Tree Rings a Problem for 6,000 Year Old Earth

[joshua 1 9]

Not at all. I never went to Bible school and or learned what I did from a church. Just good ole fashioned reading the text and believing what it says (with the guidance of God by way of prayer of course).

In any event, my friend... you are NOT reading the text!

Shall we go over it again?

5 "...for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground,..." (Genesis 2:5-7).​

Okay. Please read verse 5 that says there was not a man to till the ground. Now, I don't know how you read English, but this plainly says to me there were no humans yet to do any kind of agricultural work. That is what is saying to me. There was not a man to till the ground. Yet, you are saying there was a man around at this time. Yet, God's Word says in Genesis 2:5 that there was no man around yet because there was no man to till the ground yet. Verse 7 then says the Lord God formed man.

It does not get any clearer than that.

You either believe the Bible here or you don't believe it.

The choice is yours.

Do you decide to go with your history classes or the Bible?

If you reject science then you reject God because God gives us science so we can better understand His word and we can know Him better. I have no doubt that if you reject History and you reject Science than you are going to come up with the understanding that you seem to have. I just wonder how you can reject all of the hard evidence that God give us. The real challenge is to reconcile the Bible with Science. This takes some effort and you need to understand both Science and the Bible. Perhaps people are just to lazy to examine all of the evidence that God gives us to examine.

Romans 1 "19 For what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood from His workmanship, so that men are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified Him as God nor gave thanks to Him, but they became futile in their thinking and darkened in their foolish hearts"

I remember Jim Baker and Dr Dino before they were sentenced and went to jail. People tried to warn them but they did not want to listen. They were so convinced that they were right and everyone else was wrong.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

If you reject science then you reject God because God gives us science so we can better understand His word and we can know Him better. I have no doubt that if you reject History and you reject Science than you are going to come up with the understanding that you seem to have. I just wonder how you can reject all of the hard evidence that God give us. The real challenge is to reconcile the Bible with Science. This takes some effort and you need to understand both Science and the Bible. Perhaps people are just to lazy to examine all of the evidence that God gives us to examine.

Romans 1 "19 For what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood from His workmanship, so that men are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified Him as God nor gave thanks to Him, but they became futile in their thinking and darkened in their foolish hearts"

I remember Jim Baker and Dr Dino before they were sentenced and went to jail. People tried to warn them but they did not want to listen. They were so convinced that they were right and everyone else was wrong.

Okay. First, nowhere did I ever say I reject Science. So no. I don't reject Science and nor do I reject God. Those are just baseless accusations that are unloving and not nice. I believe in Observational Science. I only accept Historical Science if the Bible supports it (Meaning I do not reject it). However, surely you must realize that men can lie; Or do you think that men cannot lie? I merely take what men say with a grain of salt. But the Word of God is true and will last forever. Hence, why I use the Bible as my starting point or as my worldview when looking at History or Observational Sciences.

Second, did you even read the passage in Genesis 2 within my previous post?

Shall we go over it again?

5 "...for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground,..." (Genesis 2:5-7).​

Verse 5 = There was not a man to till the ground.
This means there were no humans yet.

Verse 7 = The Lord God formed man.
This is when man was formed for the first time because there was no man to till the ground before.

How do you explain this above passage?
You avoided explaining it two times so far.

 

[joshua 1 9]

I don't know how you read English

I do not read the English, I use Biblehub and I read the original Hebrew words. In this case the Hebrew word in Genesis 2:5 is wə·’ā·ḏām וְ֝אָדָ֗ם This is the first time this word is used in the Bible and this word is used a total of 10 times. The word used in Genesis 1 was adam אָדָם, Can you explain why Genesis 2 adds a letter to the hebrew name for Adam that we do not find back in Genesis chapter one.

Adam lived in the Garden of Eden 6,000 years ago. There is a lot of archaeology that goes back more then 6,000 years. Archaeology has discovered massive carved stones about 11,000 years old, crafted and arranged by prehistoric people who had not yet developed metal tools or even pottery. How do you explain this when Adam and Eve only goes back 6,000 years. (Called Gobekli Tepe)

If you study the oldest known artifacts the earliest known tools were about 2.8 million years old. Around 40,000 years ago we find fishing hooks, sowing needles and fishing nets. They were weaving baskets to carry their grain in around 10,000 years ago. They have found pottery fragments going back 20,000 years. Oldest Jewelry is 130,000 years. Oldest footwear 9,300 years. Arrowheads have been found 64,000 years. Even here in the United States they find human remains going back 8,000 to 10,600 years. Kennewick man found in the Columbia River near Kennewick Washington is 9,000 years old. Chedder man is 10,000 years old. He was dark skinned and blue eyed. They were able to extract his DNA from a tooth and even matched it with a professor living in Chedder today. They are directly related.

Do you realize that DNA evidence is very admissible in a court of law. If the DNA evidence says you are the daddy then you are the daddy and the court will order you to pay child support. In the court case of Kennewick man he was not related to the native american Indians that tried to claim his body.

We can go on and on with the abundance of artifacts that we have that are older then 6,000 years. These are just the man made items and we do not even get into the discussion of the fossils and natural history evidence we have in Geology. My son is real good at finding fossils like that. Take him to the river or a construction site along the old river bed and there is a good chance he will find something interesting. I am always amazed at what he is able to find.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I do not read the English, I use Biblehub and I read the original Hebrew words. In this case the Hebrew word in Genesis 2:5 is wə·’ā·ḏām וְ֝אָדָ֗ם This is the first time this word is used in the Bible and this word is used a total of 10 times. The word used in Genesis 1 was adam אָדָם, Can you explain why Genesis 2 adds a letter to the hebrew name for Adam that we do not find back in Genesis chapter one.

Adam lived in the Garden of Eden 6,000 years ago. There is a lot of archaeology that goes back more then 6,000 years. Archaeology has discovered massive carved stones about 11,000 years old, crafted and arranged by prehistoric people who had not yet developed metal tools or even pottery. How do you explain this when Adam and Eve only goes back 6,000 years. (Called Gobekli Tepe)

If you study the oldest known artifacts the earliest known tools were about 2.8 million years old. Around 40,000 years ago we find fishing hooks, sowing needles and fishing nets. They were weaving baskets to carry their grain in around 10,000 years ago. They have found pottery fragments going back 20,000 years. Oldest Jewelry is 130,000 years. Oldest footwear 9,300 years. Arrowheads have been found 64,000 years. Even here in the United States they find human remains going back 8,000 to 10,600 years. Kennewick man found in the Columbia River near Kennewick Washington is 9,000 years old. Chedder man is 10,000 years old. He was dark skinned and blue eyed. They were able to extract his DNA from a tooth and even matched it with a professor living in Chedder today. They are directly related.

Do you realize that DNA evidence is very admissible in a court of law. If the DNA evidence says you are the daddy then you are the daddy and the court will order you to pay child support. In the court case of Kennewick man he was not related to the native american Indians that tried to claim his body.

We can go on and on with the abundance of artifacts that we have that are older then 6,000 years.

So you know better than the many translators who worked on the KJV?
I believe God preserved His Word for us today and there are many evidences that show us this. I do not believe God confined His Word to a language that you did not grow up speaking and writing. There is nobody alive today who spoke and wrote biblical Greek. Sure, there is modern Greek, but it is not the same as biblical Greek. You are only guessing as to what this language says because you were not with Paul, Peter, James, and John to confirm your findings on what the biblical Greek actually says. Then again, maybe that is the way you want it.

So I will leave you be seeing I cannot quote Scripture to you normally with you simply reading it and believing it in the English.

Side Note:

I mean, do you honestly think God is going to hold somebody accountable to His Word in a language that they do not understand? That to me is silly. For has not God chosen the poor of this world to be rich in faith? (See James 2:5); And does not Jesus say for us to beware of the scribes? (See Luke 20:46). The scribes were those who TRAN-scribed the law or the Scriptures. In fact, in Acts of the Apostles 2, we learn that God was able to translate men's different languages just fine. So I don't see where you think God has changed somehow.

 

[joshua 1 9]

So you know better than the many translators who worked on the KJV?

I do not know better, I am just saying it is not the same word as you contend it is. Actually I am descended from the Bible translator that was Bloody Mary's first Martyr. I do believe there is a blessing on my life because of my relationship with him. But I am not going to make any claims for myself.

because you were not with Paul

I did talk to Paul once, but the conversation only lasted 3 seconds. Time is as bit different in Heaven than it is here on the Earth. That does not really qualify me for anything though. I do not want to make any claims for myself.

We are not talking about what Paul wrote, we are talking about the Ancient Hebrew Language that Moses wrote. I really am just getting started with my study of the Hebrew Language. We are taught in Bible College to look at the original word and study the contest and the different places that word is used in the Bible. There are rules that we follow for Bible interpretation.

So I will leave you be seeing I cannot quote Scripture to you normally with you simply reading it and believing it in the English.

I do believe the KJV is the only authorized translation. (KJV ONLY) The passage simply does not say that what you say that it says. There are many, many many things that Adam was the first of beginning 6,000 year ago.

You have to understand the incarnation of Jesus. How Jesus became a part of His Creation. Genesis 2:7 "Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being." Science says that man is carbon based and that man is made from Star Dust. Man has his beginning in a star a long time ago. The Word Beginning with God can mean first fruit. It could have taken God millions or even billions of years to create Adam. But we are looking at an exact point in time and an exact place. This is when God's work was finished or perfected. The same with Jesus the wise men knew exactly when and where to find Jesus. They knew when and where He would enter the world. Most likely because Daniel tells us.

When God said: "He chose us in him before the foundation of the world:"
Romans 8:29 - this means that He has known us for a very long time

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I do not know better, I am just saying it is not the same word as you contend it is. Actually I am descended from the Bible translator that was Bloody Mary's first Martyr. I do believe there is a blessing on my life because of my relationship with him. But I am not going to make any claims for myself.

If you don't know better than you should accept the KJV to some extent in what it says. For me: I know the KJV is divine and perfect in origin. If it wasn't, I probably would not be a believer in Jesus Christ right now. Comparing the KJV next to Modern Translations shows me that it is superior to other translations in many, many ways. It seems like their is an attack on God's Word because of this. In fact, the devil's name is placed within many Modern Translations. I have even been insulted and attacked by other Christians because I am KJV only. That to me is not normal if there wasn't something special to the KJV. I did nothing bad to provoke them, either. I merely shared my belief that the KJV was divine in origin. Also, biblical numerics is another one that proves the KJV is divine and perfect, as well.

Check out Mike Hoggard's video on the number 7 in the King James Bible.

God had revealed to me special things within trusting in the KJV (When others thought they were contradictions), as well.

What you probably do not realize is that there are two vines of manuscripts.

There is:

Vine #1. The Textus Receptus and
Vine #2. The Westcott and Hort's Critical Text (Which is based on the Codex Vaticanus and the Codex Sinaiticus).

One vine is clearly corrupt and the other is pure.

For Westcott and Hort were into the occult and said things that were against the faith. Their fruit can be seen in the Modern Translations (Which is founded upon their corrupt Critical Text).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I do not know better, I am just saying it is not the same word as you contend it is. Actually I am descended from the Bible translator that was Bloody Mary's first Martyr. I do believe there is a blessing on my life because of my relationship with him. But I am not going to make any claims for myself.

I did talk to Paul once, but the conversation only lasted 3 seconds. Time is as bit different in Heaven than it is here on the Earth. That does not really qualify me for anything though. I do not want to make any claims for myself.

We are not talking about what Paul wrote, we are talking about the Ancient Hebrew Language that Moses wrote. I really am just getting started with my study of the Hebrew Language. We are taught in Bible College to look at the original word and study the contest and the different places that word is used in the Bible. There are rules that we follow for Bible interpretation.

I do believe the KJV is the only authorized translation. (KJV ONLY) The passage simply does not say that what you say that it says. There are many, many many things that Adam was the first of beginning 6,000 year ago.

You have to understand the incarnation of Jesus. How Jesus became a part of His Creation. Genesis 2:7 "Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being." Science says that man is carbon based and that man is made from Star Dust. Man has his beginning in a star a long time ago. The Word Beginning with God can mean first fruit. It could have taken God millions or even billions of years to create Adam. But we are looking at an exact point in time and an exact place. This is when God's work was finished or perfected. The same with Jesus the wise men knew exactly when and where to find Jesus.

Pastor Mike used to be into Modern Translations. He was in that camp and believed as you once did. But he came out. The true light of the Word (with the KJV) showed him the way of God's Word.

Think for a moment.

Is God going to require everyone to know the original languages so as to understand His Word? Or do you think God can talk to people plainly with His Word in their own language?

 

[Chinchilla]

Our current understanding based on the Google Earth photos is that the Garden of Eden is under the Persian gulf.

https://www.livescience.com/10340-lost-civilization-existed-beneath-persian-gulf.html

We have no idea where it is , it might be burried over thousands layers of mud after flood .

 

[Chinchilla]

I know the KJV is divine and perfect in origin

It is not perfect , for example it has missing one vers in psalm which has one vers for one letter in Hebrew in order as they go .
We know this because of dead sea scrolls

 

[Chinchilla]

If you reject science then you reject God because God gives us science so we can better understand His word and we can know Him better.

1 Timothy 6:19-21 King James Version (KJV)
19 Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.

20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.


It's rather scientism not science , all the dating are false both of fossils and rocks like coal .

 

[Biblewriter]

45 Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; there is one who accuses you--Moses, in whom you trust. 46 For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me. 47 But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?" John 5:45-47

 

[joshua 1 9]

19 Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.

20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.


It's rather scientism not science , all the dating are false both of fossils and rocks like coal .

This word is translated 11 "knowledge" and once "science". Or what is falsely called science. The Greek word is γνώσεως (gnōseōs) — 12 Occurrences. I have always
heard we should avoid Gnosticism . Of course the question is what is gnosticism?

 

[JacksBratt]

There was no death for people (of whom there were only two sustained by the tree of life), but says nothing of animals not dying. In fact how was it when God warned them of death, they understood the concept if they had never seen it before?

How did they know any language... or how to do anything... saying that they would not have a definition for the word "death" is not a valid reason to state that there was death before the fall.

 

[joshua 1 9]

We have no idea where it is

Using Google Earth Photos we do know where the Garden of Eden was because of the 4 rivers - we read about 2 of the rivers the Euphrates and Tigris are still there today. The other two are dried up but with the space photos we can see where they were. "10 Now a river flowed out of Eden to water the garden, and from there it branched into four headwaters: 11 The name of the first river is Pishon; it flows through the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold." New information could come along but for now this is the best information we have regarding the location of the Garden of Eden. This was an area in the Persian Gulf that was known for pearls. Jesus told a story about pearls. Also Moses tells us that there was an ancient gold mine.

 

[Job 33:6]

Bible focuses on kinds, not species. Assuming a kind is equivalent to what we know as a genus today, you would only need one pair of a kind of each animal that needed to be on the Ark. From this, it is speculated that about 16,000 animals were needed.
See: How did Noah Fit All the Animals on the Ark? and How Could Noah Get All the Animals on the Ark?

Your second issue assumes variation requires long periods of time (millions of years) to work. Thus, of course, you will have a disagreement with Young Earth Creation.



So what do we believe? Where does our picking and choosing end? Why should we believe we have Salvation? Whose to say that's not just something written by human hands, a myth, a fable, a fabrication, a cultural boo-boo, if you will? This, of course, assumes you are Christian. If you are then why believe the Ressurection? It's not scientific? Yet, it's fundamental to Christian faith.

16 thousand?

There are 200 thousand genus of animals, 30, thousand genus of plant.

Young earthers seem to believe that lions and tigers could have evolved from a unique ancestor in just 3000 years, and that hundreds of thousands of unique arthropods could do the same. They essentially believe in some form of hyper evolution for which there is no evidence.

And of course there is no explanation for things like the biostratigraphy distribution of marsupials, as someone pointed out above, there is no explanation for how animals arrived at where they are nor why fossils leave s trail straight to modern day extant counterparts.

 

[joshua 1 9]

How did they know any language...

There were two groups of people and two languages at this time. The ancient Hebrew is based on symbols. The other language came after God confused their language and is based on the Phoneticians. Today we call this Phonics where a word is spelled based on the way the word sounds.

 

[Job 33:6]

And just how is this possible since the first record of tree rings isn't that old... The Greek botanist Theophrastus (ca. 371 – ca. 287 BC) first mentioned that the wood of trees has rings

so that must be one huge tree from his era they found with 8000 rings! But reading the materials from a few sources shows that scientists are doing what we simply call estimating... and then they have to add through "carbon dating" which is not an exact science. In one article I read it said rings could be as much as 300 years off in count. Huh? Whatever that means. Sounds like jargon to me.

But most young earthers give the earth a possible 10k years anyway. But surely not millions like.. well.. nvr mnd. Too many variables to think that way...

God made EVERYTHING with age already... no eggs, no babies, no seed germs only first.... so why not trees too!

the earth has things like burrows, foot tracks, nests with eggs, fossils with signs of predation etc.

These features indicate that time passed in the past, as opposed to being created instantly. The time needed for animals to make burrow networks, the time needed for them to construct nests and lay eggs etc.

 

[Job 33:6]

Then there are also good Scientific evidences for a Young Earth, as well:

#1. Dinosaur blood found within the bone of T-Rex:

The Bible confirms the existence of dinosaurs. The Behemoth is described alot like the Brachiosaurus in Job 40:15-24; And the Leviathan describes a dragon like beast in Job 41 (that is also briefly mentioned in Psalm 104:25-26 and Isaiah 27:1, too). In fact, the best evidence for dino's is the soft tissue found in the bone of a T-Rex.

View attachment 238571

#2. Seashells on the tops of the highest mountains:

There are seashells on tops of the tops of the highest mountains. This can only be if there was a global flood (Which goes against most Old Earth Creationist's beliefs). For if we are to believe the Evolutionists who say that the Earth was once covered by all water at some point, then how come the seashells did not erode away by the weathering of the elements for millions of years on the tops of these high mountains? This is contrary to secular Evolutionary thinking that denies the Bible and the global flood.

#3. Recession of the Moon:

The gravitational pull of the moon creates a “tidal bulge” on earth that causes the moon to spiral outwards very slowly. Because of this effect, the moon would have been closer to the earth in the past. Based on gravitational forces and the current rate of recession, we can calculate how much the moon has moved away over time. If the earth is only 6,000 years old, there’s no problem, because in that time the moon would have only moved about 800 feet (250 m). But most astronomy books teach that the moon is over four billion years old, which poses a major dilemma—less than 1.5 billion years ago the moon would have been touching the earth!

#4. Trees going through rock layers:

View attachment 238573

#5. Stalactite Length:

Fellow CF poster Xianghua says, I quote:

"The average stalactite growth rate is about 1 cm per 100 years. so if the earth is indeed so young we expect to find that most stalactites (dont be confuse with stalagmites) should be no more then 50-100cm long. This is indeed what we find in most stalactites caves:

(image from https://www.quora.com/Why-do-stalac...n-occur-in-pairs-Is-such-occurrence-important)

the main objection to this claim is that those stalactites may fall apart every several thousands years. but if it was true then the floor should be full of stalactites chunks (about 100 stalactites in the floor for every single stalactite above in a 1my old cave). and as you can see in the image, this is not what we find."​

I hope this helps, and may God bless you.



Sources Used:
https://answersingenesis.org/evidence-for-creation/six-evidences-of-young-earth/
https://www.christianforums.com/threads/4-scientific-evidence-for-a-young-earth.8037285/

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...gwAHoECAUQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0VW6f7RWvDXK63nRJTUoRa

Seashells on mountains is a product of plate tectonics.

What's more important is to understand that marine fossils are in marine strata while terrestrial are in terrestrial strata.

And regarding stalactites, nobody suggests that caves are the same age as the earth.

 

[joshua 1 9]

It is absurd for anyone in this day and age to suggest that the earth is only 6,000 years old. If we go to the beach we see little particles of sand. In northern California the sand there is very colorful. At first the earth was very hot and mostly rocks were in a liquid state. Then when the earth cooled the rocks were broken up over time and became the sand we see today. We have a lot of conglomerate rock and we have river bed rock that also was formed over a long period of time. Some rocks like lime and chalk are organic. They are actually made up of the skeletons (calcium carbonate) of tiny little animals in the ocean. Just like coal is an organic material that formed over long periods of time. They like to talk about how the oil deposits were organic. The energy from the sun was converted and stored. Under the great lakes are many thick layers of salt that they mine to put on the roads. This was layer upon layer from when the ocean covered this part of the country. Now the great lakes are fresh water and they are higher than the ocean.

The great oxygen event is very interesting also. We have life that is producing oxygen and this is causing the iron in the earth to rust or oxidize . This is how we get the brilliant red colors that we see in geology. Also we know that blood is red from the oxygen. If there is no oxygen then the blood is blue. Again this is a process that takes a very long time. Much longer then 6,000 years.

God is truth, not fiction. When He writes a story in the layers we can read what He has written. We can study the layers and we can see what God wants us to see and we can learn how He created this world that we live in today. He gives us wisdom, knowledge and understanding and He gives us a world that we are able to understand. Romans 1:20 "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:"

 

[Ken Rank]

Science is in constant collision with the notion of a 6,000 year old earth.

Take tree rings, for example. How simple can you get?

Real simple. First of all, we get 6000 years by simply adding up the genealogy from Adam through Christ knowing it has been 2000 years since he was here... and the total is about 6000. As for for the trees... when God made Adam he didn't make a baby, he made a man. So when Adam was 1 minute old, he looked what, 25? God made food for Adam, trees BEARING FRUIT which means the trees looked more mature than they were. A tree created and then cut down 2 minutes later would probably have had enough rings to support the notion that it was already bearing fruit. Point being, God created things with the appearance of age.