• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is the earth only a few thousand years old?

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
This came as a surprise for me, though I knew there are many people, especially Christians who believe the earth was somewhere like 6,000 years old due to the timelines provided in the Bible. The Bible does provide a time line and some have ventured to calculate the age of the earth. Well, it does seem like it is a 6000 plus year timeline. Though I know that this belief is there, unexpectedly in a conversation regarding Noah and the flood, a YEC doctrine came up again with carbon dating and the non-existence of carbon beyond a certain point. I am not a science major for sure, but as kids we all learn about carbon dating. So its pretty easy for anyone to understand it. Also, since carbon dating is extensively used in dating documents of old, it is a pretty well known subject. To make a claim like "Carbon 14 didnt exist" during a particular time (In this case 3000 years ago to be specific) one has to make the case that no living thing existed prior to that time. Wow. That was a surprise.

The method of carbon dating itself runs up to 60000 years in age. But the claim is the earth is 6000 years old. Also this is neglecting the other methodologies of radiometric dating.

Is the idea of a 6k year old earth absurd and absolutely unscientific? Or, do Christians who still have this idea have some solid foundation scientifically?
What does carbon dating have to do with the age of the Earth?

Science has extensive evidence from many different sources for an Old Earth. Young Earthers have only one, unsupported source.
Which is why I was surprised. But the bigger surprise was that he has extensive scientific assumptions to back the notion up. So I want to hear more.
What are some of these scientific assumptions?
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
This came as a surprise for me, though I knew there are many people, especially Christians who believe the earth was somewhere like 6,000 years old due to the timelines provided in the Bible. The Bible does provide a time line and some have ventured to calculate the age of the earth. Well, it does seem like it is a 6000 plus year timeline. Though I know that this belief is there, unexpectedly in a conversation regarding Noah and the flood, a YEC doctrine came up again with carbon dating and the non-existence of carbon beyond a certain point. I am not a science major for sure, but as kids we all learn about carbon dating. So its pretty easy for anyone to understand it. Also, since carbon dating is extensively used in dating documents of old, it is a pretty well known subject. To make a claim like "Carbon 14 didnt exist" during a particular time (In this case 3000 years ago to be specific) one has to make the case that no living thing existed prior to that time. Wow. That was a surprise.

The method of carbon dating itself runs up to 60000 years in age. But the claim is the earth is 6000 years old. Also this is neglecting the other methodologies of radiometric dating.

Is the idea of a 6k year old earth absurd and absolutely unscientific? Or, do Christians who still have this idea have some solid foundation scientifically?

The Bible i believe is a spiritual Book which is describing spiritual events. In this case creation and it’s seven days I believe refers to seven Divine Days, that is Days in which a Prophet of God arises. Since Adam there have been about seven Manifestations of God appear.

My understanding is that the seven days of creation refers to progressive revelation of the Adamic Cycle not the physical creation of the earth as science has proven that the earth is around 4.5 billion years old.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
What does carbon dating have to do with the age of the Earth?

Science has extensive evidence from many different sources for an Old Earth. Young Earthers have only one, unsupported source.
What are some of these scientific assumptions?

If a young earther participates, let them pose their assumptions. You can ask them all the questions you want.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
The Bible i believe is a spiritual Book which is describing spiritual events. In this case creation and it’s seven days I believe refers to seven Divine Days, that is Days in which a Prophet of God arises. Since Adam there have been about seven Manifestations of God appear.

Not really if you read the book. It is speaking of nightfall, and morning, day and night, one day, the next day, and six days.

Read Genesis.

My understanding is that the seven days of creation refers to progressive revelation of the Adamic Cycle not the physical creation of the earth as science has proven that the earth is around 4.5 billion years old.

Not if you just read it without having a baggage and super impose it on the simple text.
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The method of carbon dating itself runs up to 60000 years in age. But the claim is the earth is 6000 years old. Also this is neglecting the other methodologies of radiometric dating.

Is the idea of a 6k year old earth absurd and absolutely unscientific? Or, do Christians who still have this idea have some solid foundation scientifically?
No, there's no scientific basis for the YEC claim that the earth is only 6000 years old.

Nor is there any scientific basis for the claim that each species ─ no, sorry, they use the far less precise word "kind" ─ of living critter was individually created by God ("special creation").

Of course, these claims are the result of the fundy assertion that the bible is infallible. Not even the bible claims that it's infallible, and the scientific and factual errors of the bible are many. Among the low-hanging-fruit examples are plants existing before the sun exists, birds existing before land animals, a flat earth, the earth immovably fixed in space with the sun &c going round it, pi=3, Noah's flood ─ and so much more!
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
This came as a surprise for me, though I knew there are many people, especially Christians who believe the earth was somewhere like 6,000 years old due to the timelines provided in the Bible. The Bible does provide a time line and some have ventured to calculate the age of the earth. Well, it does seem like it is a 6000 plus year timeline. Though I know that this belief is there, unexpectedly in a conversation regarding Noah and the flood, a YEC doctrine came up again with carbon dating and the non-existence of carbon beyond a certain point. I am not a science major for sure, but as kids we all learn about carbon dating. So its pretty easy for anyone to understand it. Also, since carbon dating is extensively used in dating documents of old, it is a pretty well known subject. To make a claim like "Carbon 14 didnt exist" during a particular time (In this case 3000 years ago to be specific) one has to make the case that no living thing existed prior to that time. Wow. That was a surprise.

The method of carbon dating itself runs up to 60000 years in age. But the claim is the earth is 6000 years old. Also this is neglecting the other methodologies of radiometric dating.

Is the idea of a 6k year old earth absurd and absolutely unscientific? Or, do Christians who still have this idea have some solid foundation scientifically?
No! The Earth is not 6000 years old, and the universe is not only 13+ billion years old. Some aspect of the universe is eternal.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
No, there's no scientific basis for the YEC claim that the earth is only 6000 years old.

Nor is there any scientific basis for the claim that each species ─ no, sorry, they use the far less precise word "kind" ─ of living critter was individually created by God ("special creation").

Of course, these claims are the result of the fundy assertion that the bible is infallible. Not even the bible claims that it's infallible, and the scientific and factual errors of the bible are many. Among the low-hanging-fruit examples are plants existing before the sun exists, birds existing before land animals, a flat earth, the earth immovably fixed in space with the sun &c going round it, pi=3, Noah's flood ─ and so much more!

Most of it is not relevant, but I agree that there is no scientific basis for the YEC claim. I was hoping a YEC would participate here.
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
If the Earth was round then why don't we have to shorten the legs on one side of our tables?

Checkmate Atheists!

Wait...we don't have to? I feel like I've needlessly wasted a lot of time mopping when apparently it wasn't required...
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
No way! (I’m answering the Title, “Is the earth only a few thousand years old?”)

If, according to YEC’s, you have to take the creative ‘days’ literally as 24 hours, then what do they do with God telling Adam about eating that fruit, “In the *day* you eat from it, you will die”?

That wasn’t 24 hours, was it? So why must the others be 24 hours?

In just reading about Day 6, too much was going on! Then when Eve was created, what did Adam say? “This is now (IOW “finally”; “at last”) bone of my bone....”
Obviously he had waited a while — much longer than 24 hrs — for Jehovah God to provide a mate!

IMO, the time he spent before Eve’s creation, gave him more life experience...someone she could look up to, and have respect for.
 
Last edited:

F1fan

Veteran Member
Most of it is not relevant, but I agree that there is no scientific basis for the YEC claim. I was hoping a YEC would participate here.
Blu and me remember a poster from the old Beliefnet forums in the early 2000's whose handle was actually YEC. Responding to his posts wasn't so much debate as it was correcting his long list of errors of facts and about science,
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
Depends on the theist point of view.

O earth is inside a hot dense state. That claim in cosmology very ancient mass.

Yet his earth stone science said God was the seal and stone that protected life.

Then you have the radiation X mass scientists who want machine reactive ownership by metals and not God the stone seal.

Radiation X mass makes God the stone disappear into sink holes. Origin of sin gone. A theist in science mind says saved life. When he owns life first.

Survived life the correct term in whatever unnatural health condition his answer.

Man conscious self then said after the attack I will placate God earth zero is now 2021 survived evolving life ownership by count of each year. History living life with God sealed stone.

If science says I wonder how old stone seal is in creation as compared to earths hot dense state. It would own no age.

The hot dense state is given age count first.

Survive counting each cycle around a sun is age counting of a cycle. You never gave any age to God the stone
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Blu and me remember a poster from the old Beliefnet forums in the early 2000's whose handle was actually YEC. Responding to his posts wasn't so much debate as it was correcting his long list of errors of facts and about science,

Oh. If the handle was YEC, then that's the start of errors in my opinion. :)
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Depends on the theist point of view.

O earth is inside a hot dense state. That claim in cosmology very ancient mass.

Yet his earth stone science said God was the seal and stone that protected life.

Then you have the radiation X mass scientists who want machine reactive ownership by metals and not God the stone seal.

Radiation X mass makes God the stone disappear into sink holes. Origin of sin gone. A theist in science mind says saved life. When he owns life first.

Survived life the correct term in whatever unnatural health condition his answer.

Man conscious self then said after the attack I will placate God earth zero is now 2021 survived evolving life ownership by count of each year. History living life with God sealed stone.

If science says I wonder how old stone seal is in creation as compared to earths hot dense state. It would own no age.

The hot dense state is given age count first.

Survive counting each cycle around a sun is age counting of a cycle. You never gave any age to God the stone

Putting these sentences together somehow might make a nice poem of old.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
It would be nice to have some interlocutors who defend the 6000 year claim but afaik not even our resident creationist @Deeje and @Hockeycowboy do that. We would have to go to AiG for arguments.

YEC's are hung up on the word "day" used in Genesis, but the English is translated from the Hebrew "yohm" which can mean a 24 hour day, or it can be used in a much broader sense as Genesis 2:4 states....there the whole 6 days of creation are called a "day". We use the word more broadly ourselves when we speak of our grandfather's "day".
So it doesn't mean that each "day" was 24 hours long with a big magician 'poofing' things into existence.

Creation was a process.....a very lengthy one by all accounts.

There is also nothing to suggest that the first verse in Genesis ch 1 is anything but a statement about "the big bang" which could have been billions of years before the planet was considered for habitation.
What followed is an account about how a formless and waste planet was transformed into a place suitable for living things...that process could have taken million of years also, because the Hebrew does not restrict the "days" to 24 hours. Science and the Bible have to mesh because we believe that the Creator is the scientist responsible for all of it....
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Blu and me remember a poster from the old Beliefnet forums in the early 2000's whose handle was actually YEC. Responding to his posts wasn't so much debate as it was correcting his long list of errors of facts and about science,
Sounds like a poster that I know of on another forum (I may not be able to mention the name of forums still in existence) I just did a copy on the current number of his posts there here comes the paste:


3,836,753
 
Top