Old or New Earth.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sep 3, 2009
12,170
4,701
113
Florida
First, I want you to know that I do know in whom I have believed, and I know that Jesus IS the only Son of God, and is part of the Trinity. And I DON’T believe in even the possibility of evolution no matter how old the earth is! HOWEVER! There is a tremendous amount of evidence that the earth is NOT just 6000 years old.

Archeologists have stated that The world’s first city, Uruk, in modern-day Iraq, dates back seven thousand years.
They have also said that The town of Jericho, in Palestine, has traces of habitation going back to around 6800 BC.

It is very hard to pin this down but besides those examples, China claims that it has 5000 yrs of written Chinese history!

Primarily though, there is the existence of the petrified bones of dinosaurs but there has never been any human remains found with any dinosaur bones. Why is that important?
Because New Earth believers believe that man and dinosaurs lived at the same time because God, a perfect eyewitness to history, said that He created man and land animals on Day 6. Dinosaurs are land animals, so logically they were created on Day 6. That means that man and dinosaurs lived together and it also means that they would have been on the Ark.

I agree that God did create the universe with the appearance of great age to fool the foolish. HOWEVER, if I am also to believe that God is NOT a liar, then I CANNOT believe God created evidence like the bones of animals which clearly never existed alongside man without becoming a liar in the process. There just HAS to be some other way of interpreting the Bible when it comes to the age of the earth.

What do you think is the answer to this and then why do you say that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: KingJ

Cturtle

Inactive
Feb 11, 2015
8,365
12,156
113
Usa
I for one whould like to know where the archologists get their timeline from. Was it a christian man who God gave him this wisdom? Or one that highly respected God? How do they know if they are acurately judging the age of things.

A lot of them believe the way Darwin did, or with others that say we evolved (evolution). And if they are judging things with the knowledge of the world (non - Christian) then in my opinion their information cannot be trusted as fact.
 
Feb 2, 2014
6,888
5,852
113
American
www.abdicate.net
First, I want you to know that I do know in whom I have believed, and I know that Jesus IS the only Son of God, and is part of the Trinity. And I DON’T believe in even the possibility of evolution no matter how old the earth is! HOWEVER! There is a tremendous amount of evidence that the earth is NOT just 6000 years old.

Archeologists have stated that The world’s first city, Uruk, in modern-day Iraq, dates back seven thousand years.
They have also said that The town of Jericho, in Palestine, has traces of habitation going back to around 6800 BC.

It is very hard to pin this down but besides those examples, China claims that it has 5000 yrs of written Chinese history!

Primarily though, there is the existence of the petrified bones of dinosaurs but there has never been any human remains found with any dinosaur bones. Why is that important?
Because New Earth believers believe that man and dinosaurs lived at the same time because God, a perfect eyewitness to history, said that He created man and land animals on Day 6. Dinosaurs are land animals, so logically they were created on Day 6. That means that man and dinosaurs lived together and it also means that they would have been on the Ark.

I agree that God did create the universe with the appearance of great age to fool the foolish. HOWEVER, if I am also to believe that God is NOT a liar, then I CANNOT believe God created evidence like the bones of animals which clearly never existed alongside man without becoming a liar in the process. There just HAS to be some other way of interpreting the Bible when it comes to the age of the earth.

What do you think is the answer to this and then why do you say that?
Two theories are beginning to shed serious light on a young earth (i.e. < 6000 years old).

The first is the speed of light. Anyone who studies the current events surround the measurement of the speed of light as x = (distance/time); that is, two watches synchronized, two mountain tops, at a precise moment, turn on a light for the other to see, when visible, check your time. That's super inaccurate, but it does have one surprising outcome. Over 300 years of testing this way, the speed of light has slowed by 1% every 100 years. Extrapolate back 6000 years and you get the speed of light 10,000 faster than now. So you may ask, "So what?" Well, this phenomom ended in ~1958 and 1983. In these years, scientists turned away from (distance/time) and moved to the number of cycles of an atom. The number has never changed since. Why? The only explanation is literally all the atoms in the universe are slowing down. This has brought into question whether the speed of light is constant. That brings about a lot of other issues.

The second theory, is that the way in which age is determined is by two methods, carbon-14 dating and sediment build-up. Both ASSUME that their rates are constant. However, right off the bat, we know one event from the scriptures change them, the flood. Carbon-14 dating is used to determine the age of something that had carbon-12. Carbon-14 (radioactive) only comes from outerspace and bombards the earth every moment of every day. The absorption of carbon-14 into organic material allows the dating as carbon-14 has a half-life of 5730 years. Therefore, if there's no trace of carbon-14 in organic material, it's older than 5730 years. But this is based on the ASSUMPTION that the rate of absorption is constant. If you read the word of God there was a canopy over the whole earth that protected everything under it from the radiation of the sun. Without it, the aging of humans diminished to ~70 years. The next method is sediment build-up. That's literally the dust that builds up on the ground over time. With the breaking up of the waters above and the waters of the deep, the whole earth was covered by the flood's sediment.

These two theories are becoming more and more solid and is causing the scientific community much angst. The word of God explains it all, to a tee. :) I'm not a scientist so I cannot refute or confirm any of this, but it works for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KingJ and Ravindran
Sep 3, 2009
12,170
4,701
113
Florida
I for one whould like to know where the archologists get their timeline from. Was it a christian man who God gave him this wisdom? Or one that highly respected God? How do they know if they are acurately judging the age of things.

A lot of them believe the way Darwin did, or with others that say we evolved (evolution). And if they are judging things with the knowledge of the world (non - Christian) then in my opinion their information cannot be trusted as fact.
Actually I have no clue. I did however to just a little looking into this and found at http://www.sourcinginnovation.com/archaeology/Arch08.htm...............

Well, one of the methods is One of the oldest natural dating techniques is geochronology, which is based on the principle of superposition -- an object, or layer, on top must have been placed there at a later point in time.

So if a Syrian coin dated 100 BC is found on top of a plate, it had to be done later than the plate so the plate would then be older than 100BC.

Then there is the process of core drilling. A team will extract drillings from the earth as well as ice cores.
Because the seasons change regularly, and snow fall and so on can be calculated, scientists can get a really good time frame. Some of these core drillings have been able to date back 100,000 years.
ice cores preserve annual layers, making it simple to date the ice. Seasonal differences in the snow properties create layers – just like rings in trees.

A more exact dating technique using natural formations is that of dendrochronology, which was first used in the 1930s , and which is based on the number, width, and density of the annual growth rings of certain types of long-lived trees. Dendrochronology has been used with great success in Alaska, the South-West US, Northern Mexico, Germany, Greece, Great Britain, Ireland, Norway, and Switzerland. Dendrochronology has produced master tree-ring indices off of the Douglas Fir and Bristlecone Pine in the south-west US that allows for the accurate dating of events and climatic conditions of the past 4000 years. In Germany, a master tree-ring index has been constructed that dates back 6000 years, and in Ireland an index has been constructed that dates back over 7200 years.

Chemical dating technique available to archaeologists for dating bone is the bone-nitrogen dating technique. Bones buried in soil lose organic components, and nitrogen in particular, and gain inorganic components, such as fluorine and uranium, in their place. Since bones buried at the same time in the same deposit will lose nitrogen and gain fluorine and uranium at the same rate, an archaeologist can used this as a relative dating technique to determine if bones found in the same matrix were indeed deposited together. Although this technique can not produce an exact age as the rate of nitrogen loss and fluorine gain differs with local environmental conditions, when used in conjunction with other bone dating techniques, such as amino acid racemization, bone-nitrogen dating allows an archaeologist to accurately date a collection of bones by accurately dating just one bone from the set.

I am sure that a lot of the people who do this kind of work are not believers in the Lord Jesus. I am also sure that there are a lot of those people who are believers.

The bottom line is still the same, there has never been any human remains found with dinosaur bones. I would think that with as many believers working in this field, if that had happened they would publish that find immediately so as to prove the theory of man living with dinosaurs 6000 years ago. As of today, that has not happened.

Again, I am not arguing this point, only asking all of you to try and explain the obvious and asking if there is some other explanation that we are missing?
 
Last edited:
Feb 5, 2013
2,319
1,841
113
36
Wharton NJ
First, I want you to know that I do know in whom I have believed, and I know that Jesus IS the only Son of God, and is part of the Trinity. And I DON’T believe in even the possibility of evolution no matter how old the earth is! HOWEVER! There is a tremendous amount of evidence that the earth is NOT just 6000 years old.

Archeologists have stated that The world’s first city, Uruk, in modern-day Iraq, dates back seven thousand years.
They have also said that The town of Jericho, in Palestine, has traces of habitation going back to around 6800 BC.

It is very hard to pin this down but besides those examples, China claims that it has 5000 yrs of written Chinese history!

Primarily though, there is the existence of the petrified bones of dinosaurs but there has never been any human remains found with any dinosaur bones. Why is that important?
Because New Earth believers believe that man and dinosaurs lived at the same time because God, a perfect eyewitness to history, said that He created man and land animals on Day 6. Dinosaurs are land animals, so logically they were created on Day 6. That means that man and dinosaurs lived together and it also means that they would have been on the Ark.

I agree that God did create the universe with the appearance of great age to fool the foolish. HOWEVER, if I am also to believe that God is NOT a liar, then I CANNOT believe God created evidence like the bones of animals which clearly never existed alongside man without becoming a liar in the process. There just HAS to be some other way of interpreting the Bible when it comes to the age of the earth.

What do you think is the answer to this and then why do you say that?
We cannot unscrew what is unscrewable. Heard this from a pastor and I loved the quote! The fact is, Bible did not intend to record age of the earth. Attempts to derive age of earth from Bible would involve too many assumptions. Depending on the assumptions, we would end up with young earth or old earth. The point Bible makes it clear is God created universe and earth. It was not something that existed eternally. And there is a Creator. Things did not show up just like that. There was a specific order to creation. When all this happened? Bible does not answer that.
As believers, we need to ask what difference would it make to our faith if earth is old or young? I would always like to understand the motive of the person questioning Bible based on age of earth. Because Bible is not science book! There are much deeper things in Bible and would advice the person to not get stuck on 1st chapter itself ;)
 
Sep 3, 2009
12,170
4,701
113
Florida
We cannot unscrew what is unscrewable. Heard this from a pastor and I loved the quote! The fact is, Bible did not intend to record age of the earth. Attempts to derive age of earth from Bible would involve too many assumptions. Depending on the assumptions, we would end up with young earth or old earth. The point Bible makes it clear is God created universe and earth. It was not something that existed eternally. And there is a Creator. Things did not show up just like that. There was a specific order to creation. When all this happened? Bible does not answer that.
As believers, we need to ask what difference would it make to our faith if earth is old or young? I would always like to understand the motive of the person questioning Bible based on age of earth. Because Bible is not science book! There are much deeper things in Bible and would advice the person to not get stuck on 1st chapter itself ;)
Actually I love a mystery. You are correct in that the Bible is not a book on creation but does contain information of the creation.
The Bible is not a book on biology but it does contain biology.
The Bible is not a book on geology but it contain geology.
The Bible is not a book on war but it contain war.
The bible is not a book on history but it contains history.

Above and beyond everything else, the Bible is a book on the interaction of God with His creation and how a man can come to know that God and be eternally secure.

As I said, I have no motive except to learn the deep things of God and this particular doctrine is one that I have studied for many, many years.
 
Feb 24, 2017
81
41
18
Britain
What would help you to believe is the question I suppose. I mean for example what if they found dinosaur tissue that was not fossilised but was soft, as if it was only 1000's of years old like they sometimes find human remains preserved in peat or ice. Would that help? Or would you still need more and more proof? For some people physical evidence is not enough as they need revelation from God or something else?
 
Sep 3, 2009
12,170
4,701
113
Florida
Two theories are beginning to shed serious light on a young earth (i.e. < 6000 years old).

The first is the speed of light. Anyone who studies the current events surround the measurement of the speed of light as x = (distance/time); that is, two watches synchronized, two mountain tops, at a precise moment, turn on a light for the other to see, when visible, check your time. That's super inaccurate, but it does have one surprising outcome. Over 300 years of testing this way, the speed of light has slowed by 1% every 100 years. Extrapolate back 6000 years and you get the speed of light 10,000 faster than now. So you may ask, "So what?" Well, this phenomom ended in ~1958 and 1983. In these years, scientists turned away from (distance/time) and moved to the number of cycles of an atom. The number has never changed since. Why? The only explanation is literally all the atoms in the universe are slowing down. This has brought into question whether the speed of light is constant. That brings about a lot of other issues.

The second theory, is that the way in which age is determined is by two methods, carbon-14 dating and sediment build-up. Both ASSUME that their rates are constant. However, right off the bat, we know one event from the scriptures change them, the flood. Carbon-14 dating is used to determine the age of something that had carbon-12. Carbon-14 (radioactive) only comes from outerspace and bombards the earth every moment of every day. The absorption of carbon-14 into organic material allows the dating as carbon-14 has a half-life of 5730 years. Therefore, if there's no trace of carbon-14 in organic material, it's older than 5730 years. But this is based on the ASSUMPTION that the rate of absorption is constant. If you read the word of God there was a canopy over the whole earth that protected everything under it from the radiation of the sun. Without it, the aging of humans diminished to ~70 years. The next method is sediment build-up. That's literally the dust that builds up on the ground over time. With the breaking up of the waters above and the waters of the deep, the whole earth was covered by the flood's sediment.

These two theories are becoming more and more solid and is causing the scientific community much angst. The word of God explains it all, to a tee. :) I'm not a scientist so I cannot refute or confirm any of this, but it works for me.
You may very well be correct as I am not expert in this field. I have to investigate and study what to post. Just as you said,
"I am not a scientist and I can not refute or confirm this, but it works for me". That is so very true for me as well.

I would just encourage us all to think about this. Christians should not run from science. While scientists do not always interpret the data correctly, certain concepts and fundamental laws mesh with the creation. I for one accept the fact that the scientific laws man has discovered and defined were created by the God of the universe.

Consider the "speed of light" which is an accepted & proven fact. The speed of light is one of the more constant variables in the universe, with a speed of approximately 186,000 miles per second. This means that if you were 186,000 miles away from a person who turned on a bright light, it would take one second before that light reached you.

No doubt, we all have probably experienced this “delay” with sound. Since light travels faster than sound, if a person on an opposite side of a football field clashed cymbals, you would see the action before the sound reached your ears.

The only difference is that light travels so fast that enormous distances are required for a “delay” to be realized. The only place with enough space to demonstrate this effect is outer space. Because of the size of the cosmos, distances are often measured in light-years, the distance light can travel in one year. What does this have to do with the age of our universe?

That is the purpose of this thread. "If" the Earth and the universe were only 6,000 years old, we would only be able to see stars with a maximum distance of 6,000 light-years. Otherwise the light would not have had time to reach us.

Let’s put this in context.

The Milky Way galaxy is approximately 100,000 light-years across, with our solar system about 28,000 light-years from the center. This puts us about 22,000 light-years from our galaxy’s outer edge. If the universe were only 6,000 years old, we would see only a fraction of the 200 billion stars in just OUR galaxy since light from others would not have had enough time to reach us!

Of course, we have seen countless pictures of stars near Earth. There are amazing images of some of the estimated 125 billion galaxies. Of these, 3,000 are visible and can be anywhere from 80,000 to billions of light-years away. Light from the most distant galaxies had to have traveled for billions of years before it reached Earth.
Here is the key....... Of course, for light to travel billions of years there had to have been a universe for billions of years!

If this is the case, then the Earth has existed for billions of years. Then IF that is the case, is it then possible that it was only very recently that God renewed—recreated—the Earth to prepare it for the first human beings, Adam and Eve!

That is not a definitive statement but instead simply a question posed.

When one allows the Bible to interpret itself, and uses that knowledge to properly interpret scientific data, the truth of creation is not only accurate, but magnificent and awe-inspiring! 
 
  • Like
Reactions: KingJ and Abdicate
Feb 24, 2017
81
41
18
Britain
You may very well be correct as I am not expert in this field. I have to investigate and study what to post. Just as you said,
"I am not a scientist and I can not refute or confirm this, but it works for me". That is so very true for me as well.

I would just encourage us all to think about this. Christians should not run from science. While scientists do not always interpret the data correctly, certain concepts and fundamental laws mesh with the creation. I for one accept the fact that the scientific laws man has discovered and defined were created by the God of the universe.

Consider the "speed of light" which is an accepted & proven fact. The speed of light is one of the more constant variables in the universe, with a speed of approximately 186,000 miles per second. This means that if you were 186,000 miles away from a person who turned on a bright light, it would take one second before that light reached you.

No doubt, we all have probably experienced this “delay” with sound. Since light travels faster than sound, if a person on an opposite side of a football field clashed cymbals, you would see the action before the sound reached your ears.

The only difference is that light travels so fast that enormous distances are required for a “delay” to be realized. The only place with enough space to demonstrate this effect is outer space. Because of the size of the cosmos, distances are often measured in light-years, the distance light can travel in one year. What does this have to do with the age of our universe?

That is the purpose of this thread. "If" the Earth and the universe were only 6,000 years old, we would only be able to see stars with a maximum distance of 6,000 light-years. Otherwise the light would not have had time to reach us.

Let’s put this in context.

The Milky Way galaxy is approximately 100,000 light-years across, with our solar system about 28,000 light-years from the center. This puts us about 22,000 light-years from our galaxy’s outer edge. If the universe were only 6,000 years old, we would see only a fraction of the 200 billion stars in just OUR galaxy since light from others would not have had enough time to reach us!

Of course, we have seen countless pictures of stars near Earth. There are amazing images of some of the estimated 125 billion galaxies. Of these, 3,000 are visible and can be anywhere from 80,000 to billions of light-years away. Light from the most distant galaxies had to have traveled for billions of years before it reached Earth.
Here is the key....... Of course, for light to travel billions of years there had to have been a universe for billions of years!

If this is the case, then the Earth has existed for billions of years. Then IF that is the case, is it then possible that it was only very recently that God renewed—recreated—the Earth to prepare it for the first human beings, Adam and Eve!

That is not a definitive statement but instead simply a question posed.

When one allows the Bible to interpret itself, and uses that knowledge to properly interpret scientific data, the truth of creation is not only accurate, but magnificent and awe-inspiring! 
May I say this? In Proverbs it says:

Proverbs 18:17
The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.

There is a human tenancy to believe whatever we listen to and so we can not be sure that we have the right answer, that is why we must trust God's Word and chief amongst God's Word is Jesus. As I said in the other post if Jesus believed in a young Earth then that should settle it...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Abdicate
Feb 2, 2014
6,888
5,852
113
American
www.abdicate.net
Many a great scientists were devoted Christians or Jews and took the word of God literally, and they became experts in their fields. It's not a coincidence that the most winners per capita of the Nobel Prize are Jewish. Many of the great inventions in history were from Christians or Jews. Why? Because my reading, meditating and applying the word of God in their lives, they're able to discern the answers to their problems. If anyone ever asking you to prove God, point to the Jews existence.
 
Sep 3, 2009
12,170
4,701
113
Florida
May I say this? In Proverbs it says:

Proverbs 18:17
The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.

There is a human tenancy to believe whatever we listen to and so we can not be sure that we have the right answer, that is why we must trust God's Word and chief amongst God's Word is Jesus. As I said in the other post if Jesus believed in a young Earth then that should settle it...
I for one do not believe that Jesus was speaking about a young earth at all in the Scripture you posted.

Please understand that I am not making a case for either a young or old earth. I am simply posing some facts that would be helpful for all to consider.

I am not in any way challenging the Word of God so we can remove that from the conversation.

I am not challenging the creation account so that can also be removed from the conversation.

Old Earth adherents are just as committed to the Scriptures as are the Young Earth believers so I suggest that we not question the theology of either one as they are both equally able to accept one theory over the other.
I believe all here accept the Word of God as the authority of our faith.
 
Sep 3, 2009
12,170
4,701
113
Florida
Amen! Great points
In the scope of all things there is no conflict at all. I just wonder how many who accept the Young Earth position are aware of where it came from and why they accept it.

Some people just accept it as if it is proven Bible fact and is a Bible Doctrine.

The truth however is that the Bible does not specify the age of creation. The Young Earth belief that God created the world 6,000 years ago actually originated from a mid-17th century examination of the Genesis genealogies by Archbishop James Ussher and theologian John Lightfoot. Based on the ages of patriarchs, Ussher and Lightfoot both calculated the universe, earth, and life were created in 4004 B.C. Over the next several centuries, this date became firmly entrenched in Christian belief not because it was Biblically sound or proven, only that someone came up with the calculations and no one really debated it.

The cornerstone of belief in a 6,000-year-old earth rests solely on the genealogies providing a totally accurate and complete chronology.

The question then that is important is.........Are those geologies accurate???

From.......http://godandscience.org/youngearth/old_earth_creationism.html
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Professor William Henry Green and theologian Benjamin B. Warfield noted gaps and omissions in the Genesis genealogies. This suggested the creation was conceivably older than the 6,000-year timeframe proposed by Ussher and Lightfoot. Today many Bible scholars believe the Genesis genealogies were written primarily to provide only highlights and not necessarily a complete record of every actual generation. R.A. Torrey (1856-1928 A.D.), who was selected by D.L. Moody to become the first dean of the Moody Bible Institute, wrote the following of Bishop Ussher’s chronology: ............
“Its accuracy is altogether doubtful. It is founded upon the supposition that the genealogies of Scripture are intended to be complete, but a careful study of these genealogies clearly shows they are not intended to be complete, that they oftentimes contain only some outstanding names.”

There are gaps in the genealogies. Wayne Grudem writes, “…......
closer inspection of the parallel lists of names in Scripture will show that Scripture itself indicates the fact that the genealogies list only those names the biblical writers thought it important to record for their purposes. In fact, some genealogies include names that are left out by other genealogies in Scripture itself.”

This in no way suggests an error or mistake in the Scripture. Only that in some cases the genealogy is not totally complete. This means that the method for back dating the time of creation through the Bible genealogies suggest that the genealogies themselves provide a rationale for human origins dating earlier than six to ten thousand years ago.

.
 

Cturtle

Inactive
Feb 11, 2015
8,365
12,156
113
Usa
Many a great scientists were devoted Christians or Jews and took the word of God literally, and they became experts in their fields. It's not a coincidence that the most winners per capita of the Nobel Prize are Jewish. Many of the great inventions in history were from Christians or Jews. Why? Because my reading, meditating and applying the word of God in their lives, they're able to discern the answers to their problems. If anyone ever asking you to prove God, point to the Jews existence.
Amen! I agree...God gives wisdom and inventions and such to His people, so that in times of drought or lack and such they can still be blessing others, and showing how Great is our God!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Abdicate

Cturtle

Inactive
Feb 11, 2015
8,365
12,156
113
Usa
In the scope of all things there is no conflict at all. I just wonder how many who accept the Young Earth position are aware of where it came from and why they accept it.

Some people just accept it as if it is proven Bible fact and is a Bible Doctrine.

The truth however is that the Bible does not specify the age of creation. The Young Earth belief that God created the world 6,000 years ago actually originated from a mid-17th century examination of the Genesis genealogies by Archbishop James Ussher and theologian John Lightfoot. Based on the ages of patriarchs, Ussher and Lightfoot both calculated the universe, earth, and life were created in 4004 B.C. Over the next several centuries, this date became firmly entrenched in Christian belief not because it was Biblically sound or proven, only that someone came up with the calculations and no one really debated it.

The cornerstone of belief in a 6,000-year-old earth rests solely on the genealogies providing a totally accurate and complete chronology.

The question then that is important is.........Are those geologies accurate???

From.......http://godandscience.org/youngearth/old_earth_creationism.html
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Professor William Henry Green and theologian Benjamin B. Warfield noted gaps and omissions in the Genesis genealogies. This suggested the creation was conceivably older than the 6,000-year timeframe proposed by Ussher and Lightfoot. Today many Bible scholars believe the Genesis genealogies were written primarily to provide only highlights and not necessarily a complete record of every actual generation. R.A. Torrey (1856-1928 A.D.), who was selected by D.L. Moody to become the first dean of the Moody Bible Institute, wrote the following of Bishop Ussher’s chronology: ............
“Its accuracy is altogether doubtful. It is founded upon the supposition that the genealogies of Scripture are intended to be complete, but a careful study of these genealogies clearly shows they are not intended to be complete, that they oftentimes contain only some outstanding names.”

There are gaps in the genealogies. Wayne Grudem writes, “…......
closer inspection of the parallel lists of names in Scripture will show that Scripture itself indicates the fact that the genealogies list only those names the biblical writers thought it important to record for their purposes. In fact, some genealogies include names that are left out by other genealogies in Scripture itself.”

This in no way suggests an error or mistake in the Scripture. Only that in some cases the genealogy is not totally complete. This means that the method for back dating the time of creation through the Bible genealogies suggest that the genealogies themselves provide a rationale for human origins dating earlier than six to ten thousand years ago.

.
Definitely lots of things to pray about and ask God for the wisdom to know the answers.
For His Word says of we seek Him for wisdom the Holy Spirit will show us the truth.

Blessings
 
Sep 3, 2009
12,170
4,701
113
Florida
What would help you to believe is the question I suppose. I mean for example what if they found dinosaur tissue that was not fossilised but was soft, as if it was only 1000's of years old like they sometimes find human remains preserved in peat or ice. Would that help? Or would you still need more and more proof? For some people physical evidence is not enough as they need revelation from God or something else?
My dear brother. You are confusing this. This is not about me believing or not believing. You are thinking that I in some way am promoting Old Earth over Young Earth and that somehow I am needing proof from God to believe one over the other.

Brother............I am a believer in the Lord Jesus and I am a believer in the Creation of God just as are you. I am also a committed believer in the Word of God. Please just PM anyone here and ask them that question. Try Abdicate or Fish Catcher Jim for an example as they is well aware of my position with the Word of God. I do not need to see anything to encourage my faith or my belief.

I started this thread to encourage all of us to think and read the Scriptures and to have a lively debate in Christian love.

There is just so much that we can not discuss that I thought this would be a way to pump us all up and encourage discussion without arguments.

So........discuss but please make your concern over my Christian position not one of those points.

Love ya brother!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Abdicate
Sep 3, 2009
12,170
4,701
113
Florida
Definitely lots of things to pray about and ask God for the wisdom to know the answers.
For His Word says of we seek Him for wisdom the Holy Spirit will show us the truth.

Blessings
Agreed!!!

Do you have a position one way or the other on the time of Creation Cturtle?
 

Cturtle

Inactive
Feb 11, 2015
8,365
12,156
113
Usa
Agreed!!!

Do you have a position one way or the other on the time of Creation Cturtle?
At this point going off what little I know, and really have not searched for an answer..... I tend to think that the earth is not as old as the people who study the dinosaur bones say. It's difficult for me to trust the words of anyone whom believes in the fact that we came from apes and that the first people just communicated in grunts and ughs.

God created Adam and eve in His image and likeness. God is super smart and communicated with them intelligently, plus being that Adam named all the animals and such is proof enough to me that they were very intelligent. Just looking at early Scriptures of Genesis is more proof.

I also believe that the Jews always have been and still are the entrusted caretakers of the Scriptures. I also believe that each day of creation was an actual day. And some day I will do the research to find out if my thoughts line up with Scripture.

Right now there are so many other things that I need to be mindful of and training myself in, so this, for now, has to take a back seat.

Blessings and thanks for asking.... if I get any answers I'll let ya know :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.