Good question...............
Posted on 12/15/2010 5:17:34 AM PST by ImProudToBeAnAmerican
“For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day.” (Exodus 20:11a KJV)
According to evolutionary scientists, the earth is over 4 billion years old; but Biblical chronology dates the age of the earth at about 6,000 years. In an attempt to reconcile the two extreme positions, many creation scientists have used 2 Peter 3:8 to state that the six days mentioned in the Genesis account were not literal 24-hour days. However, if we used the “a day is as a thousand years” formula, we would have the six days of creation plus the day of rest equaling 7,000 years, at most. Hardly a good reconciliation with 4 billion years. So, how old is the earth?...
Fifth article in a series about Creation by Rosemarie Thompson.
Comments welcome!
(Excerpt) Read more at inspiretomorrow.wordpress.com ...
According to evolutionary scientists, the earth is over 4 billion years old; but Biblical chronology dates the age of the earth at about 6,000 years. In an attempt to reconcile the two extreme positions, many creation scientists have used 2 Peter 3:8 to state that the six days mentioned in the Genesis account were not literal 24-hour days. However, if we used the “a day is as a thousand years” formula, we would have the six days of creation plus the day of rest equaling 7,000 years, at most. Hardly a good reconciliation with 4 billion years. So, how old is the earth?
From the beginning, the Jewish sages and the early church fathers interpreted the word “day” in the Genesis creation account as a literal 24-hour period, presenting a young earth. Scientists were in agreement with the young earth view until the early 19th century. Even the first edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica, published in 1771, stated that the creation of the earth occurred 4007 years before the birth of Jesus.1
In 1785, James Hutton, the father of geology, introduced the old earth theory with the concept of uniformitarianism, which is the theory that geologic processes we see today are those that have always been. This was contrary to the prevalent concept of catastrophism, which states that only great disasters – such as Noah’s flood – can modify the earth’s surface. Although Hutton introduced his theory in the late 18th century, it wasn’t until Sir Charles Lyell popularized it in 1830 with the publication of Principles of Geology. The rest is evolutionary history.
But are we to believe that centuries of Biblical scholars and scientists have been wrong about the age of the earth? The body of Scripture supports the literal six-day creation. Mark 10:6 states that God made man and woman at the beginning of creation, not millions of years later. Also, the curse of death didn’t enter the earth until after Adam sinned, so there couldn’t have been millions of years of fossilized death prior to the creation of man. Neither did God place death into the creation He called good.
Recent scientific discoveries are even placing doubts on the old-earth theory. The 4 billion year age of earth is based on radioactive dating, which uses the decay rates of radioactive materials, assumed to be constant, to assess age. However, in 2009, scientists discovered that the decay rates are not constant, but are affected by seasons and solar activity.2 Additionally, in two similar experiments, scientists took lava samples from known volcanic eruptions from Mount Ngauruhoe in New Zealand3 and Mount St. Helens4 in Washington state and had them analyzed using radioactive dating. In both instances, the rocks were aged in the millions of years, not the actual age of 25-50 years.
So, how old is the earth? It seems Scripture is once again more reliable than some science.
Full article - see online article for sources.
I’m reading Remarkable Creatures by Tracy Chevalier. I’ve always enjoyed her books. This one is about Elizabeth Philpot and Mary Anning. Historical fiction about these two women in the 19th century finding fossils on the beach at Lyme, GB.
I’m still waiting for evolutionists to provide a good explanation for polystrate fossilised trees that doesn’t rely on handwaving and question-begging.
Forget theology, just use Occam's razor. The figure of 4 billion years is almost too ridiculous to consider seriously. How could they even be sure of their dating with something that old?
Why shouldn't the rocks be dated at millions (or billions) of years old? The magma was melted under the surface of the Earth for that long; the only thing "new" about those rocks is that now they are solid and exposed to air for the first time. The material they are made of is as old as the Earth.
http://www.amazon.com/Genesis-Flood-John-C-Whitcomb/dp/0875523382
I want an explanation for the 90% of brain mass that we dont use.
And just for the record the more I learn about science and the older I get the more I lean to the earth being 6,000 years old.
By the way what are polystrate fossilized trees?
Christians are made fun of because:
1Cr 2:6 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:
According to general relativity time is relative. Thus, both old earth theory and the 7 day account in Genesis could be literally true depending on what perspective one is viewing the event from.
Because science refutes God, not all science, there are exceptions of course, but for the most part, science refutes scripture.
Was there something special about the fossils? I thought they were found everywhere on earth
Seriously, why would anyone care about that?
Honestly, evolutionists and old-earthers have to believe a lot of abject, completely unsubstantiated nonsense to hold to what they believe. I mean, seriously, what kind of a dolt thinks that life developed from non-life, completely at odds with pretty much everything we know about the laws of physical and organic chemistry? What kind of an idiot would think that the earth is billions of years old - all on the basis of demonstrably erroneous dating methods which rely on completely unsubstantiated assumptions?
Good grief, if anyone needs made fun of, it's the evos and OECs.
I do too!
And just for the record the more I learn about science and the older I get the more I lean to the earth being 6,000 years old.
Me too. I used to be an evolutionist, actually. I'm not any more. And I probably know more about "science" than 95% of the people who get into these crevo discussions here on FR.
By the way what are polystrate fossilized trees?
PFTs are fossilised trees that are positions such that they cross stratigraphic geological boundaries, meaning that they essentially span what can be up to "hundreds of millions of years" of geology, if you buy the old-earth geological arguments. The question is how they got there, without any evidence to suggest that they were placed in such a fashion after the fact. Did it take hundreds of millions of years for the tree to finally get buried and fossilised, all without rotting away as, well, we all know trees tend to do?
“And people wonder why Christians are made fun of...”
“Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also.” John 15:20
If a Christian believes the truth about God instead of the lie(Romans 1:25), he will be persecuted.
Good question...............
So, 6000 years ago God created a world that was 4 billion years old.
What’s the problem?
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.