2007-06-19 04:56:53 · 15 answers · asked by ddust102 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
None. Zero. Zip. Nada.
2007-06-19 04:59:12 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
Please support that claim with something.
Nowhere does God tells us the amount of time it took to create the earth. Nor does it tell us the time between the creation of man to the fall. So from the earth being without form until the eating of the forbidden fruit,, we have no idea the amount of time that elapsed.
Plus we know that one day is as a thousand to the Lord. and vise versa. God doesn't live in time, but eternity.
Therefore, I assume he used the "one day" because it was easier for man to comprehend that 'time.'
And that doesn't make God a liar either, because one day could represent a set amount of time, not the actual 24 hour period we give it.
It really irks me that you all say we say that. Show me where it is written by a man that we think that please.
Also I would like note; Recorded history is not that old. However, man could be millions of years old. It would be nonsense to assume that the day after God created man, they fell. Don't you think? Plus if that is the case, then where in the world did Cain go to find a wife? If he was the first born child there would not have been any other people on earth. So it would be easier to assume that Adam and Eve had been around for a while, but God only started the actual events from the time of the fall, thus Cain was the first child to be born under the curse. Born to Adam and Eve that is.
Show me a source for that please.
Let me tell you about study, I thought Darwin rejected eveloution because that's what Christians say, however I did a little research and have found nothing to support that claim, therefore I no longer say that to anyone. See rumors start, but if we research them we might find out something else.
2007-06-19 05:12:48 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I am a Christian and hold firm to the truth of the literal 7 days in Genesis. I do not, however, hold to the idea of a 6,000 year old earth. The Bible never tells us how old the earth is, and it is reasonable to infer from a study of scriptures that there was a gap of time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, in which God created his original creation, including the angels. During this time lucifer and other angels rebelled, and what we read about in Genesis 1:2 is the earth in the state of judgment, after which he re-formed it into the universe as we know it today. God does not give us more than basic information about this gap of time, and he never states just how long a time it is. I believe that while we can glean important scientific information about the earth from the Bible, there is absolutely no way that it can be used to tell the actual age of the earth. MAN, however, has only been on the earth for 6,000 years, from the time of Adam's creation.
2016-05-19 21:13:31 · answer #3 · answered by dale 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The only thing they have presented is false claims about how "unreliable" radimetric dating is, and pure speculation about the possibility of "accellerated decay" with only a vague idea of what the term means.
Yes, radiometric dating can be unreliable...when you don't do it properly! A group of Creationists deliberately used carbon-14 dating methods on material they knew to be flawed, and then trumpeted their results declaring that all radiometric dating methods were inaccurate.
It's like declaring that driving cars will kill you and then demonstrating the point by deliberately driving a car off a cliff. To cap it off, the Creationists deliberately ignore the fact that multiple dating methods are used when testing for age. If all the methods come up with the same figure, it's kind of hard to claim "unreliability".
The only thing Creationists have is a book that never actually gives any kind of date at all, and overtly pathetic attempts to discredit dating methods. There is no actual evidence FOR their claim of a young Earth, just sad efforts to wave away evidence for an old Earth.
2007-06-19 05:09:54 · answer #4 · answered by Scott M 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The earth is older than six thousand years old. A day to the Lord is like a thousand years and maybe even more. God is not contained by time. Plus your question has been asked 6000 times in here.
2007-06-19 05:05:05 · answer #5 · answered by Dean D 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Not all creationists subscribe to the 6000 year old earth concept.
2007-06-19 04:59:32 · answer #6 · answered by Hogie 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
the creative days mentioned in the 'Bible describe epochs of time, the evidence is plain that 7 24 hr days is not logical
the Bible doesn't describe the creative days into earth days or yrs;; God does not keep time on the Gregorian calender that we use today but to say that life formed in a sterile vacuum & evolved into what it is now is adsurd, there are 2 types of eveloution, eveloution by creation (in which God made things as he prepared the biosphere) and creation by eveloution which is ludicrus
2007-06-19 05:27:50 · answer #7 · answered by zorrro857 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That's a good question... especially considering the fact that they just found a skull in china (i believe) that scientists believe is one of the oldest ancestors to the panda bear, and they also believe it to be approximately 2 million years old.
2007-06-19 04:59:47 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Only the idea of Bishop Usher.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bishop_Ussher
2007-06-19 05:47:34 · answer #9 · answered by Polyhistor 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
And how does that evidence correlate with the 80,000 year old manmade beads just discovered??
2007-06-19 05:00:06 · answer #10 · answered by PaulCyp 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋