Where is a "6000 year old earth" found in scripture?

[yeshuasavedme]

No, the scriptures never gave you that idea.

How old was Adam as described in scripture?
How old was Eve as described in scripture?
How old was The Garden as described in scripture.
How old were the animals brought for Adam to name as described in scripture.
How old was the dirt in the garden as described in scripture.
Man was created from dust.
How old is dust?

Was there anything in Genesis that suggested anything was one week old?
Perhaps a math oriented monk added numbers together and it all totaled
some impossible to replicate number. But scripture doesn't "work" like that.

Dust was 3 days old when Adam flesh was made, out of it.
The animals Adam named were a few hours older than himself, being brought forth out of the earth, by the earth, at the command of God the Word, on day six.
All your questions about age are answered in the Book of the Beginnings.
There were no stretched out heavens until day 2 of creation week. Paradise is in the third stretched out story of heaven and was made on day 3, when the "dry" was brought forth out of the waters, and the furbishing of Paradise above with plants and animals and fowl would have paralleled the same as on earth below.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

How old was Adam first described in scripture?
Was he ......a baby? A zygote?

Weird question, and seems so unrelated to seeking wisdom and understanding because the answer is in Genesis. Adam was made fully formed, in body of perfection, on day 6. Fully functional, with the tongue to converse with the Maker of him and all the software for language installed in brain to use the science of language immediately.

 

[miamited]

No, the scriptures never gave you that idea.

How old was Adam as described in scripture?
How old was Eve as described in scripture?
How old was The Garden as described in scripture.
How old were the animals brought for Adam to name as described in scripture.
How old was the dirt in the garden as described in scripture.
Man was created from dust.
How old is dust?


Was there anything in Genesis that suggested anything was one week old?
Perhaps a math oriented monk added numbers together and it all totaled
some impossible to replicate number. But scripture doesn't "work" like that.

Hi sky,

Yes, well, I'm not the type of person who feels that I need to have knowledge of the age of every particular part of God's creation to be mentioned in the Scriptures to know that, 'for in six days God created the heavens and the earth and all that is in them' to mean that whatever 'part' of the creation I choose to examine, it was created in that six day period.

How old was Adam? Well, on the day that he was created, he was one day old.
How old was Eve? Well, on the day that she was created, she was one day old.
How old was the garden? Well, on the day that it was created it was one day old.
How old were all the animals? Well, on the day that they were created each was one day old.
How old was the dirt and the dust? Well, on the day that they were created, and I believe that both words refer to the same substance, it was one day old?

Every one of these parts of the creation were created within the six days, and on the sixth of those days, God created Adam, and beginning with Adam, God counted off the years of his life and the length of years of his future generations.

So, dirt, the garden, Eve and all of the animals, on the day that Adam died at the age of 930 years old, was 930 years old plus or minus a couple of days at most. Dirt, on the day that Adam died, had existed for 930 years. The garden, on the day that Adam died, was 930 years old. Eve, if she was still alive on the day that Adam died, was 930 years old. All the animals, if any who were first created were still alive when Adam died, were 930 years old.

I'm really not quite clear on why you think that some 'math oriented monk' is the reason that there are people who believe that the accounting of the years of the future generations of Adam, Noah and Abraham is the reason that today there are people who believe the creation to be about 6,000 years old. I wasn't particularly bright in school, but I had figured out the approximate age of the earth before I ever heard of your 'math oriented monk'.

Now, you are free to exclude my evidence as worthy evidence for such a claim. That's perfectly ok with me. I understand that there are people who believe that there is a god named Allah and that they are absolutely and solidly convinced that such a god exists and is ruler over this realm. I fully understand that there are others who believe in a myriad of gods as controlling our destinies and are, each one individually, solidly convinced that such gods exist. I fully understand that people generally believe what they have convinced themselves is the truth.

The truth that I have convinced myself is that God's Scriptures tell us, within a few dozen or hundred years, exactly when this realm in which we live came into existence. I base that belief on, what I believe to be, factual and dependable evidences that God has given us in His Scriptures.

Friend, that's what I believe. Now, you may call me some 'closed minded old fool', but I have heard the claims of others who have assured me that I don't know the truth. I have gone back and looked over, both their evidence and mine, and I still am convinced without any doubt, that my understanding of the truth is correct.

Your argument is that God didn't have those ages written in the Scriptures for us to add up and use to figure the age of the creation. Quite frankly, I can't, and haven't yet seen any sensible argument, think of any other reason that God would have included them. God could have very easily and correctly told us that Adam had a son named Seth and that Adam died at the age of 930 years. He could have carried out each of the following father's and son's lineage without ever telling us how old each father was when the son was born and it would still be all true and correct. We would still know everything that we now know about the beginning generations through Adam and Noah and Abraham. There doesn't, to me, seem to be any importance or significance to knowing the age of each father when a particular child was born to him, and the only thing we can deduce from such information is the age of the creation.

We can't, for instance, figure out whether, by the age of the father, the child mentioned was first child or last child. We can't figure out who the child's mother was or anything else about the child or the father. We can't know, from the information, that the father or the child was crippled or diseased or strong or weak. As far as I can tell, the only thing we can understand from the Scriptures telling us that Adam was 130 years old when he had his son and that his son was 105 years old when he had his son, is that 235 years had passed since Adam was created. That's it! There is no other 'fact' or 'understanding' for which God would have included these numbers of years, as far as I can see.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[SkyWriting]

Hi sky,

Yes, well, I'm not the type of person who feels that I need to have knowledge of the age of every particular part of God's creation to be mentioned in the Scriptures to know that, 'for in six days God created the heavens and the earth and all that is in them' to mean that whatever 'part' of the creation I choose to examine, it was created in that six day period.

How old was Adam? Well, on the day that he was created, he was one day old.
How old was Eve? Well, on the day that she was created, she was one day old.
How old was the garden? Well, on the day that it was created it was one day old.
How old were all the animals? Well, on the day that they were created each was one day old.
How old was the dirt and the dust? Well, on the day that they were created, and I believe that both words refer to the same substance, it was one day old?

I don't have a problem with what you believe.
What I asked was how they were described as.
The answer for each is not one day.

You are free to imagine Adam as one day old.
But scripture does not describe him that way.

There was a Monk, in some tower, that said how old he thought the earth was.

But it's not what scripture describes.

Nor should you expect the earth to look as if it was "Zero" years old one day after creation week.

 

[SkyWriting]

Quite frankly, I can't, and haven't yet seen any sensible argument, think of any other reason that God would have included them.

Because people like to document such things.
Not to date the earth. That has no spiritual value.

 

[miamited]

Because people like to document such things.
Not to date the earth. That has no spiritual value.

Hi sky,

Well, you see, here's another large difference in our understanding of the Scriptures. You say that the age of the fathers is written because people like to document such things. You believe that people authored the Scriptures and that people wrote what they wanted to say and how they wanted to say it and therefore, what we read is the product of how 'people' wrote in those days.

Question: do you have evidence that in those days, whenever it was written that a man had a son, that it was also written how old he was when the son was born? Can you produce any evidence at all that in the days of Adam, Noah or Abraham that any historical account of a child being born to a man also gives the father's age? (excluding, of course, the Scriptures). On what evidentiary basis do you make your claim? Can you, for instance, tell me how old Cain was when he had any of his children? If your claim is that people liked to do that in those days, then you have to provide some evidence to support that understanding because, apart from the Scriptures, we don't have any idea what people did or what they liked to do or how they did things in the days of Adam's generations. The Scriptures tell us that each and every father then had more children. Have you found some written evidence that the age of the father when these other children were born was written down somewhere. Do you know, without doubt, that when these fathers announced the births of their other children that they made sure that everyone knew how old they were when telling others of the good news of childbirth?

BTW, no, you can't rely on the evidence that today on birth certificates we list both, let me repeat, both parents ages. I contend that you have adopted this belief because it allows you to overlook the evidence, rather than basing this understanding on any real evidence that such a statement is even remotely true. We all do that from time to time, but a wise person understands this and tries to remove such unfounded assumptions from their equations. Our 'truth' should not be based on assumptions that something is possible. We can certainly use what we believe might be possible to test the truth, but we cannot say with any certainty that something is 'true' because there is a 'possibility' that something else may be true.

Look, you want to believe that the earth conforms with some age that great and wise scientists who have spent years of their lives and hours of their time and money to gain educational credentials say it is. That's fine with me. However, let me be clear that I don't. It is my deep and abiding faith that God created this realm in mere days. A length of time that is measured by one rotation of the earth upon its axis. I believe this because God has had written that in six days He created the heavens and the earth and all that is in them. I don't have any problems understanding that there were days even before the stars and the sun and moon existed. Technically, even today, the existence of the sun does not have any bearing on whether or not a day passes. A day passes every time the earth makes one full rotation upon its axis. However, because the sun has risen on the horizon during the course of each rotation of the earth since its (the sun's) creation, we have conditioned ourselves to believe that the sun must have something to do with whether or not there is a day.

You can prove this by looking up any of the planet's length of day. What is measured to determine that length is the time it takes for the planet to rotate fully on its axis. The sun, moon or stars never even enter the equation.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[miamited]

There was a Monk, in some tower, that said how old he thought the earth was.

But it's not what scripture describes.

Nor should you expect the earth to look as if it was "Zero" years old one day after creation week.

Hi sky,

You've really bought into the idea that until that monk counted the ages of the fathers, no one believed the earth to be as young as he claims to have proven. I'm guessing that you're fairly young and haven't yet learned to separate your 'assumptions' from 'provable facts'.

I agree that the earth has never 'looked' like it was one day old. The earth, on the day that it was created looked like a spheroid structure suspended in the universe and would not have 'looked' young or old. It would have just looked like it was. As God continued to work with the earth in populating it with land and creatures, it would never at any time have 'looked' like it was one day old. It would have merely looked like it was.

God bless you,
In Christ, Ted

 

[SkyWriting]

You've really bought into the idea that until that monk counted the ages of the fathers, no one believed the earth to be as young as he claims to have proven. I'm guessing that you're fairly young and haven't yet learned to separate your 'assumptions' from 'provable facts'.

I have one 3 y.o. great g-child.
There are no provable facts except in mathematics.

My 20 years of bible study, in both the progressive
and conservative studies have shown me that all
important aspects of Christianity are revealed by
multiple authors from differing viewpoints in various
books in the Bible.

The "Young Earth" concept offers no value to Christianity
other than as a numerical oddity.

 

[SkyWriting]

Look, you want to believe that the earth conforms with some age that great and wise scientists who have spent years of their lives and hours of their time and money to gain educational credentials say it is.

Just the opposite, which I claim often.
Please refer to what I do say, rather
than your imagination.

 

[SkyWriting]

Question: do you have evidence that in those days, whenever it was written that a man had a son, that it was also written how old he was when the son was born? Can you produce any evidence at all that in the days of Adam, Noah or Abraham that any historical account of a child being born to a man also gives the father's age?

I can produce 100% solid evidence that there are no references to a young earth in scripture itself.
Nobody mentioning it or counting their sons age or any references at all to a young earth.
Nada one.

The Grandmothers and Grandfathers of Jesus–“The Begats”
http://davidbcapes.com/2013/11/26/the-begats/

 

[SkyWriting]

Weird question, and seems so unrelated to seeking wisdom and understanding because the answer is in Genesis. Adam was made fully formed, in body of perfection, on day 6. Fully functional, with the tongue to converse with the Maker of him and all the software for language installed in brain to use the science of language immediately.

Seems correct. So if the Earth was also specially created, we could
expect it to look quite old as well, just like Adam was formed in that
way. He would have language skills and some kind of a learning
history I imagine.

 

[SkyWriting]

Your argument is that God didn't have those ages written in the Scriptures for us to add up and use to figure the age of the creation. Quite frankly, I can't, and haven't yet seen any sensible argument, think of any other reason that God would have included them.

Because the news testament writers would have done that
if it was a valid exercise of any importance.

 

[SkyWriting]

Dust was 3 days old when Adam flesh was made, out of it.

OK, but dust is usually older.
And if we found some of it
it would have all the properties
of old dust.

Just as our world has all the
properties of an ancient planet.
Except only this one has life.

 

[miamited]

Just the opposite, which I claim often.
Please refer to what I do say, rather
than your imagination.

Hi sky,

Please understand that any evidence that you'd like used in this discussion, needs to be in this discussion. If you have made claims on other threads or other boards that's wonderful, but I don't maintain full profiles in my head of each one that I share with on these threads. You might try something like: Just the opposite. I believe what I believe based on such and such or so and so, which I claim often.

I'm not in the habit, nor do I intend to start, looking through every posters history on all of the threads that they have participated in to get an understanding of what they believe and why. Yes, there are occasions that I will share with someone that I have shared with before and recall something they said or alluded to in another post, but it isn't my general practice to remember or know each of you out there by handle and keep separate in my mind what each one believes.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[joshua 1 9]

How old was Adam first described in scripture?
Was he ......a baby? A zygote?

Eve was the special creation, not Adam.

 

[miamited]

Because the news testament writers would have done that
if it was a valid exercise of any importance.

Ahh sky,

Aren't you the one that said it was how people wrote for their personal understanding? I believe your exact words were that the age of the fathers was included because that's 'what people like to document'. So, I'll turn your evidence around on you. If it is your belief that it was written because that's what people like to document, then why don't the new covenant genealogies include such facts?

You see, your evidence proves my point. The ages of the father's was not included because that's what people like to document, because we find very little, if any evidence, in the Scriptures that people did that regularly when recording genealogies. The account of the genealogies in the new covenant are a good example. The new testament writers wouldn't have included them unless their purpose was to create a timeline.

You see, the account of the genealogies in the book of law in the old covenant was given with the father's age so that we could determine the passage of time from son to son. The account of the genealogies in the new covenant were given to prove that Jesus was the promised Messiah. There was, therefore, no need of ages for God to accomplish that purpose in the new covenant genealogies.

God bless you
In Christ, Ted

 

[miamited]

Hi sky,

Look, believe what you will. It's ok with me. The question was asked, quite some time ago, where we find evidence in the Scriptures of a 6,000 year earth? I believe I have provided ample evidence to support where I find evidence of a 6,000 year earth in the Scriptures. I completely understand that not everyone weighs and measures the evidence in the same way that I do. That has been true of man since the beginning. Even as to who Jesus is, not everyone weighs and measures the evidence as either you or I do.

There are people living on this earth who honestly and with all their heart and mind and soul believe that we have never been to the moon. What is the truth? There are people living on this earth who honestly and with all their heart and mind and soul believe that there was no holocaust of death for Jews during WWII. What is the truth? There are people living on this earth who believe with all their heart and mind and soul that there is a god named Allah who will usher his faithful followers into paradise for killing those called infidels. What is the truth. There are people living on this earth who believe with all their heart and mind and soul that when we die we are resurrected as cows. What is the truth. There are people living on this earth who believe with all their heart and mind and soul that a man by the name of Joseph Smith received special revelation from God and found several long hidden tablets that detailed a visitation of Jesus to the North and South American native people. What is the truth?

There are people who believe that the earth evolved in some manner to be what it is today as far as living creatures and form over a period of many, many ages of time. What is the truth? There are people who believe that God merely spoke this created realm into existence over a span of 6 literal and roughly 24 hour periods of time, called days. That it happened about 930 years before the day that Adam died. That we can take the numbers of years of age that God has caused to be written to us in His Scriptures and merely and simply add them up to determine approximately how long ago Adam was made and the earth and the universe that comprise this realm in which we live, was created. What is the truth?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[SkyWriting]

Aren't you the one that said it was how people wrote for their personal understanding? I believe your exact words were that the age of the fathers was included because that's 'what people like to document'. So, I'll turn your evidence around on you. If it is your belief that it was written because that's what people like to document, then why don't the new covenant genealogies include such facts?

Bible truths are repeated in simple ways by various writers from various
viewpoints. Contrary to this is the convoluted process of dating Creation
as described by adamant supporters of the hoop-jumping:

"To calculate the date one must first employ
the genealogical data given in
Genesis,
I & II Chronicles,
the Gospels,
and elsewhere.

Information gleaned from
Judges,
I & II Kings,
Daniel,
Acts,
and other books must be included as well.

Since dates are fairly well established archaeologically beginning at about the time of David, these can be a big help. This is because so many Biblical events are referenced to the reigns of individual kings. Obviously, the job is difficult."

 

[SkyWriting]

Please understand that any evidence that you'd like used in this discussion, needs to be in this discussion. If you have made claims on other threads or other boards that's wonderful, but I don't maintain full profiles in my head of each one that I share with on these threads.

I am objecting to your imaginary premise for your arguments which regards things I've not stated.
Please use the quote function.

 

[SkyWriting]

Look, you want to believe that the earth conforms with some age that great and wise scientists who have spent years of their lives and hours of their time and money to gain educational credentials say it is. That's fine with me.

That is all in your imagination.