Do Christians believe the earth is 4.5 billion years old?

Question

And if so, do they also believe the sun is about the same age?
Since in Genesis, the sun was made after the earth?
Accordingly four days after.
And also if the sun is 4.5 billion years old, why can't the other stars in the universe also be older then the sun, such as the star in our own milky way galaxy that dates to about 14 billion years ago, which I just realized is a large difference from that of are sun, why is that?
Maybe it is a conspirocy?

Answer 1

From what I've learned talking to others, some Christians believe the world is 6,000 to 8,000 years old, or somewhere in that neighborhood. There is also a faction that believe God created the Earth and let nature take it's course from there.

Answer 2

The Bible does not say that the earth is four days older than the sun. It simply says at Gen. 1:1 that in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. If you will notice in the Genesis account that the material heavens and earth were already in existence BEFORE the first creative day even started. Those six days were huge time periods that God used to prepare the earth for animal and human habitation. They have nothing to do with the stars, planets and other celestial bodies. The earth could be millions or even billions of years old. We just don't know for sure.

Answer 3

See if you can figure out why I am giving you this scripture...

(Oh, and the answerer above me is referring to verse 8)

2 Peter 3: 3 - 10 (Quoted from the NIV)

"3 Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4 They will say, "Where is this 'coming' he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation." 5 But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 6 By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. 7 By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.

8 But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. 9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything done in it will be laid bare."

Answer 4

Well for one no one knows how old the Earth or the other planets are. Science has guessed it's around there but that's just a guess. Christians believe that God created the Earth long ago......we don't know when of course but I don't see why we can't believe it. Personally I think the Earth was created so long ago estimating when is impossible.

Answer 5

** Open letter to Tom Harpur ***
---------------------------------------





Hi Tom!

In your article "Creationist arguments are damaging to Christianity" there are a number of egregious errors.

For instance, to defend creationism, we do not have to hold to a fundamentalist literalist interpretation of the Bible that says that the universe was created in 6 days 6000 years ago.

All we have to look at are the metaphysical and scientific facts.

We can certainly accede to the Big bang taking place 13.7 billion years ago, as the creation ex-nihilo of all matter and energy in the universe.

We can look at all of the scientific and palentological facts squarely in the face.

Indeed we can accept, as paleontology tells us, that there are a vast number of fossils in rock strata that have built up over billions of years.

Earth's history, with life in it, is divided into eons, eras, and epochs. There exists a very sophisticated fossil record, with ever complex grades of life as time goes on.

Even though similar types organisms are found in closely related layers of rock, there is no - I repeat there is no evidence whatsoever that one thing came from another. That is a pure leap by the scientists. To insist that the life-forms appeared when and where they did in the manner of one thing coming from another (i.e. evolution), and that there can be no other way, is based purely on a philosophical presupposition that supernatural miraculous creations are impossible. Such a presupposition is either materialistic or pantheistic. Analogical theism is rejected carte blanche, dogmatically, without reason.

Natural selection, as a theory of evolution, is particularly without scientific foundation. It is simply materialistic dogma, created out of thin air, by scientists, wishing to promote materialism (or pantheism). It is a pure add-on to the paleontological evidence. Not only is there no scientific evidence for such, but there is a vast body of scientific evidence that contradicts it.

But what many mainstream scientists do is append natural selection to the paleontological evidence, making it seem as if one goes with the other. This is done to eliminate a theistic transcendent God from our society and from our schools, to promote either atheism or pantheism. Natural selection is not based on science at all, but a purely political agenda. So much for the objectivity of many scientists.

There is no scientific evidence whatsoever that Adam was not created instantaneously by God. Science simply does not address this. I know that fossils of humanoid forms, of different degrees of complexity, have been found scattered around, but these are far too few data points to come to any real conclusions. It is simply supposed that the more complex humanoid form has come from the less complex. This is pure supposition. It is not even determined by scientists, what came from what (if that even happened).

Jim J. McCrea
--- --- ---







-----

Answer 6

>>>Then how did scientists arrive at this end whilst all of the sunshine we see from pronounced stars had already shone on our cutting-edge area on the 2d of their theory?.. area is increasing. those stars are farther away NOW than whilst their mild left. We see them as they have been then. >>>Wasn't the super bang an extremely very vibrant experience?, if that's so then wasn't the sunshine already here, if the sunshine became already here then how do we be conscious the age of the celebrities?.. No. If it became an extremely vibrant experience, we might have the potential to "be conscious" it, according to se. whether, the super Bang could have been a "dark" experience (to seen mild). extra output became in different EM spectrums (subsequently the Cosmic Microwave history) >>>do we then say that an old age of the universe isn't conclusive with regards to it in technology words?.. not in case you don't comprehend the technology you are attempting to disprove. >>>Is the Biblical account of a youthful earth extremely one among those undesirable theory whilst making an allowance for my reasoning? No, by way of fact your reasoning is as fallacious as your technology.

Answer 7

In the christian bible, I have read that to God a thousand years is as a day and a day is as a thousand years. Which tells me that time is not an issue. As though she, he,it,they could manipulate time. and therefore one theory does not defeat the other.

Answer 8

Whatever theory that is is used to suggest the earth is that old is something i dont beleive. Its wrong just like they found that pluto isnt actually a planet.

Answer 9

i believe the true age of the earth,sun, and universe is unknowable. becareful of theories presented as fact.

Answer 10

I don't know for sure, it could by 4.5 billion, it could be 30,000, it could be 200 billion.

I'll agree with Stephen Hawking.