if one believes n creationism, does one also believe the earth is6000 years old?

Canada
July 11, 2007 1:01pm CST
if a christian believes in creationism over the acceptance of evolution, it is my theory that one must also believe that the earth is 6000 years old. and creation is the adam and eve story btw. if one believes in creationism and not the idea that the world is 6000 years old, one may be ignorant to one idea over the other. the bible clearly states that the world is 6000 years old. (although, there is evidence from bones and fossils that humans lived 100,000 years ago, but that is a diffrent story). so, my argument is that if one believes in creationism but not that the world is 6000 years old, it is like accepting the theory of Newtons theory of gravity and Einstein theory of relativity, which is illogical.
2 people like this
6 responses
@suspenseful (40193)
• Canada
11 Jul 07
I believe that the earth is around 6000 years old, because we have to consider those who lived before the Flood. Also carbon dating may not be accurate and may only be accurate for a short period of time. Much of the confusion is because about 5000 or more years ago, the Earth was ripped by a violent Flood, where the waters that surrounded Earth (now the Van Allan belt) descended down and the waters that were under the Earth came from underneath, and probably crushed and fused many a body so they were now unrecognizable. You also have to have common sense. Much of what we know is recorded in the Bible, and what we learned from our families and literature. Also the population of this planet would be too much and even the deserts would be inhabited, there would be millions of people living in the Antarctic and other arid areas. So if the world was billion of years old, there would be too many people even with wars to get rid of the excess. And if one went through all the geneologies from Adam to Christ, one would discover the Earth is relatively new. Einstein theory is illogical. God placed the stars and planets where they stand now.
• Canada
12 Jul 07
wow
@oldiebut (859)
• Canada
12 Jul 07
My thoughts exactly. wow. He manages to dismiss all of the natural sciences, invent several events, and consider only anecdotal evidence from a single book and his family. It frightens me to think what the state of learning in the world would be if it was up to people like this. I would normally advise education but I wouldn't know where to start. No wonder Einstein's theory (he didn't name which one, it likely isn't important to him, simply deny all science) is illogical to him, the real world seems illogical to him.
• United States
12 Jul 07
First, I don't know where you got that stuff about the Van Allen Belt. The Van Allen Belts are 4 horseshoe-shaped belts of radioactive particles around the Earth that are held in place by the magnetic field. Water does not turn into radioactive particles. Also, population can only grow as long as there is enough food and water to sustain a larger mass of people. It took thousands of years for humans to get past the nomadic hunter/gatherer societies which could only sustain a miniscule number of people. Populations didn't really start to explode until about 300 years ago when new farming tools provided for the production of more food.
1 person likes this
@vivienna (582)
• Venezuela
11 Jul 07
Dear fightingistheonlyway, I post this because of your insistance to ignore some basic rules of Bible interpretation. Contrary to what you thin, the Bible does not state clearly that the universe is 6000 years old. The Hebrew original -the only resource we shoud consult in discussing the Old Testament-, uses the vocable "yom" when narrating of creation in Genesis, chapter 1. Traditionally, "yom" has been translated as "day" and previous generations concluded -like famous Bishop Usher- that God created Earth in six days. But "yom" also has the following meanings, according to Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of Bible (a 19th century scholar who invented the numbered root system of Hebrew and Greek): day, age, agone, chronicle, season, process of time, space of time... and a whole lot more). Knowing what we know today -by means of astronomy, geology, anthropology, archaeology- there is really no reason to sustain that the Bible insist in 24 hour days, but every reason to insist that the Univers is God's creation. How the Lord choose to make it -by Big Bang, for instance- and how long it took him -who is eternal and does not exist in time-, that's a question for those who like to discuss details. I myself accept what science found out till today and expect more interesting findings in the near future.
• Canada
12 Jul 07
well, kind of.. my question was, if you believe in creationism (Adam and eve) do you also believe that the world is 6000 years old?
• United States
12 Jul 07
The bible states very few things clearly, everything is up to interpretation (which is why you need rules for it). The 6000 year thing is the most common interpretation, it is also the most rediculous and there are obviously people who believe it. Fightingistheonlyway is only asking the people who believe the universe is 6000 years old why they believe that.
• United States
12 Jul 07
I forgot exactly what he wrote, and he does say explicitly 6000. That is the adopted position of the majority of Christian churches though
@Eskimo (2315)
11 Jul 07
I have studied Oceanogrophy, and the earth being 4.5 billion years old fits in with Plate Techtonics, which shows that the sea floor, & the continents have moved very slightly over these years. If you look at maps of the different continents you can see where some of the land fits in quite well and that most of the continents were joined together at one time. There is a period that Carbon Dating becomes uncertain, which some scientists conclude that this may have been because of a nuclear type explosion in the very distant past which had a sudden increase in the amount of Carbon 14.
@cyntrow (8523)
• United States
11 Jul 07
I almost saddens me to see certain religious people as so scientifically inaccurate. I do believe in creationism. I also believe in evolution. I do not view the Bible as the here all and end all. Furthermore, if scientific studies countered my long held beliefs, I would have to admit that the beliefs are illogical. I find Bible worship to be very sad and scary.
@SEOGUY (906)
• United States
12 Jul 07
Between the God created the hevens and the Earth, and if you read carfully the recreation of earth and the first day, there is no time period, It may have been nillions of yerars between the beginnig and the first day. Only a very nieve person would say the earth is only 6000 years old and it is these people who bring so much critisem to beleivers of Creation, further more they beleive in 6 literal days to creat all. Some day I will go in to this and show how science and the story of creation can be rectified togethr, Science proving or at least not at odds with creation.
@oldiebut (859)
• Canada
12 Jul 07
I shouldn't bother. There is not a single science body who would claim that science is not at odds with creationism (try reading the hundred or so court cases the creationists have lost in the US alone). Very basically, creationism is based solely on bibilical interpretation and therefore can never change. This is absolutely at odds with the scientific method which must, by definition, be open to change. To claim otherwise is simply deluding yourself.
• United States
12 Jul 07
Actually, creationism can change. Anytime something that can dispute it is discovered, people just say " No! Everyone in the church just misinterpreted it, day didn't mean day! or flood didn't mean an actual flood!"
• United States
12 Jul 07
The Bible does not state that the earth is 6,000 years old. These were calculations made by men who tried to use Biblical reference to age the world. Incidentally, man also originally wrongly calculated the year of Jesus' birth. You can absolutely believe in the truth of the Bible and believe the earth is older than 6,000 years. The Bible is infallible; man is not.
• United States
12 Jul 07
This rule applies to the original language of the Bible, not English. The word we interpret as "day" in the original language is used interchangeably to mean either a 24-hour period or an unspecified period of time.
• United States
12 Jul 07
"Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy or scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy spirit spoke under the influence of God" 2 Peter 20-21 The Bible says day (or yom, the literal translation of which is day), it can not be reinterpreted to mean anything else because that is exactly what god told people to write.