Is the age of the Earth worth disputing?

[expos4ever]

But good science is observable science and not historical science (of which we cannot prove).

From Scientific American:

It should be noted that the idea of falsifiability as the defining characteristic of science originated with philosopher Karl Popper in the 1930s. More recent elaborations on his thinking have expanded the narrowest interpretation of his principle precisely because it would eliminate too many branches of clearly scientific endeavor.

 

[dhh712]

My point is, if all the scientific theories and evidence were piled up and miraculously proved the Earth is 500 gazillion years old, would it matter? Would it even change your faith?

Not at all. God's word is the only truth there is, in all the world. He even said he would send us delusions if we did not love the truth. You want to not believe what God has written to us? You'll find plenty of "evidence" to back that up. Either trust God or believe a lie. Your choice. It's his creation so he gets to make up the rules. You or I or anyone else has no say in it, no matter what we try to dream up.

 

[dhh712]

Thanks for the reply. For me, I think it is absolutely necessary to believe the creation story in Genesis. I cannot let myself become selective in my biblical beliefs. Fortunately, you don't have to be superstitious to believe the creation story of Genesis. You just have to believe God is almighty and can do all things.

Definitely. If you start picking and choosing which parts of the Bible you believe are true, guess what? You created your own god. God is as he is revealed in what he has written to us. You don't get to choose aspects of him to believe or ignore and think you're worshiping the same god; you start doing that, you've created your own idol.

 

[dhh712]

I think it's God who is perfect not the books used to make the Bible.

It's not the Christian God you're seeking then.

 

[dhh712]

I see your point, but that thinking allows us to be very selective in what we believe. Why believe any of the bible if your not going to believe all of it? This, of course, is probably the topic of many o' threads.

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness -- 2 Timothy 3:16 KJV

If you don't believe God must be revealed to man in order for man to have any knowledge of him, then the only god you can have is one you've made up in your own mind. That is why you need the Bible to know God.

 

[rjs330]

The only thing I know for sure is that the earth is at least 63 years old. As to what happened before then I have to rely on the recorded history of others. But if God made the earth to appear billions of years older than what it actually is then is he being deceitful? In which case what else might he be being deceitful about?

Two things on this. God was clear in Genesis that he created everything with age. The plants and animals were grown full enough to multiply. The sun was fully formed as were the stars and moon. Giving age.

Secondly man's science and dating methods cannot be trusted. We haven't been around long enough with these scientific dating methods to show their consistant accuracy. There are problems with them because we are human.

 

[zoidar]

The bible is still true even if some things has to be taken as an allegory. There are stories in the bible I don't take litteraly, like the story of creation and the story of Samson who had his strength in his hair and killed 1000 people with a jawbone.

The most important thing that the bible tells us that we are sinners, and that we need Jesus sacrifice at the cross to be cleansed from sin. To me it's not a problem of an old Earth. Jesus did what he did. If science says it's an old Earth, sure why not? It can't undo what Jesus has done.

Does the bible say it always should be taken litteraly?

An old view was that Earth was in the centre of the world. Today we know that there are billions or even trillions of galaxies out there. Does that change the fact that Jesus has reconciled the world? Absolutely not!

To me: Science talks about how it happened. The bible talks about our relationship to God. Two different things.

 

[zoidar]

Two things on this. God was clear in Genesis that he created everything with age. The plants and animals were grown full enough to multiply. The sun was fully formed as were the stars and moon. Giving age.

It feels a bit like saying that: "It looks like Africa and America was fit together, but they really weren't. God created it that way with similar mountain chains and fossils and so on, just because he wanted to create it like that."

Is that reasonable? To me it isn't. To me it would be deceiving, and a bit chaotic too. It makes more sense to me if science is right, that the creation of the world was "mathematical".

"for God is not a God of confusion but of peace" /1 Cor 14:33

 

[rjs330]

I will concede something as to the age of the earth. God did make it with age for sure. But in Genesis 1:1-2 it says God created the heavens and earth. It doesn't say how long the earth hung around before God began to formation of life.

 

[cordie]

The universe is roughly 13.7 billion years old. The solar system is 4.5 billion years & that includes the earth. Genesis is really about metaphor.

 

[lismore]

God can do all things. Except to make the world in six days.

 

[zoidar]

God can do all things. Except to make the world in six days.

Can God do anything, maybe ... Anyhow even if he could make the world in six days, is it most likely that he did?

 

[expos4ever]

Definitely. If you start picking and choosing which parts of the Bible you believe are true, guess what? You created your own god. God is as he is revealed in what he has written to us. You don't get to choose aspects of him to believe or ignore and think you're worshiping the same god; you start doing that, you've created your own idol.

It is clear beyond doubt that the Bible does contain material that is not to be taken literally. I could wear out my keyboard citing examples.

Your argument implicitly assumes something quite implausible - that all material in the Bible is to be taken literally. You then imply that those of us who think otherwise are denying the "true-ness" of Scripture.

Not so - we are simply denying that it is all to be taken literally.

 

[archer75]

I had this problem on another thread. I wonder if it's ever possible to find a common language about this. Has anyone had success with this?

It seems even the most dedicated literalists are ready to take some things as metaphorical or otherwise non-literally meaningful.

 

[Speedwell]

I had this problem on another thread. I wonder if it's ever possible to find a common language about this. Has anyone had success with this?

It seems even the most dedicated literalists are ready to take some things as metaphorical or otherwise non-literally meaningful.

The general rule seems to be that if taking a passage literally produces a proof-text against the theory of evolution then it is taken literally--otherwise it doesn't matter to them very much.

 

[DennisTate]

If a Christian believes in his/her heart that God created all things including the universe and time itself, then why is the age of the Earth worth disputing or proving?

I ask this not for a scientific debate, but rather an opinion on how much time we should spend discussing these matters vs what the Bible teaches.

Consider the following scenario:

You have a 500 year old oak tree in your front yard. You love the tree so much, you ask God during a nightly prayer to give you another one exactly like it. The next morning you wake up and peer out the window. Your eyes behold a 2nd oak tree in your front yard exactly like the other one.

If you cut down both tree's, would the new tree have the same amount of rings? Of course, because God made it exactly the same as the first. And somehow, the tree is only hours old.

---

My point is, if all the scientific theories and evidence were piled up and miraculously proved the Earth is 500 gazillion years old, would it matter? Would it even change your faith?

Here is another topic that
can help us to understand how useful
this topic can become for any Christian.

NDE of Dr. Richard Eby verifies old earth and gap theory.

 

[watchman007]

I've never believed in the creation story of Genesis, yet that doesn't effect my faith in God. Science just debunks the superstitious component woven into religion.

Genesis is accurate but there is much more depth to it than you think.

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Period, then creation starts, the earth was void and without form, it was desolate. The Bible doesn't specify how long between his creation and day one was.

Jeremiah in the book we can see there was actually an earth age before the one we're in now.

 

[benelchi]

The universe is roughly 13.7 billion years old. The solar system is 4.5 billion years & that includes the earth. Genesis is really about metaphor.

Why?

 

[archer75]

Jeremiah in the book we can see there was actually an earth age before the one we're in now.

Could you point this out on the thread or by PM?

 

[mindlight]

If a Christian believes in his/her heart that God created all things including the universe and time itself, then why is the age of the Earth worth disputing or proving?

I ask this not for a scientific debate, but rather an opinion on how much time we should spend discussing these matters vs what the Bible teaches.

Consider the following scenario:

You have a 500 year old oak tree in your front yard. You love the tree so much, you ask God during a nightly prayer to give you another one exactly like it. The next morning you wake up and peer out the window. Your eyes behold a 2nd oak tree in your front yard exactly like the other one.

If you cut down both tree's, would the new tree have the same amount of rings? Of course, because God made it exactly the same as the first. And somehow, the tree is only hours old.

---

My point is, if all the scientific theories and evidence were piled up and miraculously proved the Earth is 500 gazillion years old, would it matter? Would it even change your faith?

No it does not matter how old the universe is. Also it is possible to be a Christian and to believe God created what we can see over billions of years. There are millions of Christians who can testify to such convictions. However to me this discussion demonstrates where we place our trust and our fundamental convictions about truthes can be established. Science is a useful tool and has yielded incredible benefits as well as risks for mankind. But there are things which remain out of scope for it as they cannot be established by repeatable scientific experimentation. Rather they are established by analogy with things we can demonstrate. So effectively it is not true science to posit theories about origins, some aspects of remote cosmology and huge dimensions of human nature including that of pure thought and of love for instance. Also the scriptures more clearly indicate a young universe and special creation than they support an old universe and evolution.

In some sense to posit the tree is older than it is is dishonest, but more fundamentally to blindly accept the methods by which that conclusion was reached is a form of idolatry.