If you try to deny the entire bible’s validity based on the…?
argument that christians believe the bible when it says the earth is 6000 years old… would the notion of a Great Year (as used in ancient astrotheology) of being over 25,000 years and applied to the number 6000 make a seemingly ludicrous fact a little more plausible when taken not in a STRICTLY LITERAL sense? just thinking…
i can see once again that a point has been hit a little too high out over the stands in this crowd, so i’ll try the, boring, direct approach: people who use the label of literalism to discredit other people’s thought and who are guilty of the same kind of literalist translation to support their discrediting, should probably drop the stones right now.
let’s try again. it’s not the facts in question here. it’s the rhetorical dynamic used to question the argument that is flawed. this is precisely what i’m trying to point out. you can’t defeat an argument if the argument you use to defeat an argument is flawed itself. p effin s: drop your weapons and wave your hands in the air like you just don’t care!!!
why can’t we all just accept one another and love one another and not demand that all of us become what all of us want all of us others to become and have some drinks and some laughs together instead of all this s**t? go away!!!
The Bible DOESN’T SAY the earth is 6000 years old… two nuts, Lightfoot and Ussher, from the 17th century (several others published similar numbers around the same time) said that and unfortunately, it seems to have stuck. The Bible makes no such statement.
… Arriving at such a claim requires doing a significant disservice to the text, taking numerous passages out of their contexts, and applying grossly improper exegetical methods.
Modern people who believe this read it into the scriptures rather than discover it through an exposition of those scriptures…
Not believing in the bible just because christians say its 6000 years old is like:
Not believing in santa claus just because reindeer can’t fly
References :
If that’s what happened then God should have explained it clearly. It seems like a lie of ommission.
References :
Yeah, the 6000 year old earth thing is hardly my only problem with the bible.
And how exactly do you decide what’s literal and what’s metaphorical?
References :
Sorry, still nowhere close to 4.5 billion. Then there’s still the whole problem of the plants existing before the sun.
References :
No. There are many other conflicts between what the Bible says and a sane person’s concept of reality.
References :
Your mathematics come to the Earth being 150,000,000 years old (150 million). You’re not even close.
There are so many other things messed up in the Bible.
References :
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/
It would seem logical to do so.
But when Christians say 6000 years, it’s got to be 6000 years as they understand it.
I guess if you’re going to take a weird stance, you might as well be adament about it.
References :
That would still only be 150,000,000 years. Considerably less preposterous but still unbelievable. Plus using alternative interpretations to interpret the "strictly literal sense" is preposterous.
References :
Here’s what we hope you understand…There is written in the bible that thousand years to us is one day to God…
References :
32flavor’s Blog
The Bible DOESN’T SAY the earth is 6000 years old… two nuts, Lightfoot and Ussher, from the 17th century (several others published similar numbers around the same time) said that and unfortunately, it seems to have stuck. The Bible makes no such statement.
… Arriving at such a claim requires doing a significant disservice to the text, taking numerous passages out of their contexts, and applying grossly improper exegetical methods.
Modern people who believe this read it into the scriptures rather than discover it through an exposition of those scriptures…
References :
That is most people’s problem with the Bible. They take it too literal. Regardless of what the stories read, most of them carry a good moral message. The only thing you need to learn from the Bible is to love one another. All of our destructive actions come from fear and hate. Its common sense really and I never understood why all the other little details mattered.
References :
Well to be fair the Bible says that all the plants were around BEFORE the Sun. Now…you can try to stretch time any old way you want and that one ain’t going to work itself out.
References :
Depending on what source you use, the Hebrew or Greek, the earth is roughly 6000 or 7500 years old after the last day of creation, not the first. Previous to this, the universe was formed in a series of ages, called in Genesis a day ("A thousand years are as a day and a day is as a thousand years to the Lord").
Concerning the Great Year or Great Indication, the switch from the Julian calendar to the Gregorian changed it from roughly 517 (I forgot the exact number) to the 20 some odd thousand years. The Julian Calendar, or Old Calendar, is more realistic and workable in terms of the Great Indication.
References :
It is not the just the age of the earth. Consider that there is no evidence whatsoever of the following:
1 Creation
2. Global Flood
3. Tower of Babel
4. The Exodus
5. the sun stopping
6. The sun moving backwards
7. A hostile take over of the holy land
8. The star of Bethlehem
9. Jesus’ existence
10. The 6 hours of darkness
11. The Temple curtain ripping or being destroyed before 70 CE
12 An earthquake any where near Jerusalem at any time close to when Jesus would have been crucified.
13. any other miracle recorded by the Bible.
Edit:
This is just an examination of the evidence that should exist but doesn’t and in many cases has a lot of evidence to indicate other occurrences. Then there is the "surface" morality of the Bible while endorsing the most heinous crimes and complete lack of any sort of basic human rights. Those that think the Bible is a good source for moral thoughts, do not understand morality, or at least, have only a basic concept of morality.
Of course, we could mention the literal contradictions of the Bible (well illustrated in the skepticsBible.com or other websites) or the more profound contradictions of original sin, free will, and a unconditional forgiveness that places conditions on you, not to mention the extremely poor parenting that god displays.
Edit:
Sigh, how can you take an alleged infallible source of information any other way than literal? And if you do start making things like genealogies or the creation story as metaphor, then you start having significant problems with theology and prophecy. For example, without the concept of original sin and god shedding blood to clothe adam and eve, there is no reason for blood sacrifice and obviously no need for Jesus to be crucified – not to mention the whole cain and able story.
References :
it would be silly to think the bible is a work of fiction based on this interpretation of the earths age – I agree
but how about this:
the contradictions – how about 1000 direct contradictions
the inaccuracies – like the earth being flat, the sun revolving around the earth, bats being birds, pi equaling 3
the falsehoods – jesus virgin birth, the killing of the infants by Herod,
the immorality – killing your neighbor for working on the Sabbath, killing your kids for disobedience, slavery being okay, selling your daughter into slavery
the changes – changes in the original scripts to the current ones (the new ending in Mark)
how about those reasons??????
References :
maybe christians ages are different
like cats & dogs ‘ages’ are to us
References :
Why can’t we all except the oldest book of scripture, the Rigveda of Hinduism and reject the more modern Christian Bible. What makes your mythology any more valid then the others.
We should teach in schools that the Big Bang is not valid and that the earth, heavens and sky were created by Brahma out of a lotus flower and then he created all the plants and animals
Of course there are other creation myths but this is the one I choose to accept, why shouldn’t I deny the validity of the bible. Why do bible thumpers always assume people should concede the validity of the christian bible?
References :
all christians don’t think that. i am a christian and i think its ridiculous that the world is 6000 years old. don’t categorize all christians
References :
I believe that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old
I don’t take the bible literally,but it does make
for good storytelling in a moral sense
References :
Agnostic
i think the bible clearly declares the truth that Adam lived about 6000 years ago.
i believe that the earth is older than 6k years and many generations of fallen men have existed. it is possible that Adam was the Righteousness of the previous world and first to be resurrected even though his spirit existed in the preexistence with Jesus.
i am not sure of my own beliefs, because sometimes they dont have sources in study or biblical expounding. however i have studied enough to know that Not everything that is called true, is true!
the days of abraham who saw the creation of the earth and the generations of creation, seemed to me, to be a vision that took 6 and 7 days to behold, but when paul says that a day the lord is a thousand years to man invited me to believe the earth was not created in one day, or 6 days or even 7 or 8, but in that many days times a thousand!
i do not deny the bible most validity. it was the source of inspiration after faith came upon me to learn what righteousness and faith and repentance is… but i have found that not everything is true but somethings are mythos.
when satan quoted the lord God, he didnt say every word as recorded in genesis. Satan omitted the "not" and changed the truth into a lie, just enough to deceive Eve. thats how the words of God and the ordinances in the temple are changed!
References :