Is it possible that the earth is only 6,000 or so years old?

[RocksInMyHead]

It is not deception if He told you He made it the way He did despite the fact that you dont like the way He did it

Except that nowhere in the Bible does it say "God created the world in 4,004 BC." That was an interpretation by Bishop Ussher.

 

[TasManOfGod]

Except that nowhere in the Bible does it say "God created the world in 4,004 BC." That was an interpretation by Bishop Ussher

Yes it does. Just count back the number of years till Adam thru the ages of men + the captivity in Egypt. I know, I have done it.

 

[miamited]

hi tas,

Yes, I have also and so apparently have the Jews since there calander is based on the years since Adam. One thing that I still firmly believe is that God has used the Jews to deliver all truth to us. Now, whether they believe it themselves is a whole other issue. Even Paul wrote: What value is there in being a Jew? Much in every way, cheif among them is that they were entrusted with the oracles of God. Paul considered that the very first and most important call of God to establish His people Israel was that they would deliver to all the nations the truth.

God bless you and keep up the good fight.
In Christ, Ted

 

[chris4243]

Is it possible God wants to deceive people into thinking the Earth is billions of years old?

 

[TasManOfGod]

Is it possible God wants to deceive people into thinking the Earth is billions of years old?

God gave His Word so they wouldn't be deceived. The enemy of God is the deceiver

 

[gluadys]

Is it possible God wants to deceive people into thinking the Earth is billions of years old?

No, because it is not possible that God wants to deceive--about anything.

So, since the Earth is billions of years old, we can rule out the possibility that the age of the Earth is a divine deception.

And to say that the established age of the Earth, derived from the Earth itself, is a deception of Satan is just as foolish, for it would make Satan more powerful than God and we could rely on nothing, not even scripture. After all, if Satan can remodel the planet to disguise its age, he could also rewrite the scriptures to deceive us too.

Best to begin always with the basic that God is not the one who deceives. So what is, is.

 

[Standing_Ultraviolet]

It is not deception if He told you He made it the way He did despite the fact that you dont like the way He did it

Although I would agree that this might make the Omphalos Hypothesis (what is advocated in this thread) non-deceptive, I believe that it still conflicts with Scripture. The Bible tells us that God is clearly visible through what He has created, to the extent that people are, as Paul puts it in his epistle to the Romans "without excuse". A Universe that was created in a way that would lead people to believe that it was billions of years old when it was not would not leave people without excuse. If any proof that the Universe was billions of years old were a proof for atheism, and if the Universe were littered with that proof, then even if it weren't deceptive it would still be problematic in that regard.

A metaphorical view of Genesis has been advocated since at least Saint Augustine, so it is not a new idea. Although I would agree that disbelief in a literal Adam conflicts with the important symbolism of Jesus Christ as the new Adam and is therefore unacceptable, I don't believe that it's necessary to bind ourselves to a literal interpretation of the first parts of Genesis.

 

[TasManOfGod]

How could God create in 6 days a universe with stars that would take thousands of years for light from them to reach earth if He didn't "pre age" things.
Did Adam miss out on his youth
Did the trees in the garden have annular rings
Some things had to be done the way God did them and it was not with the intent of deception.

 

[Assyrian]

How could God create in 6 days a universe with stars that would take thousands of years for light from them to reach earth if He didn't "pre age" things.
Did Adam miss out on his youth
Did the trees in the garden have annular rings
Some things had to be done the way God did them and it was not with the intent of deception.

Some things would have to be done for creation to work. Trees would certainly need the outer layers that transport water and nutrients, and a solid wood interior for support, but would it need annual layers? The earth would need to be made of rock, but would it need strata that looked for all the world like they show history of deposition and erosion deep within the rock. Why do deeper layers of rock contain the exact radioactive isotope ration you would get from hundreds of million or billions of years of decay. What is it in their functioning as rock that demands such ratios, why do deeper strata show the isotope rations that would have been produced by longer periods of time than higher strata. Why fill the sedimentary rock with fossils of dead animals that never existed. Stars would need to be created with their light visible from earth if you wanted them to been seen, but why do we see the light from supernovas stars that exploded long before the creation, light from stars that never existed?

 

[Girder of Loins]

One question.

If mankind can rewrite a few chapters in the Bible, can mankind rewrite one word? Instead of "Don't murder" can we simply rewrite "Do murder" if that is what some "objective" data(from outside the Bible) is telling us to do? I'm guessing your response is no, but then what gives you the right to declare something the LORD wrote down(through divine inspiration) as false and fictional? As one great band said it, "Why tear out single pages when you can throw away the book?" Tell me, where before Genesis 1:2 does it say,"And to Moses came a vision and he wrote down what he thought it meant." It doesn't! Notice how ever other place in the Bible it signifies that the following is not true in some way or another. It may not be that blunt, but it gets the point across. But it doesn't do this in Genesis. Instead, it gives accurate, timelined, and detailed info on the creation of the universe. So, what gives you the right to change God from the power of science.

 

[Assyrian]

One question.

If mankind can rewrite a few chapters in the Bible, can mankind rewrite one word? Instead of "Don't murder" can we simply rewrite "Do murder" if that is what some "objective" data(from outside the Bible) is telling us to do? I'm guessing your response is no, but then what gives you the right to declare something the LORD wrote down(through divine inspiration) as false and fictional? As one great band said it, "Why tear out single pages when you can throw away the book?" Tell me, where before Genesis 1:2 does it say,"And to Moses came a vision and he wrote down what he thought it meant." It doesn't! Notice how ever other place in the Bible it signifies that the following is not true in some way or another. It may not be that blunt, but it gets the point across. But it doesn't do this in Genesis. Instead, it gives accurate, timelined, and detailed info on the creation of the universe. So, what gives you the right to change God from the power of science.

It is interesting how modern translations changed 'Thou shalt not kill' to 'Do not murder' Are they changing God's word? Or simply showing a better understanding of it? Do you take the words of Jesus literally when he took the bread and said 'this is my body'? Or is it possible the bible contains metaphors and parables and that understanding God sometimes speaks this way is not rewriting the bible.

 

[ACKerr]

How could God create in 6 days a universe with stars that would take thousands of years for light from them to reach earth if He didn't "pre age" things.
Did Adam miss out on his youth
Did the trees in the garden have annular rings
Some things had to be done the way God did them and it was not with the intent of deception.

Whether you believe that God created the universe in six literal days, or in an instant as Augustine came to believe, you must remember that God exists outside of time. Therefore, God created the stars, the process of their formation, and the light from the stars - including the stars that we currently can see forming - in a timeless act. Because of this, even future events (from our perspective) throughout the life of our universe represent the end-product of His will, which has already occured for God. This postulation also suggests that God could have used any creative process - whether following His laws of natrue, or not - regardless of the time required.

 

[Standing_Ultraviolet]

Do you take the words of Jesus literally when he took the bread and said 'this is my body'?

Actually, yes, I do. Christians have taken the language of the Bible to support the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist since at least the second century. But, I get the point

How could God create in 6 days a universe with stars that would take thousands of years for light from them to reach earth if He didn't "pre age" things.
Did Adam miss out on his youth
Did the trees in the garden have annular rings
Some things had to be done the way God did them and it was not with the intent of deception.

As Assyrian said, the problem with saying that the Earth was created in a way that would leave an impression of age is that many things we see that suggest a very old age would not be necessary for the Earth to function.

Having different types of rock might be necessary, but not having clearly striated rock layers filled with fossils that appeared to evolve over time from animals that never existed. Having star light might be necessary, but it's important to remember that stars aren't just unwavering beams of light; they move and shift in ways which suggest that some of them have planets orbiting them. They also explode, in explosions that would never have happened had the light just been created in transit, and they form in the clouds of dust left behind by past explosions.

A creation with the appearance of age would also have to include human remains, and even some written records from time periods that go back further than the Flood in any Biblical chronology which did not include gaps in the Genesis genealogies.

The bottom line is that a creation with the appearance of age would literally have to be created with the intention to lead people astray. One person pointed out that the existence of a record stating that the Earth was only 6,000 years old would make this non-deceptive, and although I could argue that it still wouldn't, it's not necessary to make this argument sicne the Bible actually states that we can see God through creation in a way that makes us without excuse, so clearly creation is not intended to lead people astray.

It's because of this that most Young Earth Creationist ministries have completely abandoned the idea of a Universe created with the appearance of age, or the idea that light was created in transit.

One question.

If mankind can rewrite a few chapters in the Bible, can mankind rewrite one word? Instead of "Don't murder" can we simply rewrite "Do murder" if that is what some "objective" data(from outside the Bible) is telling us to do? I'm guessing your response is no, but then what gives you the right to declare something the LORD wrote down(through divine inspiration) as false and fictional? As one great band said it, "Why tear out single pages when you can throw away the book?" Tell me, where before Genesis 1:2 does it say,"And to Moses came a vision and he wrote down what he thought it meant." It doesn't! Notice how ever other place in the Bible it signifies that the following is not true in some way or another. It may not be that blunt, but it gets the point across. But it doesn't do this in Genesis. Instead, it gives accurate, timelined, and detailed info on the creation of the universe. So, what gives you the right to change God from the power of science.

While I would agree that reinterpreting part of the Bible without sufficient reason is not advisable, we have overwhelming evidence that the Earth is very old. The Omphalos Hypothesis is one way to account for this without challenging our interpretation of Genesis, but as I have pointed out, this idea conflicts with Scriptural descriptions of what we can learn from creation. Creation science is another, but I believe that the evidence strongly suggests that it is incorrect. It's entirely possible to view the days of creation as metaphorical and still interpret Genesis as recording real events that really occurred in the history of our world.

The style of language used in Genesis 1 is an unusual form not found in other instances of Hebrew writing, called exalted prose. It doesn't have the characteristics that you would expect in poetry, but it does have unusual characteristics which you would not expect in regular prose. This seems, in my opinion, to make it much more likely that the author intended to convey a metaphorical depiction of creation as occurring over a seven day time span.

 

[jpcedotal]

Is it possible that the earth is only 6,000 or so years old?

Is it possible for water to only be found on or only be originated from earth...ever?

 

[mark kennedy]

Could all the scientific evidence that says the earth is around 4.54 billion years old be wrong?

Evidence cannot be wrong, it's either true or false. The theory that dovetails all of the facts together is either valid or invalid. Still, in answer to your question I would say that while it is certainly possible that scientists are grossly misunderstanding the evidence the universe and the earth could have chronological ages in the billions, it makes very little difference. The Genesis account starts with a very brief account of original creation, before creation week starts.

The only timeline the book of Genesis gives us indicates that Adam was created about 6,000 years ago. That does not require a young earth, don't get me wrong, I'm not impressed with geology making a comprehensive and conclusive case that the universe and the earth are actually billions of years old. I have seen their same tired naturalistic assumptions applied to everything from Biology to systematic theology. Any Christian scholar who sells out to the spirit of the age that rejects miracles a priori has abandoned Christian theism.

Is it possible that God used super natural methods to create everything and we are unable to measure these?

God acting in time and space to so much as speak to someone is beyond the scope of natural science. They have neither the right nor the evidence to conclude that such dialogues take place or to confirm or deny what was said. They need to keep there nose down their microscopes and keep out of theological issues they know very little about and could care less.

Is this the best science can do or are scientist blinded by satan to the possiblity that the earth is around 6,000 years old?

Apart from the person and work of Christ, in the power of the Holy Spirit, according to the will of the Father we are all blinded by satan and our own stubborn hard heartedness and the cunning deceitfulness of our own hearts.

Honestly, I think you are alluding to a kind of guiding divine intervention, which is perfectly permissible given that essential doctrine is never really effected directly.

Doesn't the bible say that some people's minds are blinded?

Repeatedly:

The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. (II Cor. 4:4)

The one who received the seed that fell among the thorns is the man who hears the word, but the worries of this life and the deceitfulness of wealth choke it, making it unfruitful. (Matthew 13:22)

No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known. (John 1:18)

It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit (Hebrews 6:4)

But whoever hates his brother is in the darkness and walks around in the darkness; he does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded him. (1 John 2:11)

He has blinded their eyes and he hardened their heart, lest they should see with their eyes, and perceive with their heart, and would turn, and I would heal them. (John 12:40)

But he who hates his brother is in the darkness, and walks in the darkness, and doesn't know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded his eyes. (1 John 2:11)

Jesus said, “For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind." Some Pharisees who were with him heard him say this and asked, “What? Are we blind too?” Jesus said, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains. (John 9:39-41)

The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John 1:9-14)

The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools (Romans 1:18-21)​

To deny creation is to deny the Gospel since the two are inextricably linked, the New Testament is crystal clear on that point of doctrine.

 

[Gozreht]

Here are my thoughts, from my lessons. It comes in a couple of parts. Part 1...

The first book of the Bible, literally means "beginnings". When you start to read Genesis it may get confusing because of the way some of the stories intertwine. It seems like the timeline is disrupted and it will not make sense. Some say that the book was written as a form of poetry and that is why the flow is the way it is. Some say it was written in an analogical way and not everything can be interpreted the way it is written. To understand how Genesis is written you have to go back to what it means; beginnings. Genesis is about the beginning of everything. It is separated into many sections that deal with beginnings of many subjects. The following is break down of what it is all about.

• Genesis 1:1-31, the beginnings of the universe. It takes us back in time before man existed. It tells us how the universe was created and the beginning of life on earth.
• Genesis 2:1-25, the beginning of mankind. These passages lets us know how man and woman came into existence. This is why some of it is repeated from the 1st chapter. It is a different creation. It takes part of the creation of the universe and explains it in deeper detail.
• Genesis 3:1-5:5, the beginnings of sinful nature. These chapters explain to us how man lost Paradise and his place with God. It shows the need of a bridge to get back to Him.
• Genesis 5:6-10:32, the new beginning. Man was so corrupted that God in His mercy decides to give man a new beginning. He does not give a new creation, just a new beginning.
• Genesis 11:1-11:32, the beginning of cultural differences and languages. It shows why languages are different.
• Genesis 12:1-15:21, the beginning of God's people. These chapters describe why God chose the Hebrew race as His chosen people. It also shows the Promise of man's redemption.
• Genesis 16:1-21:34, the beginning of the Covenant. Abraham is given a covenant to show the Promise will be fulfilled.
• Genesis 22:1-25:18, the beginning of true faith. The story continues to show us what true faith is all about.
• Genesis 25:19-39:23, the beginning of Israel. A novel about one man's struggles and how he overcomes his own insecurities to become the nation of Israel.
• Genesis 40:1-45:28, the beginning of captivity. Israel will be a captive in Egypt. This outlines how they needed to have an Exodus and the break away from captivity.
• Genesis 46:1-50:23, the end of the beginning. From here on out we will read what happened to the nation of Israel, it's struggles, it's triumphs, it's legacy, it's Son.

Don't get bogged down with the style more than what is being spoken to you. It is not written to confuse man. It is written from man's perspective so we can understand why we are the way we are. It should be taken as literal as possible except when the words "like" or "as" or any other words are used with the scripture.

 

[Gozreht]

Genesis 1:1-31

Some people say that the earth and the universe are billions of years old. And on the other hand you have those who think the world is only 6000 years old. Let's take a look at what the Bible says on the subject.

• 1 In the beginning God (Elohim) created the heavens and the earth.
• 2 The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters.
• 3 Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light.
• 4 God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness.
• 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.

The first argument will come over the word "day". First of all, a suggestion; do not use the Greek language to decipher the OT. It was not originally in Greek. The original version is closer to Hebrew. The Hebrew word for day is "yom". Now day has a couple of meanings. It could mean: "back in my day", "24 hour period", or "daytime- when light is hitting the earth". Notice that verse 5 starts the problem. It has the word day in it twice and it is used as two of the meanings listed. But since this word has more than one meaning, there are those who will say that the second time day is used could mean an "indefinite time period". Hence this is where billions of years comes in. Christians who try and rationalize billions of years will bring in the scripture verses of Psalms 90:4 and 2 Peter 3:8. Both of these scriptures link a thousand years to God is like a day. That would be an incorrect interpretation of these verses. Both passages here talk about how God has been around forever. These verses mean that time is not important to God. He is beyond all measures of time. Day one had one part daylight and one part night. If this was supposed to be billions of years then that was one long day.
Another argument will be about light. Some stars are billions of light years away from us. So, in order for us to be able to see their light then the universe has to be billions of years old for it would take that long for their light to travel. The natural law of physics would not allow this to be any other way. True. But God created the laws of physics. God is not part of the natural world. God set things into motion and to do that He created this in state of maturity. Adam was not a baby when he was created. Light was the first thing after the universe that was created. It was in its maturity. Let there be light and BOOM there was light, everywhere. They do have a neat theory. It is called doubling time theory. With the expansion of the universe happening in their eyes, every time the universe doubles in size, time is cut in half. Given the rate of the speed of light and the calculations of how big they say the universe is one can use the following to decipher how old they say the universe is:

• day one took 8 billion years
• day two took 4 billion
• day three took 2 billion
• day four took 1 billion
• day five took 500 million
• day six took 250 million
• and the Christian scientists claims we are still in day seven

Add these together and you get 15 3/4 billion years.
www.aish.com/societywork/sciencenature/Age_of_the_Universe.asp will give you more information on this theory. It is neat but doesn't hold all the water.
Science tells us that the sun had appeared by an explosion of gas and bits and pieces were thrown into our solar system. When these pieces cooled you have some planets forming. Same with the moon. Earth started to cool and a piece of earth had broken off and cooled 300,000 miles away in the form of our moon. So science tells us the order of these things coming into existence as: Stars, Sun, Earth, Moon. But scripture tells us that the earth came first. Then the light. Then the sun and moon and stars. The earth is the oldest but not billions of years old. So, if some of these stars we could not see until today because they are 15 billion light years away, and the stars were not created until the 4th day then by their own theory the stars could only be 3 billion years old at the most. Thereby if you stick to the doubling theory then the earth is either 60 billion years old or the stars are a lot closer than they thought. Or the Bible is inaccurate about which came first. In any way, their theory now has holes in it or the Bible does.


To get the final picture you have to go back to the way Genesis was written. Remember from part 1, Genesis was written so we could understand it. Six days is six days.

 

[TasManOfGod]

Christians should spend more time getting science to line up with the Bible rather than trying to make the Bible line up with science

 

[Keachian]

Genesis 1:1-31

Some people say that the earth and the universe are billions of years old. And on the other hand you have those who think the world is only 6000 years old. Let's take a look at what the Bible says on the subject.

• 1 In the beginning God (Elohim) created the heavens and the earth.
• 2 The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters.
• 3 Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light.
• 4 God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness.
• 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.

The first argument will come over the word "day". First of all, a suggestion; do not use the Greek language to decipher the OT. It was not originally in Greek. The original version is closer to Hebrew. The Hebrew word for day is "yom". Now day has a couple of meanings. It could mean: "back in my day", "24 hour period", or "daytime- when light is hitting the earth". Notice that verse 5 starts the problem. It has the word day in it twice and it is used as two of the meanings listed. But since this word has more than one meaning, there are those who will say that the second time day is used could mean an "indefinite time period". Hence this is where billions of years comes in. Christians who try and rationalize billions of years will bring in the scripture verses of Psalms 90:4 and 2 Peter 3:8. Both of these scriptures link a thousand years to God is like a day. That would be an incorrect interpretation of these verses. Both passages here talk about how God has been around forever. These verses mean that time is not important to God. He is beyond all measures of time. Day one had one part daylight and one part night. If this was supposed to be billions of years then that was one long day.
Another argument will be about light. Some stars are billions of light years away from us. So, in order for us to be able to see their light then the universe has to be billions of years old for it would take that long for their light to travel. The natural law of physics would not allow this to be any other way. True. But God created the laws of physics. God is not part of the natural world. God set things into motion and to do that He created this in state of maturity. Adam was not a baby when he was created. Light was the first thing after the universe that was created. It was in its maturity. Let there be light and BOOM there was light, everywhere. They do have a neat theory. It is called doubling time theory. With the expansion of the universe happening in their eyes, every time the universe doubles in size, time is cut in half. Given the rate of the speed of light and the calculations of how big they say the universe is one can use the following to decipher how old they say the universe is:

• day one took 8 billion years
• day two took 4 billion
• day three took 2 billion
• day four took 1 billion
• day five took 500 million
• day six took 250 million
• and the Christian scientists claims we are still in day seven

Add these together and you get 15 3/4 billion years.
www.aish.com/societywork/sciencenature/Age_of_the_Universe.asp will give you more information on this theory. It is neat but doesn't hold all the water.
Science tells us that the sun had appeared by an explosion of gas and bits and pieces were thrown into our solar system. When these pieces cooled you have some planets forming. Same with the moon. Earth started to cool and a piece of earth had broken off and cooled 300,000 miles away in the form of our moon. So science tells us the order of these things coming into existence as: Stars, Sun, Earth, Moon. But scripture tells us that the earth came first. Then the light. Then the sun and moon and stars. The earth is the oldest but not billions of years old. So, if some of these stars we could not see until today because they are 15 billion light years away, and the stars were not created until the 4th day then by their own theory the stars could only be 3 billion years old at the most. Thereby if you stick to the doubling theory then the earth is either 60 billion years old or the stars are a lot closer than they thought. Or the Bible is inaccurate about which came first. In any way, their theory now has holes in it or the Bible does.


To get the final picture you have to go back to the way Genesis was written. Remember from part 1, Genesis was written so we could understand it. Six days is six days.

So one day is like a thousand years, then Christ who laid in the ground for three days actually is still there now for another 1000 years? If I wasn't confused then I am confused now.

Yes, the Six Day creation account reads as six literal 24hour days, however a little reading into it's purpose is needed, you know how some say that Genesis reads like the Babylonian Myths? Well because it is an apologia against polytheism we see our God Elohim creating all things that others have set up as Idols. Cool, yay! Do we need to take it literally then? Why? What do we gain from doing this? I believe God created the universe, you do as well, we both believe that he created through his sovereignty, the only thing we argue on appears to be semantics.

About the placement in history, haven't you not read that we should not be obsessed with endless genealogies and whatnot and instead hold fast to that which is the Gospel? So suddenly it doesn't really matter how long ago God created, more that he did create. If we chase after the genealogies we are going to lose sight of Christ and what he accomplished on the Cross, no?

So let's now look at Genesis 2-3 which is a different creation story and it talks about the human condition, it judges rightly our predisposition to Sin, even Paul talks about it when he sees Christ as a symbol of Adam, now bear with me. If Christ is symbolically the second Adam come to turn us back to God as Paul says in Romans does Adam need to be a literal flesh and blood person, I'd argue no. As it is Adam in his very name (Adamah means Man) is a symbol for all of humanity, maybe because he has all of humanity "in his loins" maybe because he is just a symbol of the human condition, either way it again boils down to semantics.

 

[Keachian]

Christians should spend more time getting science to line up with the Bible rather than trying to make the Bible line up with science

I actually try to get my understanding of the Bible and Science to meet. And by my understanding of Science I mean my understanding of God's Creation as seen through Creation itself.