Christian scientists determine from the bible that man is 12000 yrs old-so why are there 13000+ yrold fossils?

Question

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

"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, should 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?

Answer 1

As a side note, "Christian Scientists" or "Christian Scientology" is actually a particular sect of "Christianity." Christian Scientists can also refer to scientists that are Christian, but it can be a rather vague usage.

As for how Christian Scientists in your usage would explain the 100,000 year old fossils; for one, the dating might be wrong (dating methods like carbon or potassium dating become inaccurate the farther back one goes and generally needs to be adjusted using dendrochronology; this is a perfectly scientific process but creates doubts in some people's minds). For another, God could have created the world with fossils that look so old as a test to the faithful. For a third, they might claim that individuals who discover these fossils are purposely trying to misrepresent their findings.

Personally, I don't buy into those explanations, but that is what they might say. These individuals aren't so much Christian Scientists as Fundamental Creationists. The majority of creation was experienced only by God; I find it unreasonable to assume that God's account of creation will be perfectly understandable to the human mind, therefore I am perfectly capable of believing both in the Christian creation story and what science says about the origins of mankind.

There is also the question of where we draw the line between when modern humans start. The oldest indications of human civilization (as opposed to indications of human existance) are somewhere around 12,000 to 15,000 years old (found in Egypt and Sumeria). If we define humans as the Greeks did, by our nature as a political animal (well, a better translation would be an animal of the city), then humans did start around that time.

Answer 2

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?

Answer 3

For starters, carbon dating is only accurate for about 6500 years according to the man that developed carbon dating. Second, the word used in the Bible that everyone has translated as days actually means, "a period of time" in the original tongue, "not a day". So, there are some misconceptions there. I'd suggest doing some more research yourself on the subject and come to your own conclusions.

¬¿¬

Answer 4

There are probems with trying to "add up" the ages in the Bible to determine the age of the world.

Do a search on :

"For a day is as a thousand years and a thousand rears is as a day"

To God... time is irrelevant.

The "7 days" of creation: Day 1 could have been a millisecond... or 500,000,0000,000 years. There WAS NO SUCH THING as a 24 hr "Earth" day then... There was no day and night YET.

So the "Days" of cration are Figurative... not 24 hr time periods.

Jews USED TO understand this... it shows in how they tracked a "day" at the time of Jesus' life... if it was before sunset, it was one day... if it was after sunset... it was the next day.

Jesus died in mid-late afternoon on Friday on the Cross. (day 1... before sunset.) Might have been say.. 4:00 pm... close enough.... (have to set a time to count hours...)
He's pulled down and taken to the tomb before sunset. (thats important...)
Rock gets rolled in front of the tomb before sunset.
Saturday... the Sabbath. No one opens the tomb... not legal in Jewish law to do more than absolutely necessary for life on the Sabbath... except going to worship.
Sunday MORNING shortly after dawn (day 3...) 2 women go to the tomb and find it open with Jesus' body GONE. Call it 8 AM....

We have a GRAND TOTAL of ... 40 hours. and the Jews record it as... 3 days. AND... BOTH ARE CORRECT by thier method of timekeeping.

Answer 5

I Thank God it is so. I love being a woman, I was born this way! Woman can teach & be workers for God. God calls men to do this, alot of men ignore God. So God gives it to the Woman then. If our families were true families. Strong heads of households (males), helpmates (wives of these men)., as God intended, it would be different. Beside of Great Men, is always Great women, and many of these men give credit to their wives. This is not how it is nowdays. Many males are busy being gay or males don't want these responsiblites. Woman are stepping up to the plate, hitting Homeruns for God! God Bless them! Being Heads of their households & work, raising kids,accepting responsibity. Then it's ok. God has a special place in His heart for us girls! God made women to be Loved, pampered, spoiled. How many girls get this? Some do, most don't.

Answer 6

There are cave paintings 35,000 years old and human hand prints. Charcoal was used to make some of the drawings and collected for testing. If you are true scientists and not unthinking devotees you know what that means to your statement.

Answer 7

Well, the Bible was probably not written for a while after Adam and Eve were created. Even though they were there, they still didn't have the materials or writing for them to do so.

Answer 8

Christians look at what the Bible says FIRST, evidence second.

I attended a Christian college (thankfully only for a while!) and my biology teacher admitted, "I'd think the earth was millions of years old if I wasn't a Christian." (I'm quoting that nearly verbatim.)

He cited things such as fossils, the formation of mountain ranges, etc. Yes, it's a crazy world out there!

Answer 9

Nothing is impossible in this universe. So it's possible the Bible could be accurate. It is highly improbable however.

There is also a gray area as to what defines a man on the evolutionary scale.

We are all p-ss--g up a rope on this issue..

Answer 10

I'm a christian scientist.
I get so annoyed when people question me and my beliefs because they're too narrow minded to realize that you can believe in science, as well as in some higher form of power.

Or when they try to argue with me by saying that the theory of evolution, and the theory of creation cannot possibly go together.

ps-whats with all the thumbs down? Im sorry, should I have said:
"let's forget about all the concrete evidence science has provided us, lets not use logic, instead we should follow word by word, a book written thousands of years ago, edited countless times, and take every story in there literally".

im not that stupid, sorry!