When was this world created?

http://www.urlbee.com?3037

 

Thank you- I never realized that.

 

My two cents, Carbon-14 dating I was taught wasn't actually measuring C14, but measuring C14 levels compared to other carbon isotopes. So, it's a ratio, and assumes that C14 levels are constant(their ratio other carbons) as you go back.

This doesnt allow for solar changes, earth 'flip-flops' or even changes in the magnetic poles. Don't' fact these in, you only have an almost guess. Right?

tom

Got an expert here, where does the number 6000 come up?

Book Chapter and verse please. I must have missed it.

tom

Man I love this thread, learning so much.

Almost as much fun as a "I did nothing and I was banned thread"

Tom <== Creation-Evolutionist, Science-Buff, Dino-nut, and Just NUT.

 

I don't think the "Bible" states specifically a round number "6000". How could it?

I believe in the 1650's the Bishop James Ussher studied the genealogies in the Old Tesament and based on that calculated the earth was created in about 4004 B.C.

Of course looking at Genesis can give you a general idea of when God mande the Universe and earth as well. Next time you are in a Holiday Inn, pop open Genesis, even the Giddeons version will do.

However, like I have said before, who really cares? I think we can all agree that neither science nor religion can with any degree of accuracy say how old the earth is. All we can do is look at the evidence on both sides and decide for ourselves which age seems more plausable.

Now here is an interesting take on the age of earth. Trees. As far as I know they are some of the longest living lifeforms with the longest life spans on the planet. So if the earth is really billiions of years old, would you not expect to see more trees ranking up in that multi million year range? The oldest I know of is 4000 years old. I've not seen any that are 10,000, 100,000, 1,000,000 or 1,000,000,000 years old. Have you?

In all fairness if the flood occured around 4000-5000 years ago, then all life would have been destroyed, including trees, so it stands to reason that we would not find trees older than that. But there are some 4000 year old trees around.

How on earth do you explain that?

 

That's fine...but you seem to totally disregard the science part of the equation.

Do you spend much time underground? I guess that would explain a lot.

 

Is not science the theories of man (and woman)? That man introduces something which ultimately becomes labled as "science" is no different than those that wrote down history into a collective book. Men wrote the Bible, men (and women) research to conclude something as science. Both are the derivatives of man.

 

Do you have a point?

Religions are based on beliefs. Science is based on studies, laws of nature and observations. Yes, there is some theoretical explanation in science but that's usually noted as such.

The problem with science, is that is disproves much of what religious people believe in. So *they cherry pick and decide what to believe based on their religious beliefs. That just doesn't make sense to me.

*'They' being the people who take the Bible's stories as literal depictions of actual events. Like the parting of the Red Sea to lead the Jews from Egypt.

 

Medieval science: flat earth

Bible (Isaiah 40:22): "the circle of the earth"

Other examples could be given. Too often people not familiar with the bible in detail assume (wrongly) that it is somehow anti-scientific.

 

I don't disagree, Jim. I'm speaking to the people who, for some reason, disregard physical evidence...such as fossils.

"After religious teachers accomplish the refining process indicated, they will surely recognize with joy that true religion has been ennobled and made more profound by scientific knowledge." -Albert Einstein

 

Some large creatures from the Bible were "Aurochs". Like very large bulls and a lot more agressive than normal bulls.

 

Nice quote, Rob. In 34 years of fulltime ministry, I often pointed out that the bible records many scientific principles, including a number of detailed references on health issues, for example.

For true bible believers, that is not surprising. To believe in a Creator, we must also notice that His creation is not random, but that God established it on amazingly complex laws of physics and other scientific disciplines of His making.

 

Don't forget the firstborn of all creation was "Jesus" in heaven. Through Jesus all other things were created.

Anyone believing that the earth is only 6000 years old is grossly misinformed and way under-researched. Mankind is about 6500 years old though.

 

That's quite right Jim! Many say that the Bible contradicts science. But in fact, it is harmony with science. Not forgetting that God is the ultimate scientist and mathmetician.

 

You know they can create the basic lifeforms and precursors out of chemicals mixed in water?

 

Based on beliefs in? What other men have written down as historical. Men create science, men write books.

I've not seen any science that disproves what I believe in. I have noted, every few years (it seems) that some major discovery is made in Israel that supports what I believe in. But my beliefs do not harm others, nor I expect others to hold them. In my religion, it is clearly a choice.

I liken your paragraph above to that of liberal beliefs, but do so only for illustrative purposes. Regardless of what the facts say, some will still reject them solely based upon what they want to believe in. I mention that, not to be derogatory, but as an illustration that might bring understanding. Think about how many times we've argued a point over the last year or so, where I've provided clear evidence to support something, but those that don't want to believe it, reject it. They "cherry pick" what they want to believe in. There's a direct correlation here. It may be quickly recognizable, it may not even be apparent.

Some might say: "You weren't there, you don't know for sure it didn't happen."

Others might say: "You weren't there, you don't know for sure it did happen."

It's all about faith.

 

I love when people pull out of the air the experiment. Since I'm very familiar with the possible experiment you are referencing, I'll let you first explain what you mean. I don't want to turn this into an education lesson, since we are all sharing ideas and beliefs.

So SVZ (only), please elaborate and share with us what impact this has to this discussion.

tom

 

Toss a wrench in, remember the impact to faith, and God with the discovery of the Babble Fish?

So, those who have not seen and believe...



tom

 

You don't have to see to believe. You can't see gravity but we believe it is there. The same for radiation. We know it is there but we can not see it. Read 2 Cor 4:18 while we keep our eyes, not on the things seen, but on the things unseen. For the things seen are temporary, but the things unseen are everlasting.

 

Seems it is pretty much the point I already made. One word "MAN".

 

Since when has anyone disregarded the existence of fossils? I just simply questioned their age. All things considered, I'll ask again... Who really cares how old the earth is?