Christian's views on the age of the Earth

[Kane]

There is a lot of people on this board that say that according to christians, the Earth was created in 4004 BC meaning the Earth is only 6,000 years old. I've never really heard that anywhere and the Earth's age is written on stone even to a christian. It doesn't say anywhere in the Bible the age of the Earth. Infact, many christians I know think the Earth is 10,000-15,000 years old. And the Earth might be even older than that even in christian terms. So it is not good to claim christians said the Earth is only 6,004 years old when trying to prove the theory of creation is wrong.

By the way, can anyone show me a link on where some of you got the idea the Earth is only 6,004 years old. Thanks.

 

[PeachMonkey]

17th-century Irish Archbishop James Ussher of Armagh estimated the creation of the earth as having taken place at 4004 BC in his 1658 book "The Annals of the World". He derived this figure using Biblical durations listed throughout, as well as those few Middle Eastern histories he had access to.

See:

http://www.mids.org/pay/mn/709/ussher.html

http://www.ptm.org/BibleAnswer4.htm

http://pages.zdnet.com/rwfortune/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/only6000yearsold.htm

 

[Feisty Mouse]

I'm a Christian, and I think the Earth is several billion years old.


Wow, PeachMonkey, you keep amazing me with the things you know. Did you Google that or was it part of your vast knowledge pool?

 

[PeachMonkey]

I'm a Christian, and I think the Earth is several billion years old.

Yep... as many of the sites I listed show, being a Christian is in no way incompatible with, you know, *science*

Wow, PeachMonkey, you keep amazing me with the things you know. Did you Google that or was it part of your vast knowledge pool?

I remembered that it was an Irish priest and/or scholar from "a few hundred years ago"; that was enough to make a Google search nice and quick. Thanks for the compliments all the same, Feisty Mouse. *smile*

 

[hardheadjarhead]

Kane,

Some Christians do, in fact, claim the world is only six thousand or so years old. It matters little whether they claim six thousand or fifteen thousand years of age when debating the issue.

Those that don't believe in the notion of Creation place the world's age at several billion years. They take no handicap by a simple tripling of Ussher's estimates.



Regards,


Steve

 

[pete]

i'm be more concerned with rock of ages than the age of rocks... inherit the wind.

 

[Corporal Hicks]

The earth through the rock ageing and fossils have been proved to be more than 6000 years old. I'm afraid that that part of the bible happens to be incorrect, however I highly respect those who have their own faith. There is no right and wrong, if there was prove it?

 

[hardheadjarhead]

The earth through the rock ageing and fossils have been proved to be more than 6000 years old. I'm afraid that that part of the bible happens to be incorrect, however I highly respect those who have their own faith. There is no right and wrong, if there was prove it?

This form of relativism..."there is no right and wrong"...causes both Christians and atheists to cringe. We all, at some point, believe that there are things that are right or wrong.

I would encourage you to investigate a form of "committed relativism", wherein you respectfully recognize each side's arguments but base your own stance on a study of the issues. You're partway there in stating that the Earth is older than 6,000 years. Clearly you've based that on your readings in science and of Genesis.

Regards,


Steve

 

[Feisty Mouse]

i'm be more concerned with rock of ages than the age of rocks

I'm interested in both, actually.

 

[Enson]

i'm a christian and i don't see why some would not believe the earth is older than dirt! hee hee!

 

[JPR]

The earth through the rock ageing and fossils have been proved to be more than 6000 years old. I'm afraid that that part of the bible happens to be incorrect, however I highly respect those who have their own faith. There is no right and wrong, if there was prove it?

The Bible doesn't state the age of the earth. People try to extrapolate the age using a general timeline of events and several of the geneaology lists. This will hardly give you a conclusive age of the earth.

Some are trying to use science to "prove" the existence of God or prove creation. A point of a young earth is to disprove a pillar of the Darwin theory of evolution because a young earth wouldn't allow the time necessary for evolution to happen. A problem with this approach comes in theological realm.

A major component of theology is that one has to have faith in God. The Bible defines faith in Hebrews. "1Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. 2This is what the ancients were commended for." [Hebrews 11:1-2] So if we could prove everything by science there would be no need to have faith because all would be seen.

A common confusion comes from a statement in Romans: "18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For 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 men are without excuse." [Romans 1:18-20] People often take this to mean that nature can prove that God exists. It seems to me to be more that nature is evidence of some of God's qualities. If you walk into my home, you would witness the things I collect, how organized or unorganized I am, etc. These evidences would reveal things about me and my personality, but they wouldn't necessarily prove that I existed nor would they tell you all there is to know about me.

So, to me, all things related to God follow along a path. There is evidence that leads me to believe that God exists, however it doesn't prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt. I come to the end of the evidence and then I must make my "leap of faith". Not a blind faith, but in the end a faith beyond what I can see, sense, or fully understand. I take this stand because, "...without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him. "[Hebrews 11:6]

So for our world and its origin, "3By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible." [Hebrews 11:3] As to the world's age, I don't know. It is as old as it needs to be.

JPR

 

[Feisty Mouse]

JPR - that was a nice post - I think you addressed the issue of faith (that I was trying to talk about ineloquently in another thread) well.

I think we can have faith and pursue our religious beliefs, AND use the reason (such as it is) that we have been given to understand our world.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

I agree, JPR...that post was articulate, persuasive and inoffensive.

I'm often articulate, abrasive and offensive...so I found what you wrote refreshing.

Yours was the most "evangelical" Christian posts I've seen on the internet--ever. I know some ministers who could take lessons from you, and probably ought.

Good job.


Regards,


Steve

 

[MA-Caver]

I'm a Christian, and I think the Earth is several billion years old.

Well having been underground many a time and the deepest being 1165 feet down.. I can testify that the earth is several billions years old. Those experiences and the monologues of "arm-waving geologists" who go caving with me explaining in minute detail (please feel sorry for me here) about what we're looking at when we're down 300 to 500 feet down and seeing layers of rock... (sigh).
I believe that the Lord God created the earth and I do believe he was able to do it in seven days (complete works) ... but a day to God isn't the same as a day to us.
Likewise... one of my geologist friends (also a Christian) says in his opinion God took parts from other planets and created earth.. thus the explaination of the age of the rocks. That was one way of seeing it and knowing "grade-skool geology" as I do and knowing the gospel as well (or even better than geology) I can buy into that one man's theory, and incorporate it into my own personal beliefs.
:asian:

 

[hardheadjarhead]

I believe that the Lord God created the earth and I do believe he was able to do it in seven days (complete works) ... but a day to God isn't the same as a day to us.

One would think then that the term "days" wouln't have been used in that case, and that a suitable word would have been inserted to reflect these epochs.

Since the Enlightment it has become popular in some circles to suggest the word "days" is a metaphor for millions or billions of years. Yet for thousands of years the notion of literal "days" was accepted in the Judeo-Christian world. It was only with the pressure of scientific findings that anyone attached a different meaning to the word "days", stretching it beyond the capacity of the word itself.

This raised comfort levels, but it was (and is) a rationalization intended to harmonizes any cognitive dissonance that Genesis and science bring to the fore.


Regards,

Steve

 

[Ping898]

I'm with MACaver. I think the biggest problem with Chrtistian (and I am a practicing one) interpretations, is we use our concepts of space and time. But since in my opinion God is omnipotent and omnipresent, doesn't mean that we can even for one second understand how the world was created, so we put it into words the best we knew how and have translated it the best we know how, but in the process some of the meaning gets lost along the way, with things like, a day is 24 hr for us, how long was a day 6 million years ago, may have been 1,000,000,000 hrs per day. Just my thoughts....

 

[Scout_379]

Me, i don't beleive in a god, and I beleive the world is most definitely billions of years old

but....if there was a God, so powerful as to create an entire world, regardless of when, why could it not take those 7 days? according to most...God is an all-powerful/omnipotent and omnipresent being able to warp time and space to his whim. so why not even in a just single day? a single hour? or was there even time itself?

 

[hardheadjarhead]

But since in my opinion God is omnipotent and omnipresent, doesn't mean that we can even for one second understand how the world was created, so we put it into words the best we knew how and have translated it the best we know how, but in the process some of the meaning gets lost along the way, with things like, a day is 24 hr for us, how long was a day 6 million years ago, may have been 1,000,000,000 hrs per day. Just my thoughts....

If he were omnipotent, why rest on the seventh day/epoch? Why rest at all?

The Old Testament has reference to numbers in the millions. The concept of a year was known to the authors of the Pentateuch, and we see the patriarchs living a very, very long time. Length of time in the age of a human seemed an impressive piece of data for them.

It makes no sense to use a "day" as a metaphor when a year/years/centuries/millenia would have been just as easy to conceive. It also moves towards what we all perceive to be more accurate, i.e., an earth that was created in a span of time far greater than 144 hours.

If you were to tell me that priests and scribes recorded an ancient creation myth in an effort to explain the beginnings of the world, and the myth was intended to impress the adherents of proto-Judaism ("All this...in just six days. Amazing!"), then I would believe it. This wouldn't invalidate your faith in any way, and indeed seems almost the direction you're heading...but not quite.


Regards,


Steve

 

[pete]

since someone who thought my brief tag line from inherit the wind was "irrelevant" enough to blast me with bad karma points (?), i'll educate a bit by posting the scene from the play... made into a film in 1960 starring frederich march and spencer tracy... irrelevant huh?


DRUMMOND: How old do you think this rock is?

BRADY: (intoning): I am more interested in the Rock of Ages than I am in the Age of Rocks. (A couple of die-hard "Amens." DRUMMOND ignores this glib gag.)

DRUMMOND: Dr. Page of Oberlin College tells me that this rock is at least ten million years old.

BRADY: (sarcastically): Well, well, Colonel Drummond! You managed to sneak in some of that scientific testimony after all. (DRUMMOND opens up the rock, which splits into two halves. He shows it to BRADY.)

DRUMMOND: Look, Mr. Brady. These are the fossil remains of a prehistoric marine creature, which was found in this very country-and which lived here millions of years ago, when these very mountain ranges were submerged in water.

BRADY: I know. The Bible gives a fine account of the flood. But your professor is a little mixed up on his dates. That rock is not more than six thousand years old.

DRUMMAND: How do you know?

BRADY: A fine Biblical scholar, Bishop Ussher, has determined for us the exact date and hour of the Creation. It occurred in the year 4004 B. C.

DRUMMOND: That’s Bishop Ussher’s opinion.

BRADY: It is not an opinion. It is literal fact, which the good Bishop arrived at through careful computation of the ages of the prophets as set down in the Old Testament. In fact, he determined that the Lord began the Creation on the 23rd of October in the year 4004 B. C. at-uh, at 9 A. M.!

DRUMMOND: That Eastern Standard Time? (Laughter) Or Rocky Mountain Time? (More laughter) It wasn’t daylight-saving time, was it? Because the Lord didn’t make the sun until the fourth day!

BRADY: (fidgeting): That is correct.

DRUMMOND: (sharply): The first day. Was it a twenty-four-hour day?

BRADY: The Bible says it was a day.

DRUMMOND: There wasn’t any sun. How do you know how long it was?

BRADY: (determined): The Bible says it was a day.

DRUMMOND: A normal day, a literal day, a twenty-four-hour day? (Pause. BRADY is unsure.)

BRADY: I do not know.

DRUMMOND: What do you think?

BRADY: (floundering): I do not think about things that . . . I do not think about!

DRUMMOND: Do you ever think about things that you do think about? (There is some laughter. But it is dampened by the knowledge and awareness throughout the courtroom that the trap is about t0 be sprung.) Isn’t it possible that first day was twenty-five hours long? There was no way to measure it, no way to tell! Could it have been twenty-five hours. (Pause. The entire courtroom seems to lean forward.)

BRADY: (hesitates-then): It is . . . possible . . . (DRUMMONDS’S got him. And he knows it! This is the turning point. From here on, the tempo mounts. DRUMMOND is now fully in the driver’s seat. He pounds his questions faster and faster.)

DRUMMOND: Oh. You interpret that the first day recorded in the Book of Genesis could be of indeterminate length.



BRADY: (wriggling): I mean to state that the day referred to is not necessarily a twenty-four-hour day.

DRUMMOND: It could have been thirty hours! Or a month! Or a year! Or a hundred years! (He brandishes the rock underneath BRADY’S nose.) Or ten million years!

 

[MA-Caver]

If he were omnipotent, why rest on the seventh day/epoch? Why rest at all?

As I understand it the "day of rest" was an example to us that we should take time and reflect. God asks us to worship Him and keep the day holy by resting and refraining from labor. This doesn't mean not to cook your family dinner or anything like that but from laboring to earn your "daily bread" as it were.
He rested because creation is WORK. All powerful, all knowing and all everything else you wanna attach to God... The work He can perform WE cannot. His understanding of the laws of physics, gravity, motion and so forth far surpasses ours and thus who are we to question such knowledge?
I accept it because I've felt the truth "like a fire burning" within when I questioned the existence of such a being. I hike up into deep canyons and high mountains and venture deep underground and I ask myself.. can I do this? It reminds me of where I come from.

The Old Testament has reference to numbers in the millions. The concept of a year was known to the authors of the Pentateuch, and we see the patriarchs living a very, very long time. Length of time in the age of a human seemed an impressive piece of data for them.

It makes no sense to use a "day" as a metaphor when a year/years/centuries/millenia would have been just as easy to conceive. It also moves towards what we all perceive to be more accurate, i.e., an earth that was created in a span of time far greater than 144 hours.
If you were to tell me that priests and scribes recorded an ancient creation myth in an effort to explain the beginnings of the world, and the myth was intended to impress the adherents of proto-Judaism ("All this...in just six days. Amazing!"), then I would believe it. This wouldn't invalidate your faith in any way, and indeed seems almost the direction you're heading...but not quite.
Regards,
Steve

Well discussions like this can go on forever because there is no middle ground that everyone can agree and end the discussion on. There are always questions to the answers.
You can believe in what MAN says about it all or you can believe what God says. Moses when writing Genesis was doing a prophet's job and translating what the Lord was telling him about it all and then spreading the Word.
Your heart will give you the best answer, believing with faith like that of a child makes it simpler.
In my humble opinion it is far easier to accept the things learned about spiritual/theological things with a beginning base of faith than it is to try and achieve faith by learning. Faith can and does grow with further knowledge.

One thing more... the more you learn...the more you become accountable for.