Posted on 02/21/2009 6:03:46 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1:1).
The question of the age of the earth has produced heated discussions on debate boards, classrooms, TV, radio, and in many churches, Christian colleges, and seminaries. The primary sides are:
*Young earth proponents (biblical age of the earth and universe of about 6,000 years)1
*Old earth proponents (secular age of the earth of about 4.5 billion years and a universe about 14 billion years old)2
The difference is immense! Let’s give a little history of where these two basic calculations came from and which worldview is more reasonable...
(Excerpt) Read more at answersingenesis.org ...
Answers in Genesis has a great museum somewhere up in Kentucky. I hope to get out that way someday soon to see it.
It’s a good organization and provides some good information. I like Ken Ham, too...
Whoo hoo! The same topic as yesterday but with a different name. GGG can keep spammin’ this forever.
There’s no way to use the bible to estimate the age of the planet. First of all, we dont’ know how many generations were left out in the “begats”. THere’s no reason to believe that those lineages were without gaps. I would guesstimate that only the really important and memorable individuals were included.
It was here when I got here, so I know it’s at least 49 years old.
No one knows
Just got back from God’s snow covered mountains. I felt like I was sitting atop a glimmering 11,000 foot cathedral. My wife had to drag me up there. But boy was I glad once we arrived! I could actually see where we live way off in the distance. Pure bliss.
That’s a truly good start :o)
gaaaa!
If you don’t like reading posts from Christian Right Conservatives who have different interests than yourself, you are free to ignore them.
The geneologies in the Bible give us a pretty good idea IMHO.
That's easy. Just Google it, Wikipedia, or any good geology or science book will tell ya!
“First of all, we dont’ know how many generations were left out in the “begats”. THere’s no reason to believe that those lineages were without gaps. I would guesstimate that only the really important and memorable individuals were included.”
Read the Bible. There are no “gaps”.
Here’s a good summary.
http://www.lavistachurchofchrist.org/LVSermons/LineageOfJesus.htm
4.5 Billion is the most likely answer.
The 6000 year argument is based on the "generations of man" mentioned in Genesis 5:1.
Man and the Universe were not born in the same "Day."
Save the protests of what it actually "says" in the Bible for Sunday School where all of the arguments are of equal stature with these so called "young earth proponents."
“How old is the earth?”
-
Which part?
You are quite right. The Universe was created two days before Adam.
The answers are all there. Look up and see the moon. Out of 159 moons in this solar system, it is the only one that is the same size as the sun in the sky, enabling perfect solar eclipses. It is the only one whose periods of rotation and revolution are synchronized, so that the same side always faces the earth, which revolves around our sun at the perfect distance for liquid water. Our unusually large moon gives those waters tides and the wobble of the earth gives us seasons, all enabling and challenging life. Coincidence? Just lucky I guess.
I am a christian and one who reads the Bible daily, and I think that Yale University answered some of those questions in the Carbon dating study they did twenty years ago.
==Coincidence? Just lucky I guess.
I wonder how many people actually thank God for the laws and celestial bodies he established to make life on earth possible? It’s truly amazing when you stop and think about it.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-c14.html
Carbon dating was wrong, and when Yale Univ did the study with new capabilities they found the earth is less than 10,000 yrs old....
It was not twenty yrs ago, but 90’s when it was started. To understand please read the above link about it.
The problem with offering such proof to a Young Earth creationist is that no level of proof is sufficient, because it is an article of faith that any contradiction of the Bible's literal accuracy is false by definition.
2 “days”? What’s a “day”?
Carbon dating is not used to establish the age of the earth.
You use talkorigins as a source?
Yale Univ study proved original carbon dating wrong, see this link...earth is less than 10,000 yrs old.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-c14.html
Uhm, 24 hours. Even in the Chinese calendar, imagine that! (You're welcome.)
No I use the Yale Univ study by scientists...and it is on that website in concisde form...just read it.
The Earth is 127 days old.
Not any more, because the scientist debunked it....and the link I’ve provided says why.
Now, it’s like the old bloodletting theory, it didn’t work, and the truth about age of the earth is now confirmed at less than 10,000 yrs...and it has nothing to do with religion in the study.
False. Enceledus, for example, always presents the same face to Saturn. Most moons are tidally locked in this way.
There are pretty basic and well-understood gravitational reasons for this tidal locking.
Oh, you linked talkorigins.
It is obvious God is using our frame of reference, otherwise why make sure that each day of Creation Week is defined as having an evening and a morning?
Who says a day is constant over the last billions of years?
no proof link does not work. page is gone
I win!!!!!
BTW what did I win?
Obama will know the answer.. He knows everything.
Sun up and sun down. That’s the time reference to primitives. Who says the actual measureable time between sun up an sun down has been constant all this time?
The Earth is about 5-6 Billion years old.
People that for some reason can’t get over it get over it.
==The problem with offering such proof to a Young Earth creationist is that no level of proof is sufficient, because it is an article of faith that any contradiction of the Bible’s literal accuracy is false by definition.
I could say the exact same thing about the Old-Earth Evos:
The problem with offering such proof to Old-Earth Evos is that no level of proof is sufficient, because it is an article of faith that any contradiction of long-age accuracy is false by definition.
You seem really, really confused.
The site you’re linking to attacks and dismantles a variety of creationist claims, including the infamous fake “Dr.” Kent Hovind, now in prison for tax evasion. Why are you citing it as evidence supporting your view the earth is less than 10,000 years old?
The age of the earth is estabilished through radioisotope dating of a variety of types, including argon, lead, etc. Radiocarbon dating has never been used to estabilish the age of of the earth.
Those false memories of your childhood are implants. The universe was created five minutes ago. If you can't prove me wrong, then I must be right, right?
The question makes an invalid assumption. The assumption is that one day it was not there and another day it was.
At first there was one particle that accreted with another and the pair then attracted another and so on. The procass continues as growth until the point where we recently began to expel mass in to space.
The accretion process took a very long tome. Any estimate is at best a guess. Do we date the earth from conception, that is the first attraction between two protoparticles or from the point when toe process of gathering was 99.999999 % complete?
If the measurable time between evening and morning (not just sun up and sun down, since the sun was not created until day four) then God would have made mention of it. The passage was written so that whoever read it would know that God is talking about our frame of reference.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.