Deducted based on the Bible. It isn't rocket science. The Bible provides an unbroken lineage from Adam through Solomon and gives the ages of each. Solomon to the birth of Jesus was documented by the Bible and by historical records. One could quibble about how Bishop Ussher arrived at the October 23rd date but if you accept the Bible as history then it gives the age of the world at just over 6000 years.
When Cain was punished to wander after he murdered Abel, he said that he was not being merely exiled to wander, but condemned to death in his isolation. So God made a mark to make sure others would not attack him.
Question is: who are these others?
Formation of non living things involve phases of fabrication, time is meaningless. It is one phase to the other.
When outside intervention takes place to manufacture Earth or beings, then we have the meaning of relative time coming to existence. Why God chose to follow the phases of the sun and Earth as a time reference, using it as a giant watch, when neither existed yet, is part of the whole integration management genius of creation.
WE deduce it as 6K years - the Bible never states that - which is why I rarely engage in "age of the earth" discussions, too many unknown variables.
God created the heavens and the earth. EXACTLY when that was? We can (and do) debate that 'til the cows come home, and it can be a fun exercise.
Does it change the central message of the Bible that we are fallen and can't get up (on our own), but God provides redemption for us in the Name of Jesus (only)?
Not exactly. That would require the definition of begat/begot to strictly mean "the father of" when a more accurate translation of the original would be "an ancestor of."
One of the best illustrations I've read to explain this:
Matthew’s Genealogy
Perhaps the best place to see the use of the word father is in the Genealogy of Jesus given by Matthew in Chapter 1. The following is the important verses from that larger genealogy that spans Abraham to Joseph.Matthew 1:8 8 Asa begat Jehoshaphat; Jehoshaphat begat Jehoram; Jehoram begat Uzziah
This is in fact not how it happened.
The Old Testament gives a precise account of the Judean Kings. It covers the spiritual highlights of each reign and as an aside gives the details of the family tree. The actual genealogy went like this:
- Jehoshaphat father of Joram1
- Joram father of Ahaziah2
- Ahaziah father of Joash3
- Joash father of Amaziah4
- Amaziah father of Uzziah5
Ahaziah, Joash and Amaziah are three Judean kings missing from Matthew’s account of the same genealogy.
At this point critics of the Bible text often object that the Bible is itself inconsistent. These two lists are not inconsistent. The proper meaning of the word father must be assigned to what Matthew is saying.
The word Matthew is using only means ancestor nothing more. Matthew’s account easily reconciles with Second Kings.