How old is the earth?

[BNR32FAN]

real science is based on the ability to reproduce something and to test it where it can be reproduced in any location on planet Earth.

There is NO real science showing that bacteria turn into eikaryote amoebas given enough time and chance... no not even with over 80,000 generations of direct observation in the case of the long running evolution experiment.

I don’t even see how bacteria can survive long enough to mutate. Things like extreme weather conditions and depleting food source would be a constant barrier.

 

[BNR32FAN]

No one knows..... But some can know how old it is not.

Young earth creationists are their own worst enemy.

They fail to terribly understand the Hebrew of Genesis in depth which allows those who oppose the Word of God to feel free to declare open season for making up high sounding stuff about the fossil evidence that they have to be subjective and clever with...

Exactly what part of the Hebrew do we fail to understand about Genesis?

 

[tonychanyt]

No one knows..... But some can know how old it is not.

Some Christians think that the earth is between 6000 to 15,000 years old (coinciding with the Neolithic Age). Astronomers think that it is 4.5 billion years old. I think these are very good estimates.

 

[GenemZ]

Exactly what part of the Hebrew do we fail to understand about Genesis?

Parts.... not one part.

What is commonly accepted as "without form and void" for the state of the planet is misleading and erroneous.

The Hebrew 'tohu wabohu' means the earth was in utter ruin and destruction, having an eerie sense of emptiness around it.

Which is why Jeremiah chose quoting Genesis 1:2 when telling the rebellious Jews of the horrible judgement God was about to bring their way.
That is found in Jeremiah 4:23.

If you read the rest beyond 4:23, you will see that Jeremiah added that the Jews would not be utterly destroyed as Genesis 1:2 in the Hebrew declares. The Jews knew Hebrew and the passage. That was why Jeremiah had to add that they would not be totally wiped out.

27 This is what the Lord says:​

​

“The whole land will be ruined,
though I will not destroy it completely."​

Why did Jeremiah add? "though I will not destroy it completely?"
Because the Hebrew speaking Jews knew what it meant!


And, that is how the earth was described in the Hebrew of Genesis 1:2

'Tohu wa bohu' means utter destruction and ruin. Having an eerie emptiness surrounding it.
A wasteland.... "Not the wimpy 'empty and void.'

We have been lied to by poor translations.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Parts.... not one part.

What is commonly accepted as "without form and void" for the state of the planet is misleading and erroneous.

The Hebrew 'tohu wabohu' means the earth was in utter ruin and destruction, having an eerie sense of emptiness around it.

Which is why Jeremiah chose quoting Genesis 1:2 when telling the rebellious Jews of the horrible judgement God was about to bring their way.
That is found in Jeremiah 4:23.

If you read the rest beyond 4:23, you will see that Jeremiah added that the Jews would not be utterly destroyed as Genesis 1:2 in the Hebrew declares. The Jews knew Hebrew and the passage. That was why Jeremiah had to add that they would not be totally wiped out.

27 This is what the Lord says:​

​

“The whole land will be ruined,​

though I will not destroy it completely."​

Why did Jeremiah add? "though I will not destroy it completely?"
Because the Hebrew speaking Jews knew what it meant!


And, that is how the earth was described in the Hebrew of Genesis 1:2

'Tohu wa bohu' means utter destruction and ruin. Having an eerie emptiness surrounding it.
A wasteland.... "Not the wimpy 'empty and void.'

We have been lied to by poor translations.

That’s based on the usage of one word in another verse. It’s not uncommon for words to have alternate meanings depending on the way it’s used in a sentence. What you’re saying is that God did not create the world in 6 days, He just altered it. That’s a direct contradiction of the surrounding context. Exodus 20:11 says that God created the heavens and the earth and everything in them which is indicating that He didn’t just alter what was already there in 6 days He created everything in 6 days. That’s probably why the translators chose that translation for that particular verse.

 

[GenemZ]

That’s based on the usage of one word in another verse. It’s not uncommon for words to have alternate meanings depending on the way it’s used in a sentence. What you’re saying is that God did not create the world in 6 days, He just altered it. That’s a direct contradiction of the surrounding context. Exodus 20:11 says that God created the heavens and the earth and everything in them which is indicating that He didn’t just alter what was already there in 6 days He created everything in 6 days. That’s probably why the translators chose that translation for that particular verse.

After showing you what I did?

For me to reason with you would make me into a fool at this point.....

Because I know others when shown that have instant recognition and a sense of relief....

Wishing you happiness.

 

[SuperCow]

Entering into God’s rest is referring to resting from our toils and struggles, basically it’s a reference to entering into heaven. I would also point out that the verses that refer to God’s rest at creation refer to His rest in the past tense not the present tense as if He is still resting.

For a basic reading of Psalms 95, it could be understood that way, but the elaboration in Hebrews 4 (at least verse 1-12) clearly implies something different.

 

[SuperCow]

Vs 1 is a summary of all of it.
Vs 2 is intro to the back ground conditions here - just before day 1.
vs 3 is the start of day 1 - and begins with "an God said"...

So this leaves the universe being older than life on earth and it may also lead to the rocks on Earth being older than life on Earth.

I tend to agree with this.

They have to be biologically as tall as an adult.
They have to be mentally as capable as an adult because in the text of Gen 3 - they are left alone on this planet and expected to 'Behave themselves" as man and wife. That is a rather mature human, not two infants laying in a pool of water.
If you met them you would not say "you look like you are biologically 2 days old"

Just accepting the text on the face of it.

The text on the face of it does not specify their height or age. All it says is male and female (in 1:26, though KJV says man and NIV says mankind) and man and wife. (in chapter 2) But in general every reference to man and woman could be simply gender and species references.

And I never suggested they would look two days old, or two infants laying in a pool of water. (Not sure how water got into the discussion anyway.) Some Native American tribes had their children leave the tribe at the age of 13 for a period of time to prove that they could survive on their own and be treated as a man before returning. So leaving them alone on the planet does not imply a fully mature adult. (And they weren't exactly left alone anyway. God talked to Abel and Cain, so he probably still communicated with Adam and Eve as well.)

They are one or two days old when left alone on the planet and expected to behave well as man and wife alone on planet Earth. Trying to stretch the story against the natural reading of the text is not logical. Moses is writing the text for the Hebrews at the foot of Sinai and it is pretty clear as to the intent he is giving his readers.

I am not trying to stretch the story. I am merely not limiting it to what is not specified. For instance, it does not say how old they were when they first sinned or how long they had been in the garden, or how long Adam was in the garden before Eve was created. (Other than the 6th creative day, for which the length of time is being debated here.) The intent is to describe the fall of mankind, not to get into every nit-picky detail about physical appearance, maturity levels or what they did every day. Just the important points.

Not true. They had language, they had the ability to relate as husband and wife, they could worship God etc.
You are forcing your views into the text that is written to be accepted as it is and not bent to some unworkable oddity.

Those things are potentially true of a 10 year old or even younger, depending on your definition of "relate" as husband and wife. Many children from other countries are put into arranged marriages long before they do here. (Ghandi for instance was married at 13.)

Not true. Not only are the capable but you seem them in argument with Satan himself in Gen 3.

Both of my kids started arguing with me around age 3.

bending the text to the oddity of your scenario does not fit the text. Too much eisegesis in your suggestions.

Don't understand what you are saying here.

More than enough time ... 130 years.

models are just that... models and faulty assumptions used for the baseline is the old "garbage-in, garbage-out" problem so well defined and proven in real life,

too many assumptions in "working backwards".

IT is like saying I see you driving west -- if I work that backwards you started your trip in China.

No argument here.

 

[Diamond72]

I don’t even see how bacteria can survive long enough to mutate.

Bacteria can be found in ice, including in various icy environments such as glaciers, ice cores, and polar regions. Bacteria have been discovered in ice samples taken from deep within glaciers, frozen lakes, and even ancient ice cores extracted from polar ice caps.

These bacteria are often referred to as "cryophilic" or "psychrophilic" bacteria, as they have adapted to thrive in extremely cold temperatures. They have unique adaptations that allow them to survive and even grow in these icy conditions, such as producing special proteins that protect their cellular structures from freezing and metabolic processes that operate at low temperatures.

In some cases, bacteria found in ice can be ancient and have been preserved for thousands or even millions of years. These organisms can provide valuable insights into the past climate, as well as the potential for life in extreme environments.

 

[BobRyan]

The text on the face of it does not specify their height or age. All it says is male and female

and that they are married in Gen 2 and that they are left alone as adults in Gen 3 and that they debate Satan himself while left alone.

So then the point remain as noted in the details of my prior post

And I never suggested they would look two days old, or two infants laying in a pool of water.

Indeed they would appear as two adult humans. Not because "God was lying" about how old they were but because practically and functionally one would need two mature adults , having a full vocabulary, great communication skills and able to live alone on Planet Earth.

(Not sure how water got into the discussion anyway.) Some Native American tribes had their children leave the tribe at the age of 13

God is a few steps up... from "some native americans"

also it would be "very evil" to take two immature teens or 4 year olds, leave them alone on planet Earth then doom all of humanity to the Rev 20 lake of fire because those two children "made a mistake while left alone".

 

[BobRyan]

Bacteria can be found in ice, including in various icy environments such as glaciers, ice cores, and polar regions. Bacteria have been discovered in ice samples taken from deep within glaciers, frozen lakes, and even ancient ice cores extracted from polar ice caps.

And we have direct observation of over 80,000 generations of them in a lab experiment so as to "notice" that macro evolutionism is mere myth and not science fact. Humanity itself supposedly "evolved" in far fewer generations than that (- and bacteria have a far great adaptive construct than do humans).

 

[Diamond72]

Both of my kids started arguing with me around age 3.

My wife did fine as long as she could put him in a playpen.
The problem was when he was old enough to climb out.

 

[Diamond72]

Indeed they would appear as two adult humans.

Genetic studies on Jews are part of the population genetics discipline and are used to analyze the chronology of Jewish migration accompanied by research in other fields, such as history, linguistics, archaeology, and paleontology. These studies investigate the origins of various Jewish ethnic divisions. In particular, they examine whether there is a common genetic heritage among them. The medical genetics of Jews are studied for population-specific diseases. Wiki

Genetic studies on Jews - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[SuperCow]

and that they are married in Gen 2 and that they are left alone as adults in Gen 3 and that they debate Satan himself while left alone.

So then the point remain as noted in the details of my prior post

I'm not sure what you call debating skills, but all Eve did was repeat the commandment of God. The serpent tells them one lie and they give up on the debate entirely. Doesn't sound like much maturity there to me. And the fact that they are married is irrelevant when you consider that it was essentially an arranged marriage, and those have been going on at young ages throughout history. (Including Christian societies)

Indeed they would appear as two adult humans. Not because "God was lying" about how old they were but because practically and functionally one would need two mature adults , having a full vocabulary, great communication skills and able to live alone on Planet Earth.

Again, most children are capable of having a full vocabulary by age 10. And I don't see any evidence of great communication skills. My kid can easily blame someone else when they do something wrong. And regarding surviving, you can do that without good communication skills as well. Initially everything was provided in the garden of Eden so as long as you can see the fruit, you can eat it. "Dig here. Eat plant" is pretty much all you need. But I wasn't arguing their communication skills anyway.

God is a few steps up... from "some native americans"

I fail to see how that is relevant. If anything, it shows that God teaching Adam and Eve to survive after leaving the argument is superior, and therefore Adam and Eve didn't even need to be at the level of the 13 year old Native American to survive.

also it would be "very evil" to take two immature teens or 4 year olds, leave them alone on planet Earth then doom all of humanity to the Rev 20 lake of fire because those two children "made a mistake while left alone".

By that logic, how is it different if they are two adults that made a mistake while left alone? You're still dooming all of humanity for their mistake.

 

[BNR32FAN]

For a basic reading of Psalms 95, it could be understood that way, but the elaboration in Hebrews 4 (at least verse 1-12) clearly implies something different.

It was Hebrews 4 and Matthew 11:28-29 I was referring to.

““Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭11‬:‭28‬-‭29‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Those who come to Christ will find rest for their souls, hence they will enter into His rest. Those who do not come to Christ will not find rest for their souls, hence eternal torment, they do not enter into His rest.

 

[SuperCow]

It was Hebrews 4 and Matthew 11:28-29 I was referring to.

““Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭11‬:‭28‬-‭29‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Those who come to Christ will find rest for their souls, hence they will enter into His rest. Those who do not come to Christ will not find rest for their souls, hence eternal torment, they do not enter into His rest.

Hebrews is specifically commenting on Psalms 95 and quotes it in Hebrews 3:11. Matthew does not directly quote and could therefore be using rest in any context. Matthew says he will give them rest, whereas Hebrews and Psalms speak of entering into "my [God's] rest". Therefore the context and meaning is different.

Hebrews 4:4 - "...On the seventh day, God rested from all his works."
4:5 - "...They [Israel -specific generation] will never enter my rest."
4:6 - "Therefore since it still remains for some to enter that rest..."
4:7 - "God again set a certain day, calling it Today..."
4:9,10 - "There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; for anyone who enters God's rest also rests from their works, just as God did from his."
4:11 - "Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter into that rest..."

It is clear to me that these are all specifically referring to God's day of rest, and the one exception (4:8 regarding Joshua) is worded differently. There is says "given them rest", whereas the others all say enter "my" or "that" rest, meaning a specific resting period, which by context in 4:4 means God's day of rest.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Hebrews is specifically commenting on Psalms 95 and quotes it in Hebrews 3:11. Matthew does not directly quote and could therefore be using rest in any context. Matthew says he will give them rest, whereas Hebrews and Psalms speak of entering into "my [God's] rest". Therefore the context and meaning is different.

Hebrews 4:4 - "...On the seventh day, God rested from all his works."
4:5 - "...They [Israel -specific generation] will never enter my rest."
4:6 - "Therefore since it still remains for some to enter that rest..."
4:7 - "God again set a certain day, calling it Today..."
4:9,10 - "There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; for anyone who enters God's rest also rests from their works, just as God did from his."
4:11 - "Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter into that rest..."

It is clear to me that these are all specifically referring to God's day of rest, and the one exception (4:8 regarding Joshua) is worded differently. There is says "given them rest", whereas the others all say enter "my" or "that" rest, meaning a specific resting period, which by context in 4:4 means God's day of rest.

I don’t see how any of this relates to God still resting as if we’re still on the seventh day. None of these verses have anything to do with that. Every verse pertaining to God’s rest on the seventh day is written in the past tense. God rested, not one single verse pertaining to God’s rest is written in the present tense implying that God is still resting. Forgive me for saying so but this seems like a lot of scriptural acrobatics in order to cater certain verses to coincide with a preconceived agenda. That agenda being trying to mix the scriptures with science. The Bible is a spiritual book full of numerous miracles and supernatural events. It’s not supposed to be explainable by science otherwise they wouldn’t be miracles at all. When people try to explain these events by offering scientific explanations it diminishes God’s might and glory. It reduces Him to being nothing more than an intelligent being and unworthy of the title GOD.

 

[Diamond72]

But in general every reference to man and woman could be simply gender and species references.

Some people say Male and female is a Scientific fact. Man and women the gender a person identifies themselves.
1 in 500 is born with an extra male or female gene that further complicates the issue. If people have mixed up and confused chromosomes they have no choice but to deal with that as best they can and they need our support.

 

[SuperCow]

I don’t see how any of this relates to God still resting as if we’re still on the seventh day. None of these verses have anything to do with that. Every verse pertaining to God’s rest on the seventh day is written in the past tense.

Everything in the creative days is written in the past tense. Most of the things in it could not be accomplished as written in 24 hours. The first two days are debatable maybe, but take Genesis 1:12 - "The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds..."

The land produced [past tense] vegetation. Can you name me a single plant that produced vegetation in a single day? Any trees that can bear fruit in the past tense in one day?

Genesis 1:21 - "And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good." (Using KJV here, because NIV obscures the wording)

The waters brought fort abundantly [past tense]. After their kind...and God saw that it was good. [past tense], and you can't see that creatures being brought forth after their kind were good, if they haven't procreated yet, which takes more than a day. (Months in many cases) In any event God "saw" that it was good is past tense. Even something like separating the waters and gathering the seas in day two in any logical sense takes much time to do with a planet this large.

And I can't see how the time between Adam and Eve's creation could be in one day either, based on everything that happened to Adam that day. Even if God created all the mammals and Adam instantly, Adam is not supernatural and needed time to name the animals, realize he was alone, fall into a deep sleep so Eve could be created. And why was the process of Eve's creation even necessary? (Maybe that's off topic)

God rested, not one single verse pertaining to God’s rest is written in the present tense implying that God is still resting.

I don't see how you can enter a rest that isn't happening.

Forgive me for saying so but this seems like a lot of scriptural acrobatics in order to cater certain verses to coincide with a preconceived agenda.

Likewise.

That agenda being trying to mix the scriptures with science. The Bible is a spiritual book full of numerous miracles and supernatural events. It’s not supposed to be explainable by science otherwise they wouldn’t be miracles at all.

Nonsense. Gravity is a miracle. Atoms are a miracle. Electrical charges and subsequently magnetism is a miracle. Life is a miracle. If you break down existence to it's lowest level, nothing really makes sense. There's no logical reason why just having mass creates an attractive force. There's no logical reason why life exists. Sure, atheists try to twist the mathematics of existence and the immense size of the universe into a game of statistics. (Drake equation for instance) But science doesn't make things any less miraculous, it only tries to explain the rules God created or utilized to manage the universe.

When people try to explain these events by offering scientific explanations it diminishes God’s might and glory. It reduces Him to being nothing more than an intelligent being and unworthy of the title GOD.

Well the exact nature of God is unknown, and assuming he could create the universe instantly, the literary evidence suggests periods of time. Whether the time period is 144 hours or 14.4 billion years, it does nothing to diminish his glory or his might.

 

[SuperCow]

Some people say Male and female is a Scientific fact. Man and women the gender a person identifies themselves.
1 in 500 is born with an extra male or female gene that further complicates the issue. If people have mixed up and confused chromosomes they have no choice but to deal with that as best they can and they need our support.

This is totally off topic and I'll comment in another thread if you want my thoughts.