Does anyone here believe the earth is 5000 years old?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PaleoConCatlick
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
FrancisBenedict said:
Are you saying Matthew has it wrong?
Click to expand...
Have you read the first genealogy in Matthew, the short one:

This is the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah the son of David, the son of Abraham

I would say that genealogy was rather incomplete, wouldn’t you? You might not want to rely too much on Biblical genealogies.

“In discussing questions of this kind two rules are to be observed, as Augustine teaches. The first is, to hold to the truth of Scripture without wavering. The second is that since Holy Scripture can be explained in a multiplicity of senses, one should adhere to a particular explanation only in such measure as to be ready to abandon it if it be proved with certainty to be false, lest Holy Scripture be exposed to the ridicule of unbelievers, and obstacles be placed to their believing.”

Source: Summa Theologica, Saint Thomas Aquinas

Trying to use the ludicrously bad, overly literal, YEC interpretation of the Bible is only likely to lead to “the ridicule of unbelievers, and obstacles be placed to their believing.”

The Bible is not a science textbook. Reality (as made by God) is the only science textbook, and that textbook tells us that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old in a 13.7 billion year old universe.

rossum
 
devoutchristian said:
We have genetic evidence telling us that the human race is about 80000 years old. Did the Earth only exist for a small portion of humanity’s existence?
Click to expand...
That wouldn’t be possible because Humans are part of this planet. The Earth couldn’t come after people. Please show me this genetic evidence?? What is it? Some so called “forms” that are our “ancestors”? Those are rubbish.
 
landon13 said:
I firmly believe the earth is around 6000 years old. This can be seen scientifically because the estimates that the earth is in the millions of years old are absurd because “carbon dating” cannot accurately age substances and so called ‘scientists’ use this dating which can only date a few thousand years in the past.
Click to expand...
scientists use argon-argon dating for dates in the millions of years before present.

most creationists seem to know at least that much. so your strawman is a fail.
 
Are you asking this question because God worked for 6 days and rested on the seventh?
I thought that this was how we were to be God’s children, to imitate God by working 6 days and resting on the 7th. It gave us a way to organize the weeks, months and years, and a way to show God that we ‘claim’ our God as our Father. Why people want to turn it into the silliness of how old the earth is, I’ll never know. 😛
 
rossum said:
Have you read the first genealogy in Matthew, the short one:

This is the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah the son of David, the son of Abraham

I would say that genealogy was rather incomplete, wouldn’t you? You might not want to rely too much on Biblical genealogies.

“In discussing questions of this kind two rules are to be observed, as Augustine teaches. The first is, to hold to the truth of Scripture without wavering. The second is that since Holy Scripture can be explained in a multiplicity of senses, one should adhere to a particular explanation only in such measure as to be ready to abandon it if it be proved with certainty to be false, lest Holy Scripture be exposed to the ridicule of unbelievers, and obstacles be placed to their believing.”

Source: Summa Theologica, Saint Thomas Aquinas

Trying to use the ludicrously bad, overly literal, YEC interpretation of the Bible is only likely to lead to “the ridicule of unbelievers, and obstacles be placed to their believing.”

The Bible is not a science textbook. Reality (as made by God) is the only science textbook, and that textbook tells us that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old in a 13.7 billion year old universe.

rossum
Click to expand...
With respect, you have Buddhist belief rather than Christian. Christians have many varied beliefs about the validity of the Bible in its different levels. The Catholic one is that it is written by many different authors at different times in different cultures and so should be seen in that light.Others believe in the literal meanings. And one of the things we have been told to expect is the ridiculeof unbelievers!
 
Fairwinds said:
scientists use argon-argon dating for dates in the millions of years before present.

most creationists seem to know at least that much. so your strawman is a fail.
Click to expand...
Well, most evolutionists I have talked to and some of them have their Ph. D’s they really only quote carbon 14 dating. Ar 40- Ar 39 dating has still about the same vast parameter of millions if not billions of years of accuracy.
 
landon13 said:
That wouldn’t be possible because Humans are part of this planet. The Earth couldn’t come after people. Please show me this genetic evidence?? What is it? Some so called “forms” that are our “ancestors”? Those are rubbish.
Click to expand...
I didn’t refer to archeological evidence and my point was that the Earth had to be at least as old as humans. Look up the term “Biological Eve” to see what I’m talking about.
 
devoutchristian said:
I didn’t refer to archeological evidence and my point was that the Earth had to be at least as old as humans. Look up the term “Biological Eve” to see what I’m talking about.
Click to expand...
I know that the Earth has to be at least as old as humans in fact a few days older 😃 I’m just curious as to how old you think the earth is? Biological Eve that study of the mitochondria refers to a number around 200,000 years which is outrageous.
 
landon13 said:
Well, most evolutionists I have talked to and some of them have their Ph. D’s they really only quote carbon 14 dating. Ar 40- Ar 39 dating has still about the same vast parameter of millions if not billions of years of accuracy.
Click to expand...
carbon 14 dating is accurate to something like 40k years. an expert could tell you more exactly. I suppose you could track the evolution of wheat.
 
devoutchristian said:
About four and a half billion years old.

What is so outrageous about it?
Click to expand...
Will you please show me proof that it is 4.5 billion years old. If I am shown scientific proof that it is that old, I will believe it. Please.

It is outrageous because there is significant proof that current scientific dating can only go back a few thousand years old so any number greater than that is outrageous. Even if you take that the “day” of Genesis is figurative and is thousands of years which it is not because here the same Hebrew word for a literal day “evening and morning” is used. It isn’t just used figuratively but in Hebrew it is used to symbolize a true day.
 
I hear six thousand. Do I hear seven thousand? Seven thousand years? Going once, going twice…
 
Fairwinds said:
carbon 14 dating is accurate to something like 40k years. an expert could tell you more exactly. I suppose you could track the evolution of wheat.
Click to expand...
With Carbon 14 data I want to tell you a little story. An evolutionist was given a rock in a study and it was volcanic rock from an eruption in the last hundred years. The evolutionist showed with Carbon 14 dating that it was millions of years old. That is outrageous since it was formed right in front of our eyes. Look this up. It is not just one or two times that this has happened, it has happened innumerable times.
 
landon13 said:
Will you please show me proof that it is 4.5 billion years old. If I am shown scientific proof that it is that old, I will believe it. Please.

It is outrageous because there is significant proof that current scientific dating can only go back a few thousand years old so any number greater than that is outrageous. Even if you take that the “day” of Genesis is figurative and is thousands of years which it is not because here the same Hebrew word for a literal day “evening and morning” is used. It isn’t just used figuratively but in Hebrew it is used to symbolize a true day.
Click to expand...
its unlikely you’ll believe what you don’t want to believe, since you either don’t know or don’t accept the difference between C14 and Ar-Ar dating.
 
landon13 said:
With Carbon 14 data I want to tell you a little story. An evolutionist was given a rock in a study and it was volcanic rock from an eruption in the last hundred years. The evolutionist showed with Carbon 14 dating that it was millions of years old. That is outrageous since it was formed right in front of our eyes. Look this up. It is not just one or two times that this has happened, it has happened innumerable times.
Click to expand...
yeah, don’t make up stuff. that’s not even close to believable, even for a creationist. seriously. that’s totally lame.
 
I don’t think it really matters how young or old the earth is. Seriously, is God giving a special award in heaven to the individual who correctly guesses how old the Earth is? Will solving the mystery cure cancer or solve world hunger? I don’t think so…

And no, I don’t believe the earth is 5000 years old. It is 4.54 billion years old.

The Bible was not intended to be a book on science, but to teach people about God. We need to remember when reading the Bible to take a literal (author’s intent) interpretation rather than a literalist (everything happened exactly as said, no idioms or anything like that were used) interpretation. 👍
 
landon13 said:
Will you please show me proof that it is 4.5 billion years old. If I am shown scientific proof that it is that old, I will believe it. Please.
Click to expand...
Zircon crystals have been dated to be over 4.4 billion years old.
 
Fairwinds said:
yeah, don’t make up stuff. that’s not even close to believable, even for a creationist. seriously. that’s totally lame.
Click to expand...
Really? Oh my gosh. Why would I make that up. It was studied on Mt. St. Helens right here in the US.

atenizo.org/evolution-c14-kar.htm

Even if you look at science and go behind my 6000 years, scientists believe that Carbon 14 is only viable to about 60,000 years and not millions if not billions of years.
 
Fairwinds said:
its unlikely you’ll believe what you don’t want to believe, since you either don’t know or don’t accept the difference between C14 and Ar-Ar dating.
Click to expand...
C14 and Ar40-Ar39 dating are not accurate forms of measuring anythings age. Ask any professor. I have had conversations with my Biology and Chemistry professors who have their Ph. D’s and have worked for top government research facilities and they don’t believe in either of these dating methods as accurate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top