getting dates about a young earth

[Tintin]

probably included also the word Galaxy, surely others like nuclear fusion, plasma etc..

Right. But there's no probably about it. 'Heavens and earth'/'the all' means everything God has created. Everything that exists.

 

[William86]

Young earth creationism has serious problems, the only resolution possible does seem to be that God created everything in a way that makes it seem to be billions of years old. However, if that is the case there's no way to scientifically distinguish between a universe made to seem old and one that actually is old. In other words there is no way to test this hypothesis because both possibilities would give the same result. The extreme low quality of evidence, misrepresentation of modern science and pseudoscientific methodology (starting with a hypothesis you prefer and forcing evidence to fit that) makes me seriously question the idea of a young earth. These are the exact same arguments that have been offered for decades and each time they've been refuted the YECs simply go on as if nothing happened. They do not know the field well and have not put forth the amount of time required to come to a detailed understanding of it, which is most glaringly obvious in the way they misuse the word theory in a scientific context.

 

[Tintin]

The universe looks billions of years old? Based on what exactly? Your understanding of how something should look if it's billions of years old? Isn't that purely speculation? You weren't there to witness it, nor were the scientists who propose to know such things and to call it science. To them I would say: you keep talking about the universe being billions of years as if it were science but I don't think that word science means what you think it means. Clearly, you too have been influenced by uniformitarianism.

 

[William86]

The universe looks billions of years old? Based on what exactly? Your understanding of how something should look if it's billions of years old? Isn't that purely speculation? You weren't there to witness it, nor were the scientists who propose to know such things and to call it science. To them I would say: you keep talking about the universe being billions of years as if it were science but I don't think that word science means what you think it means. Clearly, you too have been influenced by uniformitarianism.

Where to begin? Avoiding rapid fire yes or no questions that explicitly misrepresent the opponents position may be a good place to start as it's generally frowned upon. I'd define science as the application of empirical philosophy to the development of an understanding of the natural world, that's essentially what the word means. You begin with the concept that for an idea to be reasonably certain then it must be able to be derived from sensory experience, notice that you don't begin by assuming a religious text is the end all be all source of scientific truth. I'm also not claiming that I was there and neither do any scientists I'm aware of, luckily the foundation of geology does not rely on this or we certainly would be in trouble wouldn't we!

What evidence exists for a universe that is more than 10,000 years old? Overwhelming evidence from diverse fields with the most obvious being distant starlight which would place the universe at a minimum of 10 billion years. Chemistry offers decay rates and the foundation for radiometric dating methods like potassium argon dating, which are used because they've been demonstrated to be accurate in thousands of tests (these are available to anyone who cares to look). These place the earth itself at a minimum of 4 billion years. Assuming ad hoc that the speed of light is somehow not constant or that decay rates of unstable isotopes vary wildly just to force these into your specific worldview is nothing but a case of special pleading. Since we've begun measuring these things they have been perfectly consistent, the speed of light may vary while going through different mediums but forcing light to travel astronomical distances in 6000 years is a bit of a stretch.

Uniformitarianism has been dominant in geology for over a century for good reason, it explains what we see better than catastrophism which has been discredited for some time now. There is no debate on this issue in geology except in the imaginations of young earth creationists who pretend that answersingenesis.com is a reliable source of scientific information.

 

[Dan_473]

What evidence exists for a universe that is more than 10,000 years old? Overwhelming evidence from diverse fields with the most obvious being distant starlight which would place the universe at a minimum of 10 billion years.

Hi William86... welcome to the forum!

a related question would be, What biblical evidence exists for a billions of years old universe?

I agree that if one starts with mainstream science, then looks for ways to fit that with the bible, the universe is easily billions of years old.

many people disagree with me on this, but I lean towards a recent universe created appearing to have existed for a long time.

to me, this fits with how God does miracles.

 

[William86]

Thanks for the reply Dan_473! You seem to be honestly trying to see all perspectives on this issue and I respect that very much. I agree that for a biblical view to be consistent with mainstream science it would basically need to accept a world that was created so as to appear to be billions of years old if you want to retain the idea of creation in 6 24 hour days. However, I don't really think there is any evidence from the bible that the universe is billions of years old. I am not trying to fit mainstream science with the bible honestly, I am only concerned in this case with what the actual scientific evidence on this subject seems to indicate. I do not consider this to be an idea that is testable scientifically because the prediction it would make is indistinguishable from what mainstream science would predict, which is essentially a consequence of accepting the idea that mainstream science is valid to begin with. It is therefore fundamentally a theological claim that itself requires a rejection of the plain reading of the text and an interpretation that is symbolic on some level is then required. Personally, I don't expect the Jews to have developed a highly advanced scientific understanding of the world during the time period these texts were written and so I accept a plain text reading of these passages. For this reason I do not have a problem with reconciling the two systems, I think the Jews were doing the best they can be expected to have done working with what they had to make sense of the world.

 

[Dan_473]

Thanks for the reply Dan_473! You seem to be honestly trying to see all perspectives on this issue and I respect that very much. I agree that for a biblical view to be consistent with mainstream science it would basically need to accept a world that was created so as to appear to be billions of years old if you want to retain the idea of creation in 6 24 hour days. However, I don't really think there is any evidence from the bible that the universe is billions of years old. I am not trying to fit mainstream science with the bible honestly, I am only concerned in this case with what the actual scientific evidence on this subject seems to indicate. I do not consider this to be an idea that is testable scientifically because the prediction it would make is indistinguishable from what mainstream science would predict, which is essentially a consequence of accepting the idea that mainstream science is valid to begin with. It is therefore fundamentally a theological claim that itself requires a rejection of the plain reading of the text and an interpretation that is symbolic on some level is then required. Personally, I don't expect the Jews to have developed a highly advanced scientific understanding of the world during the time period these texts were written and so I accept a plain text reading of these passages. For this reason I do not have a problem with reconciling the two systems, I think the Jews were doing the best they can be expected to have done working with what they had to make sense of the world.

(thanks for the respectful reply... and I ask these questions respectfully, also)

would you say there was a literal Tree of knowledge of good and evil?

would you say that there were literally two first humans who didn't know the difference between good and evil until they ate of its fruit?

 

[mbarham]

And where does Peter warn about this

 

[William86]

(thanks for the respectful reply... and I ask these questions respectfully, also)

would you say there was a literal Tree of knowledge of good and evil?

would you say that there were literally two first humans who didn't know the difference between good and evil until they ate of its fruit?

Well I think this is a very interesting question so I will try to give you a detailed answer. Biblical scholars have speculated about what these passages mean for centuries and many different ideas have been offered in that time. The interpretation I've found most persuasive is that of the biblical scholar Nahum Sarna. His approach to the Genesis account can be roughly described as beginning with the idea that in order to understand these passages in their proper context we must first consider the intended function they served for the author's audience. What themes do they include and what relationship emerges from the text between God and mankind?

Let us first consider the major ideas we find just before the story of Adam and Eve. The biblical creation story breaks radically from previous religions of this region. We see here a much closer connection between the divine and human beings than one finds in the Babylonian creation account for example. Here humans are essentially slaves who are created to do labor for the gods who decide to destroy them because they are keeping them awake. We see in Judaism for the first time the concept of the singularity of God who is also all powerful, there are no rival gods in this portrait and God has no backstory, He simply always was. When God began creating the heavens and the earth, He creates a world for humans to live in that is idyllic and fundamentally good (notice this is repeated seven times). Not only this but the importance of human beings is emphasized, God is concerned with taking care of their needs, he provides them food and humans are treated justly and said to be created in the image of God. He brings man to life by the "breath of God," further emphasizing that humans have certain qualities associated with the divine yet are still not God but merely a created being. There is at least something special about human beings, their lives matter and they are offered God's perfect love, they serve a purpose consisting of taking care of the garden. With regard to your specific questions, Sarna has this to say about literal interpretations of Genesis:

"Literalism involves a fundamental misconception of the mental processes of biblical man and ignorance of his modes of self expression. It thus misrepresents the purport of the narrative, obscures the meaningful and enduring in it and destroys its relevancy. At the same time, literalism must of necessity become the victim of hopeless inconsistency. By what quirk of faith or logic has the science of astronomy finally merited indifference or even sympathy on the part of our fundamentalists, whereas the biological, geological and anthropological sciences still encounter hostility?" (Understanding Genesis)

I wholeheartedly agree, I think a more nuanced and deep understanding of this passage can be derived from the function symbols serve in the text and how they contribute to the development of it's major themes. Now let us consider the two named trees in Eden, the "Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil" and the "Tree of Life," which are given special significance. One possible interpretation is that these allow a test of obedience to God's command with disobedience leading to death and obedience leading to eternal life, which I think is reasonable. Furthermore, the knowledge of good and evil and immortality are characteristics possessed by God. What sort of knowledge however is the first tree to impart and why does God not seem to want humans to possess this knowledge? A likely explanation may be he wishes them to live forever with them in their current state and does not want them to die, which would be a consequence of disobedience. Notice also how this parallels the Jewish concept of a return to an Eden like state during the reign of the Messiah once the enemies of Israel are defeated and everyone on earth turns to and recognizes the authority of God.

As far as the name goes, a clue may be that elsewhere in the bible juxtaposed opposite ends of a thing can indicate the entire spectrum between them. For example, see Psalm 95:5 where God's creation of the sea and dry land represents creating the entire world. Also Job 29:8 and Isaiah 1:16 are two other similar examples. This would indicate that the knowledge imparted could be seen as the entire spectrum of moral knowledge, with the capacity to do great harm or good, or even just a more complete understanding in general. This could be seen as an explanation of how we obtained our intellect and capacity for complex thought, which is a major quality that distinguishes us from other creatures. Perhaps it is referring to our capacity for moral understanding in the same way. There are many other perspectives too numerous to describe here. This ambiguity however merely makes the text richer, we are given no simple solution and are encouraged to think about the significance of these events and in doing so contemplate important moral problems, what it is to be human, why we die and the essential nature of the depiction of God presented by the author.

Now for the second question, I don't think it's entirely clear if humans had a concept of right and wrong, though they must have had some concept of obedience to law for the test to make sense. I'm inclined to think that the fruit simply expanded their knowledge of morality and fundamentally changed the way they perceived things, since they are suddenly experiencing new emotions like shame of nakedness. This change produces a division between God and humans that did not exist anymore and they are driven from their idyllic home. Also it should be noted that God considered it necessary to prevent them from entering again and eating of the tree of life, least they should live forever. How to interpret this? As a consequence of a previous idea, they failed the test and so are not given the reward for passing, eternal life. Another explanation people have come up with is that if they had an elevated knowledge of good and evil perhaps they would reach a state too close to that of a god and could act as an immortal enemy of God, disturbing the balance present where God is fully in control of creation.

Just something to think about, hopefully I've answered your question satisfactorily. Wish you the best and would like to encourage you to keep reading and studying the text because it is a rich and beautiful subject that will bring you joy for the rest of your days if you let it.

 

[Tintin]

God has always existed and exists separately from His creation. As TIME is God's creation, it only began when God created it. Genesis 1:1 tells us that 'In the BEGINNING, God created the heavens and the earth.' Before God created, there was nothing. When God created TIME, He started the clock. Therefore, the beginning of TIME was day one of Creation Week.

 

[Tintin]

Some verses refuting evolution (molecules to mankind and everything in-between)


For not all flesh is the same, but there is one kind for humans, another for animals, another for birds, and another for fish.

1 Corinthians 15:39


And God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, on the earth.” And it was so. [SUP]12 [/SUP]The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. [SUP]13 [/SUP]And there was evening and there was morning, the third day.

Genesis 1:11-13


And God said, “Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the heavens.” [SUP]21 [/SUP]So God created the great sea creatures and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. [SUP]22 [/SUP]And God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.”

Genesis 1:20-22


And there was evening and there was morning, the fifth day. [SUP]24 [/SUP]And God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds—livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds.” And it was so. [SUP]25 [/SUP]And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the livestock according to their kinds, and everything that creeps on the ground according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

Genesis 1:23-25


And God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds—livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds.” And it was so. [SUP]25 [/SUP]And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the livestock according to their kinds, and everything that creeps on the ground according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

Genesis 1:24-25


And of every living thing of all flesh, you shall bring two of every sort into the ark to keep them alive with you. They shall be male and female. [SUP]20 [/SUP]Of the birds according to their kinds, and of the animals according to their kinds, of every creeping thing of the ground, according to its kind, two of every sort shall come in to you to keep them alive. [SUP]21 [/SUP]Also take with you every sort of food that is eaten, and store it up. It shall serve as food for you and for them.”

Genesis 6:19-21


On the very same day Noah and his sons, Shem and Ham and Japheth, and Noah's wife and the three wives of his sons with them entered the ark, [SUP]14 [/SUP]they and every beast, according to its kind, and all the livestock according to their kinds, and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth, according to its kind, and every bird, according to its kind, every winged creature. [SUP]15 [/SUP]They went into the ark with Noah, two and two of all flesh in which there was the breath of life.

Genesis 7:13-15

 

[RobbyEarl]

Some verses refuting evolution (molecules to mankind and everything in-between)


For not all flesh is the same, but there is one kind for humans, another for animals, another for birds, and another for fish.

1 Corinthians 15:39


And God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, on the earth.” And it was so. [SUP]12 [/SUP]The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. [SUP]13 [/SUP]And there was evening and there was morning, the third day.

Genesis 1:11-13


And God said, “Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the heavens.” [SUP]21 [/SUP]So God created the great sea creatures and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. [SUP]22 [/SUP]And God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.”

Genesis 1:20-22


And there was evening and there was morning, the fifth day. [SUP]24 [/SUP]And God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds—livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds.” And it was so. [SUP]25 [/SUP]And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the livestock according to their kinds, and everything that creeps on the ground according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

Genesis 1:23-25


And God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds—livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds.” And it was so. [SUP]25 [/SUP]And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the livestock according to their kinds, and everything that creeps on the ground according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

Genesis 1:24-25


And of every living thing of all flesh, you shall bring two of every sort into the ark to keep them alive with you. They shall be male and female. [SUP]20 [/SUP]Of the birds according to their kinds, and of the animals according to their kinds, of every creeping thing of the ground, according to its kind, two of every sort shall come in to you to keep them alive. [SUP]21 [/SUP]Also take with you every sort of food that is eaten, and store it up. It shall serve as food for you and for them.”

Genesis 6:19-21


On the very same day Noah and his sons, Shem and Ham and Japheth, and Noah's wife and the three wives of his sons with them entered the ark, [SUP]14 [/SUP]they and every beast, according to its kind, and all the livestock according to their kinds, and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth, according to its kind, and every bird, according to its kind, every winged creature. [SUP]15 [/SUP]They went into the ark with Noah, two and two of all flesh in which there was the breath of life.

Genesis 7:13-15

I agree with you Tin, but where do Dino's fit in there is overwhelming evidence that they existed at some time. Then the only explanation is they drowned in flood as God did not save them or the took eggs or babies on the ark for they were to big for the ark or they existed from a time before Adam. It has to be 1 of the 3.

 

[Tintin]

I agree with you Tin, but where do Dino's fit in there is overwhelming evidence that they existed at some time. Then the only explanation is they drowned in flood as God did not save them or the took eggs or babies on the ark for they were to big for the ark or they existed from a time before Adam. It has to be 1 of the 3.

Yes, if we read the Bible and what it says, land animals (of all kinds) were created on Day 6, just before humans. So, dinosaurs being land animals must have been created on Day 6, just before humans. God saved two of every unclean animal and bird kind and seven (pairs?) of every clean animal and bird kind, onboard the Ark. That included some dinosaur kinds, probably juveniles that were ready to mate upon exiting the Ark, after the Flood. After all, we have many stories of people fighting 'dragons' in every culture around the world and ancient artworks (and more modern ones) depicting dragons that look a lot like dinosaurs. This isn't just a matter of looking at crocodiles and snakes and lizards and embellishing them. This is something more.

 

[William86]

God has always existed and exists separately from His creation. As TIME is God's creation, it only began when God created it. Genesis 1:1 tells us that 'In the BEGINNING, God created the heavens and the earth.' Before God created, there was nothing. When God created TIME, He started the clock. Therefore, the beginning of TIME was day one of Creation Week.

More accurate translation would read "When God began creating the heavens and the earth." This means your claim is not sustainable. Also no creation ex nihilo in bible, preexisting water is present.

 

[RobbyEarl]

Yes, if we read the Bible and what it says, land animals (of all kinds) were created on Day 6, just before humans. So, dinosaurs being land animals must have been created on Day 6, just before humans. God saved two of every unclean animal and bird kind and seven (pairs?) of every clean animal and bird kind, onboard the Ark. That included some dinosaur kinds, probably juveniles that were ready to mate upon exiting the Ark, after the Flood. After all, we have many stories of people fighting 'dragons' in every culture around the world and ancient artworks (and more modern ones) depicting dragons that look a lot like dinosaurs. This isn't just a matter of looking at crocodiles and snakes and lizards and embellishing them. This is something more.

That would imply that man hunted them to extinction yet no mention in the bible except behemoth and leviathan. and the fact that leviathan ( and lived in the water) mocked the weapons of men and said remember the battle never do it again.

 

[Tintin]

More accurate translation would read "When God began creating the heavens and the earth." This means your claim is not sustainable. Also no creation ex nihilo in bible, preexisting water is present.

Nope. That's not an accurate translation, that's the translation you abide to (the liberal Jewish Publication Society 'translation'). The original JPS reflected the original and accurate translation of Genesis 1:1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. It speaks to the absolute beginning of all things - time, space, matter (heavens and earth = the totality of all creation = the universe). The waters are the previously created matter - the unformed creation that is the universe. God gives the earth shape and eventually inhabits it with plants and trees, and birds and fish and land animals of every kind. God's crowning achievement in Creation Week is creating man, Adam and woman, Eve.

 

[RobbyEarl]

Nope. That's not an accurate translation, that's the translation you abide to (the liberal Jewish Publication Society 'translation'). The original JPS reflected the original and accurate translation of Genesis 1:1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. It speaks to the absolute beginning of all things - time, space, matter (heavens and earth = the totality of all creation = the universe). The waters are the previously created matter - the unformed creation that is the universe. God gives the earth shape and eventually inhabits it with plants and trees, and birds and fish and land animals of every kind. God's crowning achievement in Creation Week is creating man, Adam and woman, Eve.

There is no biblical creation of water no where does it say let there be water it was already there as water is a symbol of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Tintin]

That would imply that man hunted them to extinction yet no mention in the bible except behemoth and leviathan. and the fact that leviathan ( and lived in the water) mocked the weapons of men and said remember the battle never do it again.

Yes, it's very likely they were hunted to extinction. Dinosaurs aren't the focus of the Bible though, that's why they're mentioned sparingly.

 

[William86]

Yes, it's very likely they were hunted to extinction. Dinosaurs aren't the focus of the Bible though, that's why they're mentioned sparingly.

That's why they're not mentioned at all.

 

[Tintin]

That's why they're not mentioned at all.

What about the Behemoth and the Leviathan?