that would mean the earth is not 6,000 years old. We know the continental plates are moving at the rate at which your finger nails grow so, if they were all together then that mean the bible is wrong.
http://www.seafriends.org.nz/oceano/drif...
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...
2007-05-09 09:31:13 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
You mean pangea. I don't know, but I bet you can find the answer here
2007-05-09 09:34:11 · answer #1 · answered by yaabro 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Christians are wrong the bible don´t said that it is true that Adam and eve were created 6000 years ago, but the bible don´t said that the six days´s period are of 24 hours each one , the word "day" has different meaning in the bible sometime 1000 years or a undefiny amount of time that could be hundreds of thousands years; genesis is not about the creation of the earth, the earth was already created by God, it is talking abut the preparation of the earth to support live.
2007-05-09 09:36:49 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
You know how scientists date rocks? by the fossils found in them. You know how they date fossils? by the rock layer they are found in. That's called thinking in a circle. That's why we have no clue whether they are correct or not.
Also, the earth may actually be more than 6000 years old, because we dont know how long Adam and Eve were in the Garden before they were cast out. And, with the Lord, a day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years is as a day. So even though the earth was created in 7 days, we dont know that the lenght of those days was 24 hours or not.
2007-05-09 09:39:13 · answer #3 · answered by pocketful_of_sunshine 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Good try. However, if you were to read Genesis Chapter 10:25. You'll see that it was in the days of Peleg that the "earth" was divided.
And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother's name was Joktan.
(Note) The continental plates were weakened at the flood of Noah. The Bible says the foundations of the deep were broken open. Now, the estimated force to do this would equal that of 10,000 Hydrogen bombs.
2007-05-09 09:41:02 · answer #4 · answered by n_007pen 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not all Christians believe the world is 6 000 years old. In fact, those Christians who use the number 6 000 use it to refer to the number of years people have existed, not the earth. Also, geologists have recently started to question the theory that there was one large land mass. I would love to know what the new theory is and how much support it has among geologists. You really need to do more research.
2007-05-09 09:38:30 · answer #5 · answered by ellipse4 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The continents were once all connected, that is fact. When it happened is up for grabs, and that 6,000 year thing is interpreted differently by different theologists, so I'm going with the earth is older than we think, but a big bang from nothingness didn't create it, God did. The bible isn't wrong, the people interpreting it are wrong.
2007-05-09 09:37:45 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
1) Where in the bible does it say that the Earth is 6,000 years old?
2) Do we also know that the continental plates have ALWAYS moved at the rate at which my finger nails grow? (Short Answer: No, we don't, not that it's relevant)
2007-05-09 09:34:38 · answer #7 · answered by Open Heart Searchery 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The Universe may look older than it is ! Is it not possible that human interpretations could be wrong ? If you accept that GOD is all mighty (master of time as well as space), is it not possible that he could cause what seems like millions of years of development to happen in a day, an hour, or even a blink of the eye ? If you think not, why not ?
2007-05-09 09:45:00 · answer #8 · answered by Bostic R 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Fudamentalists, not Christians in general, would be wrong if the age of the earth was proven (I doubt it) as a lot older. Many Christians believe in an old earth, and some even believe that God created evolution.
2007-05-09 09:34:57 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
we believe it was all together, just not 200 million years ago. whether this continental shifting started near the beginning of the flood (gysers, water coming up) so displacement and shock would be weaker, we don't know. but it looks like a jig-saw to me.
you'll notice I said "started" not "happened" as people needed to populate Australia somehow. quick fact: did you know Australian Aboriginals have an almost exact account to that of Noah? but there's is a raft, not an ark.
2007-05-09 09:35:27 · answer #10 · answered by Hey, Ray 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
First of all it's spelled Pangaea not Pangea.
Second, we all know that earth is more than 6000 years old and the continental plates do move, so don't attack the guy just for expressing his understandings?!
2007-05-09 09:45:19 · answer #11 · answered by Mia 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋