According to the bible the earth is around 6000 years old and it was created in 6 days.
If you believe in the bible you have to believe in those number, even though dinosaurs were around 160 millions year ago and their bones can prove it, also some rocks prove the earth is about 4.5 billion years old.
When religious people are given these facts they still refuse to believe it? When does believe overwrite common sense… In the face of undeniable evidence you still refuse it, does that not make religion the enemy of knowledge?
":If we could reason with religious people: there would be no religious people": – Hugh Laurie
Lots of questions in this, therefore lots of facets in the response.
(1) Yes, the Bible declares that the cosmos was created in six days: no it does not declare that the earth is around 6,000 years old. A comparison of Genesis 11 and Luke 3 demonstrates what was fairly common practice in that culture – that unimportant generations are often omitted from ANE genealogical records. I can give you numerous, verifiable examples of this, including others from within the biblical record.
Those that claim a 4004 B.C. date of Biblical creation are appealing to a misguided 17th century theory proposed by Bishop James Ussher. The Bible itself does not give a date for creation.
(2) There are no dinosaur bones, only fossils of them – stone imprints, as it were. The dating of these fossils is not derived from the bones, but from (a) proposed systems of fossil progression, and (b) classifications of geological strata. To call these proofs is to argue circularly – to say that the system proves the data because the data proves the system.
It does not mean that evolutionary dating is wrong, but it does not say that it is right either.
(3) There remain massive holes in evolutionary theory. Again, this does not mean it is wrong, but when prominent evolutionary theorists have massive belief differences among their own ranks, is it any wonder that some would reject it altogether?
(4) There are some areas – epistemology &: ethics, for example – where religion is miles ahead of science. Religion is not the enemy of knowledge, but it does have different emphases.
Where did you read (or did someone tell you or did you read it on the internet?) that the bible states the earth is only 6000 years old? That’s clearly incorrect. The bible states that the earth was created in 7 days, not 6, you don’t even have that right. A day to God may be a million days or 10 million years to us, there’s no way of knowing. I’m a very strong Christian, and I believe absolutely in the truth of God’s Word, his Bible, in all it’s many interpretations and forms, and everything in the bible can fit into everything that science teaches. Your immediate problem is your complete lack of biblical knowledge, not to mention your horrible grammar and spelling. Read the bible and learn.
The Bible never states anywhere that the earth is 6000 years old. Many claim the earth was created in six literal days, but again, this is not a scriptural teaching. The earth is millions of years old. The history of humans only goes back about six thousand years. (Luke 3:23 to 38 the lineage of Jesus right back to Adam).
If the Bible is to be the final arbiter, what it says, and, by extension, does not say, is quite clear but has to be seperated from religious doctrine and dogma created by humans.
‘What Does The Bible Really Teach?’ http://www.watchtower.org/e/bh/article_0…
Where do people get the idea that the time given applies to the earth?
Gen.1:1,2, no time given earth, no time given angels or space, Job
The time of day one through 7[that continues until the SALVATION of
the offsprings of Adam is accomplished by Christ Jesus, Heb.4:1-3]:
adds to the age of the universe, the time for these preparation days
are not know until the time of day seven is known, it appears that at
6000 years after the death of Abel, the 1000 year reign that results
in the SALVATION of the offsprings of Adam, 1Cor.15:22-28,51-53,
into eternal life in the new heaven and new earth promised, has all
come to pass, Abel probably died year 128 or 130, Gen.4:25: 5:3:
Heb.12:22-24, he is sure not forgotton.
Well, first I would like to see the reference for the scripture that gives the age of 6000 years for the earth. There is no such date given in the Bible, That date was first advanced in the 16th century to try to support a doctrine that the world would end in the year 2000.
Does the Bible say that the earth was created ":6 days":? No. It speaks of 7 days. But notice that three of the ":days": take place before the Bible says that the orbits for the sun, moon and planets were established. So there is no reason (from the text) to believe that they were ":24 hour periods":. Rather the word used there for ":day": refers to a ":period": or ":age":. (Like we could speak of the ":day of the dinosaurs": and are not referring to a 24 hour period.)
As for the issue of dinosaurs, hopefully you are aware that the Bible has over 30 references to their existence. As the word ":dinosaur": was not invented until the 1840’s, it uses the older word (as did science at that time) of ":dragons":. It refers to them as massive and powerful creatures, divides them between the two legged ":bird hip": and the four legged ":lizard hip": types, and speaks of their demise in an ":act of God": and how they now only exist as bones. All of which fits well with our current understanding of dinosaurs,
So the existence of dinosaurs and the age of the planet in no way affect religious belief. The modern discoveries do help us to better understand what the original text is saying. For example, the text claims that fish and then birds lived before mammals appeared. Current theory now tells us that the dinosaurs ":evoluted": and survive today as ":birds":. So it is scientifically correct to say that birds were ":created": after fish and before mammals.
There are several timeline problems in the Bible and Christians come up with amazing rationalizations. The creation timeline and earth age is only one of them.
Another is the Flood. Look at the genealogy list at the time of Noah. Quite a few people lived many years after the flood, but they weren’t on the ark.
In the New Testament Jesus was supposed to come back before the last of his immediate followers died. They’ve been gone a long time.
In my opinion, if you have to come up with fancy rationalizations to have things make sense then it’s not worth basing your life on.
The Bible is referring to Earth II and you are referring to Earth I—-one is truly 4.5 billion years old and was destroyed by a Universal flood slinging it into outspace and in darkness where it floated around as a formless bit of matter. God in his Holy Word clearly identifies that formless lump and from that he makes Earth II. Since it was the broken form of Eath I it would still have the relics of Earth I including fossils and other artifacts. Many Christians believe this and Many do not—same can be said for non-Christians, some do, some don’t. However, the spiritual message is still the same. In the beginning God and the secondary message is In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth(Earth I). Genesis 1:1
by the way Earth II was made in a day–then it was populated with plant and mammal or life in general.
You’re right: some people are not too smart, but you’re not helping either. According to the Genesis account, the Earth was not created in 6 days, read again.
Please give the chapter and verse that gives an age to Earth in the Bible.
You do know that Religion covers more than Young Earth Creationists. Asking a question like this is like asking why do all atheists eat snails.
I am Christian, I believe the Earth is 4.5 to 4.7 BILLION years.
Do you just like to perpetuate stereotypes, are you just out to rant, or don’t you realize that theist doesn’t equal YEC?
When confronted with facts that disturb their world view they go looking for crazy explanations, to keep their world view intact
God planted all the evidence here to confuse or test us.
Various forms of radiometric dating are inaccurate. God changed some elements to have a different radioactive decay than they have now.
I am sorry I do not know of their other arguments against science. They exist. And even when you have refuted them, they keep restating their nonsense as if they hadn’t heard you.