• 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!

Christians: How could Earth only be 6000 years old?

Where Is God

Where Is God

Creator
If I made the a really stupid movie, but a character in that movie( played by me) claimed that it was the best movie ever and it was the only good one, do you think I could get a billion followers?
 
james2ko

james2ko

Well-Known Member
artificial_entelligence said:
The problem is you forgo basic concepts of both the sciences (not just geology) and biblical interpretation as you are trying to reconcile the two fields.
Click to expand...

So what basic concept of science and biblical interpretation am I forgoing by implying the earth has been around much longer than 6,000 years?

artificial_entelligence said:
Apparently you want to be the kind of Christian who accepts science and as literal an interpretation of the Bible as you can. So you're loosely fitting in what you think you know about science with what you think you know about the bible, and the product is a useless, bastardized mess.
Click to expand...

You speak as one with a firm grasp on science and the bible. We both agree the scientific evidence supports the old earth theory and I'm always open to new biblical understanding. Perhaps you can enlighten us on your version of the literal, biblical interpretation of the OP. Please provide references.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
james2ko said:
So what basic concept of science and biblical interpretation am I forgoing by implying the earth has been around much longer than 6,000 years?
Click to expand...

Well, first of all, I didn't say or imply anything like that.

You speak as one with a firm grasp on science and the bible. We both agree the scientific evidence supports the old earth theory and I'm always open to new biblical understanding. Perhaps you can enlighten us on your version of the literal, biblical interpretation of the OP. Please provide references.
Click to expand...

OK, and where you depart - unless I've read you incorrectly - is when you think that Gen 1:1 begins 6,000 years ago.

This would excuse yourself from geological (and other) data that indicate that the earth is much older than 6,000 years, but if you say that humans have only been around for that long (which I think is a very safe assumption), then you have no excuse at all when all the sciences indicate otherwise.
 
james2ko

james2ko

Well-Known Member
artificial_entelligence said:
Well, first of all, I didn't say or imply anything like that.
Click to expand...

Then what was the intent of your statement?

artificial_entelligence said:
OK, and where you depart - unless I've read you incorrectly - is when you think that Gen 1:1 begins 6,000 years ago.
Click to expand...

You most certainly have. The implication was Gen 1:1 could have occurred billions of years ago:

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2410175-post42.html

By the way, I'm still waiting for a reply to this request. Will you honor it?

You speak as one with a firm grasp on science and the bible. We both agree the scientific evidence supports the old earth theory and I'm always open to new biblical understanding. Perhaps you can enlighten us on your version of the literal, biblical interpretation of the OP. Please provide references.​
 
waitasec

waitasec

Veteran Member
james2ko said:
So what basic concept of science and biblical interpretation am I forgoing by implying the earth has been around much longer than 6,000 years?
Click to expand...
you accept geological evidence for the age of the earth but ignore geological evidence that supports evolution for example .
 
darkendless

darkendless

Guardian of Asgaard
waitasec said:
you accept geological evidence for the age of the earth but ignore geological evidence that supports evolution for example .
Click to expand...

It is most frustrating to see such hypocrisy isn't it?

Geology is more useful to evolution than most people think.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top