In recent studies,Christian scientists, non-religious scientists,and Theologists have concluded that,utilizing the bible and its many references throughout history and its list of Adam&Eve’s descendants that mankind must be no more than 12,000 yrs old.Why is it that we've found fossils of men from 13,000+ yrs old? C. Dating isnt completely accurate, but there are fossils 100,000+ yrs old.
I’m not trying to debunk any religions,or prove science completely right,but this does bring up an interesting question to those who take the Bible literally.Obviously, most stories in the Bible are not supposed to be taken literally,but instead just pose with a moral background.Religion,in a lot of ways,gives simplified answers to those really sticky questions.But the fact is we fight with rage over who is right and wrong is just completely barbaric.Religion should just thrive to get us to be better ppl,help each other out,and feel secure in life.Simple as that.
How old is mankind?NOT the EARTH
2007-08-01 05:04:38 · 22 answers · asked by Adam 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
"Christian scientist" is NOT an oxy moron. Why does everyone think that science and religion are like water and oil? They can be intertwined together to create a beautiful story based on both faith and fact. Those of you who haven't, read "Angels and Demons" by Dan Brown. He expresses this very idea on simple paper in an understandable way. Even science requires a lot of faith. To me, Genesis and the Big Bang theory are the same story, just from two different points of view. Why can't evolution and God's creation of man be the same story as well? God's creation of man could have been him evolving single-celled organisms gradually until he created all sorts of species, including man. Why not?
2007-08-01 06:25:52 · update #1
A mass extinction of species occurred during the Pleistocene - Holecene boundary approximately 12,000 years ago.
At this point God could have intervened. What we have in Genesis is not the creation of the earth, but the restoration of the earth. God intervened in the evolutionary processes and created the modern animals "after their kind," that is genetically after the DNA structure of prehistoric animals.
The same happened for modern man. God intervened in the evolutionary processes and created modern man "after their kind," that is genetically after the DNA structure of prehistoric man. Modern man was created additionaly in the "image of God," that is with God's spiritual nature.
2007-08-01 05:28:58 · answer #1 · answered by ignoramus_the_great 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Holy cow... I don't know if there is really a question here! Let's see if I can earn my points... Carbon dating is much more accurate than the Bible. Keep in mind that the Bible was written by many men, translated 5 times and only certain texts were included. I would trust C. Dating 10 times out of 10, if it was between C. Dating and a Christian Scientist. Humans have been killing each other since the very first book of the Bible. Religion wasn't to blame for that, however, "My God is better than your God," is the best reason we can come up with, because we are primative creatures. The age of mankind is debatable. But approximately 200,000 years ago... makes the Bible look wrong huh?
2016-04-01 06:39:33 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
C. Dating is not accurate. If you wish to read up on it just Google debunking C dating or the like and you will get enough info.
Also, if you look at the creation account as a true accurate account and not a story of creation you get what I call a faux age look created by God. Considering the depth of creation and all things he placed in this world it would not surprise me to find that he made everything we are digging up as a test of faith. Carbon Dating cannot be accurate because these items were created with all their properties intact.
Far fetched? Perhaps...but so is saying space debris collided and created the foundations of life. Which leads dust to become presumtious and desire to live and adapt. Continuing this slime decides to become cellular and later decides to become aquatic and finally after a long swim they decide to come on land for a breather (if you catch my drift) each time the cocky lil buggers decide to change and adapt and evolve in dramatic ways.
Aside from why are their still apes and questions like that I pose where are these cocky critters now? Why have we not see more drastic changes? Where are all these fossils of the changing creatures? How can one that changes make more like themselves?
Evolutionists scoff at one man and one woman being created from dust and yet this is exactly what they believe! The only differences really boil down to one thing. God or no God. Accident or Design.
2007-08-01 05:22:36 · answer #3 · answered by crimthann69 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
What's the matter? You didn't like the answers you got the first time so you delete and repost? That is more commonly called "cut and run".
ADDENDUM
"C. Dating is not accurate. If you wish to read up on it just Google debunking C dating or the like and you will get enough info."
Only true if you only read creationist sites. The accuracy of carbon dating is quite good and its limitations are well-known - except to creationist apologists who always neglect to mention the dozens of other dating techniques used by scientists.
2007-08-01 07:57:40 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Christian Scientists are neither Christian nor Scientific in their beliefs. The Bible does not give a definitive answer to the age of man.
2007-08-01 05:14:10 · answer #5 · answered by Malcolm 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You don't cite sources. Well, the earth is billions of years old and man has been evolving on it for millions of years. The Bible is a book of fiction, not a scientific text. No educated or rational person could possible take its "facts" as genuine!
2007-08-01 05:14:11 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Animals were created long before man was. Gen 1 says that some animals were created on the 5th day, whereas man wasn't created untill the 6th day. Man was the last thing that God created. These fossils that have been found probably belonged to animals that existed before man. They don't prove that the Bible is inaccurate.
2007-08-01 05:08:59 · answer #7 · answered by Mabes 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Becasue the bible is based on stories. There were no archeologists back then and scholars had to come up with a date that man was created. Its creationism vs. science and evolution.
2007-08-01 05:08:26 · answer #8 · answered by Hoptoad City 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"Obviously, most stories in the Bible are not supposed to be taken literally,but instead just pose with a moral background"
No, not obviously. Most of the Bible is, in fact, literal.
The Bible does not have enough data in it to answer the question of "how old in mankind".
2007-08-01 05:11:42 · answer #9 · answered by Machaira 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Actually, they believe that man and the Earth are both about 6000 years old.
And yet we have proof that dinosaurs existed about 220 million to 65 million years ago.
Hmm.. weird.
2007-08-01 05:13:29 · answer #10 · answered by Professor Farnsworth 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋