Sure. I just referenced <4.6B years because 4.6B years appears to be a 'religiously' held value - and there is more evidence that refutes the 4.6B year number. There also are a few data points that are consistent with a ~10,000 year old earth.
The 6000 year old claim is flat earth... it doesn’t hold up the most basic evidence and isn’t based on any.
Sure it is. It is based on God's Word. An eyewitness account by someone who was there and someone who is entirely trustworthy. 10,000 years is consistent with the amount of Helium in our atmosphere (given the escape and generation rates), the Magnetic Field on Earth (not having to invoke a perpetual motion machine to maintain the Magnetic Field strength), the existence of comets (snowballs that orbit the Sun And not having to invent a mythical Oort cloud to replenish the comet supply), as well as several other phenomena (that escape me at the moment).
Human Writing is more than 6,000 years old,
What is the basis of this claim? How reliable is the proof?
God's Word is reliable and trustworthy.
The 6000 year claim is about as meaningful as that map another person made showing a body over the city where Jesus was believed buried and declaring he was buried where the heart of the body would be.
Sorry - that analogy escapes me. Jesus is not buried. He is risen and sits at the right hand of the Father in Heaven. But I get the drift -- you reject that the Earth is on the order of 6000 years old.
There is sound scientific evidence that Gobekli Tepe is at least twelve thousand years old. And there are ritual imagery at both Gobekli Tepe and Easter Island, marking the Statuary at Eastern Island to the epoch twelve thousand years ago.
Sorry, I challenge you to point to me anywhere in the Bible where the number 6,000 or even the number 10,000 is mentioned... Or to keep it relative that Christ was sent to earth 4,000 years after Adam or 8,000 years.
These dates don’t come from any word of God, to claim God claims the earth is X years old is complete fallacy, its disingenuous at any theological level.
The reality is we have documented cultures who were writing and leaving written records long before 6,000 years ago.
“Sorry - that analogy escapes me. Jesus is not buried. He is risen and sits at the right hand of the Father in Heaven. But I get the drift — you reject that the Earth is on the order of 6000 years old.”
Really? it escapes you? You are denying the Bible now? Jesus was indeed buried in a tomb and the tomb was sealed. This analogy is exactly accurate, the young earth theory is just as nonsensical as this overlaying a body over a city and claiming where the heart would be located is the location of Christ’s tomb.
To claim a young earth is somehow the word of God is to be so frankly ignorant of theology that its indeed nonsense theologically. God did not grant man reason to then say, ignore reason and make up your own reality, and the 6000 or 10000 year claim is indeed just making it up. To criticize t is not to criticize the infallibility of God, but to openly mock the folly of man.
The very idea that science and theology are in conflict is idiotic, and a stand only held by people on both sides who are too damned pig headed to remotely accept THEY DON’T KNOW WHAT THEY DON’T KNOW. This debate wasn’t a debate on ID or Evolution, because it never got there because the insane claim of the earth is only a few thousand years stands so at odds with the empirical evidence that a true debate on ID vs Evolution never occurred.
Ham was a piss poor standard barer to take up the argument for ID, and as such there really wasn’t a debate about ID or Evolution but a mockery of the entire reason the debate was claimed to be about.
God Himself put pen to parchment and wrote the Bible? Who knew?