. Also that God set forth physical laws which govern events. The real issue here is the atheist use of evolution as a main vehicle for an attack on God and Christian values. Anyway, I'm getting off topic.

 

[Johnnz]

Gotta love the way these Christian scientists who disagree with elements of scientific understanding, always do so in fields they aren't experts in?

Or Christians who make assumptions without checking their facts.

Dr Ross is an astrophysicist. He contributes into the academic community of his peers. He subjects his arguments to review by non Christians, and challenges their own positions.

Why not listen listen to some of his talks and then make your assessment?

John
NZ

 

[GarySneakers]

How old is Mars?

 

[thesunisout]

Just 40 or so years ago science denied that the Universe had a beginning..they said the Universe was eternal. People would mock Christians for believing it was created because of what science told them as being an absolute fact. It's the same story today, that you have most atheists and even some Christians putting their faith in science as being a source of truth, if not THE source of truth. If the scripture and science contradict, they assume science is right and reinterpret the bible. Yet, the conclusions of the scientific community are not always right; they are actually often wrong. As it contradicts the word of God, they are never right. Instead of standing firm on the word of God and investigating the data, they twist scripture until it conforms to the wisdom of the world. God called the wisdom of the world foolishness. Scripture says let God be true and every man a liar. I'm also not sure why some Christians are so oblivious that they cannot see the spiritual warfare inherent in these matters, but I can only assume it points to the reality of this disturbing poll:

The Barna Group - Most American Christians Do Not Believe that Satan or the Holy Spirit Exist