How old is man?

[calm]

According to "science" man is over 190,000 years old, but according to the Bible man is only about 6,000 years old. Now who is right? If science is right, why does the Bible only tell a story about 6,000 years old? What happened in the other 184,000 years? Were Adam and Eve really the first humans?
If the Bible is right; then why does the "science" lie?

Who do you believe, the "science" or the Bible?

 

[Galateasdream]

Me personally, I think the science quite correct here. I think the bible mythologies just historically incorrect.

Though I should point out there are many ways to harmonise the bible with science, even from within an inerrentist paradigm, if you wish. See biologos, the Faraday Institute, the works of Walton, or Wenham, or Sailhammer.

 

[ChristineM]

According to "science" man is over 190,000 years old, but according to the Bible man is only about 6,000 years old. Now who is right? If science is right, why does the Bible only tell a story about 6,000 years old? What happened in the other 184,000 years? Were Adam and Eve really the first humans?
If the Bible is right; then why does the "science" lie?

Who do you believe, the "science" or the Bible?

Science does not lie, it has evidence, lots of evidence. The bible was written before science and scientific evidence were even thought about, what is written is what ignorant men considered happened way back then.

 

[exchemist]

According to "science" man is over 190,000 years old, but according to the Bible man is only about 6,000 years old. Now who is right? If science is right, why does the Bible only tell a story about 6,000 years old? What happened in the other 184,000 years? Were Adam and Eve really the first humans?
If the Bible is right; then why does the "science" lie?

Who do you believe, the "science" or the Bible?

Science, obviously. The bible is about the nature of God, the nature of Man and the relationship between God and Man. It is not a history book or a science book and should not be taken as either. It was written by and for ancient people. The Genesis stories in the Old Testament have been taken as allegorical by scholars since as early as 200AD, if not before.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

No where does the Bible say the Earth is only 6,000 years old.

 

[columbus]

If the Bible is right; then why does the "science" lie?

If science is right, why does the Bible only tell a story about 6,000 years old? What happened in the other 184,000 years?

The Bible isn't history. It's (deleted by moderator). It was created by people who didn't know what the facts are. They were telling meaningful stories.
Nobody is lying. They're writing about different things for different reasons.
Tom

 

[SalixIncendium]

According to "science" man is over 190,000 years old, but according to the Bible man is only about 6,000 years old. Now who is right? If science is right, why does the Bible only tell a story about 6,000 years old? What happened in the other 184,000 years? Were Adam and Eve really the first humans?
If the Bible is right; then why does the "science" lie?

Who do you believe, the "science" or the Bible?

How are you defining "man?" Homo habilis? Homo erectus? Homo sapiens?

There is evidence of homo sapiens that existed 260,000 to 350,000 years ago in Africa.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The Bible isn't history. It's(deleted by moderator).. It was created by people who didn't know what the facts are. They were telling meaningful stories.
Nobody is lying. They're writing about different things for different reasons.
Tom

The false dichotomy of "it's true or it's a lie" does get a bit old doesn't it?

 

[Valjean]

One claim was arrived at by multiple lines of research and mountains of consilient evidence.
The other came from a guy adding up lists of lifespans from an ancient compilation of folklore, which, itself, was based on no research or empirical evidence whatsoever; an anthology full of contradictions and wild claims of centuries long lifespans and contradictory numbers.

As Shadow Wolf pointed out, the bible says nothing about the age of man or the earth.

Q: Why would you see the bible as any more historically authoritative than Lord of the Rings?
Why do you believe the bible claims an age of 6,000 years?

 

[Nakosis]

According to "science" man is over 190,000 years old, but according to the Bible man is only about 6,000 years old. Now who is right? If science is right, why does the Bible only tell a story about 6,000 years old? What happened in the other 184,000 years? Were Adam and Eve really the first humans?
If the Bible is right; then why does the "science" lie?

Who do you believe, the "science" or the Bible?

The 6,000 year age was arrived at by James Ussher, a 17th century Irish Archbishop who counted up estimates of the ages of Abraham’s family listed in the Old Testament and calculated that the creation began (on the Julian calendar) on Saturday, October 22, 4004 BC, at 6 pm. Really.

Usher made a lot of assumptions, chose to ignore inconsistencies within even those scriptural sources known at that time, and was unaware of certain, now obvious translation issues, importantly including the way the Babylonians counted, but that’s beside the point. As William Henry Green wrote, “The Scriptures furnish no data for a chronological computation prior to the life of Abraham; and the Mosaic records do not fix and were not intended to fix the precise date either of the Flood or of the creation of the world.”
Can We Measure the Earth's Age According to the Bible? | HuffPost

Not that I'm one to defend the Bible but one ought to differentiate between what the Bible actually says and what people say about the Bible.

 

[Twilight Hue]

According to "science" man is over 190,000 years old, but according to the Bible man is only about 6,000 years old. Now who is right? If science is right, why does the Bible only tell a story about 6,000 years old? What happened in the other 184,000 years? Were Adam and Eve really the first humans?
If the Bible is right; then why does the "science" lie?

Who do you believe, the "science" or the Bible?

I believe we are as old as the atoms in our body.

 

[Twilight Hue]

No where does the Bible say the Earth is only 6,000 years old.

I wonder where they got that idea from?

 

[Valjean]

I believe we are as old as the atoms in our body.

Atoms have ages?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Atoms have ages?

That's my point. It's all relative.

Questions and Answers - How long is the life span of an atom?


What makes radioactive atoms get old so quickly and decay?


How do you age anything in a continuum?

 

[BSM1]

No where does the Bible say the Earth is only 6,000 years old.

Nor does it say Adam was the first man...

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I wonder where they got that idea from?

It's a crude attempt at concluding the Earth's age by going through the family trees presented in the Bible from Adam to Christ. It actually tends to produce a range between 6,000 - 10,000 years old. But, be as that may, many (including many fundamentalist/evangelical types) will state that must assume that the 7 Days of Creation would have been the 24-hour days we know, but we don't know what a day to god is. This leads to a group that doesn't really care, rejecting YEC and potentially scientific explanations. However, interpreting the days of creation to be longer than the days we know--entire periods of time and history--this gives rise to beliefs such as Old Earth Creationism, which does include evolution, however views it as being guided by god (and this view is made possible when a day is viewed as billions of years and then what we see is a gradual appearance of everything, including biodiversity).

 

[danieldemol]

According to "science" man is over 190,000 years old, but according to the Bible man is only about 6,000 years old. Now who is right? If science is right, why does the Bible only tell a story about 6,000 years old? What happened in the other 184,000 years? Were Adam and Eve really the first humans?
If the Bible is right; then why does the "science" lie?

Who do you believe, the "science" or the Bible?

I believe in science because it is based on careful examination of reality and not on stories from a book written by people ignorant of the workings of the world and universe around them.

 

[calm]

@Nowhere Man
@Nakosis

With the help of the genealogies of the Bible about mankind it is possible to determine an approximate age of man. From the sex registers in Genesis 5 and 11 we can see at what age Adam and his descendants each fathered the next generation. If one now count the years it becomes clear that the Bible teaches a young humanity that is about 6.000 years old, plus minus a few hundred years. But never more than 8.000 years.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Nor does it say Adam was the first man...

Nor does it give us a consistent account of what was created and when it was created. Nor does it explain how we go from just a few people to an entirely populated region. Back to a few people, and suddenly and inexplicably back to a populated region.

 

[Twilight Hue]

@Nowhere Man
@Nakosis

With the help of the genealogies of the Bible about mankind it is possible to determine an approximate age of man. From the sex registers in Genesis 5 and 11 we can see at what age Adam and his descendants each fathered the next generation. If one now count the years it becomes clear that the Bible teaches a young humanity that is about 6.000 years old, plus minus a few hundred years. But never more than 8.000 years.

I like my favorite folks at Answers in Genesis to answer the question... I mean they are the most 'scientific' right*?

How Many Human Generations Are There from Adam Until Today?

Now look at some of the wonderful and long ages of some of our favorite biblical characters.

10 Oldest People in the Bible | Oldest.org


The final tally of total generations coupled with the individual and respective total ages for the final Grand number is... Is...is....

Gadzooks something isn't adding up Batman!!!

*They even made up their own peer review journal. How cool is that?