Why do some Christians believe that the earth is approximately 6,000 years old?

Question

The age of the Earth is 4.54 billion years (4.54 × 109 years ± 1%). This age is based on evidence from radiometric age dating of meteorite material and is consistent with the ages of the oldest-known terrestrial and lunar samples.

Answer 1

Low IQ.

Poor education.

Brainwashing from birth.



That's why.

Answer 2

The earth as a lifeless planet can be however old science dictates, though all dating methods are flawed beyond carbon dating going back a few thousand years. The Bible does not give a time for when the heavens and earth were created, or water on the earth; Scripture proclaims this prior to numbering specific events into 6 "days", which are likely periods of time. What many Christians believe- as I do, being learned- is that the all life forms on earth are from a fairly recent origin...6000 years of humanity. This is not a foolish concept, for the oldest known archaeological finds date back from a conservative 6000 to a liberal 10000 years. And these oldest civilizations of southern Mesopotamia are at the same location as Scriptural declarations of origin. And besides the archaeological record supporting a young earth and humanity, population growth studies point to a young humanity. For example: the population of the earth in the 1 century A.D. (C.E.) is estimated to be a measily 200 million people; today it is over 7 billion. People multiply like rabits, no matter if they are hunting or using agriculture. If we had 20000 years, the world would have been populated over and over again many times. Archaelogical finds don't support this. There is much greater evidence for a young history of mankind than there is of old earth and evolutionary theory. So, maybe 4.5 billion years is the age of the earth in formation...but a young humanity is doesn't lack many areas of support.

Answer 3

Dating rocks by radioactive timekeepers is simple in theory, but almost all of the different methods rely on these few basic assumptions:

Beginning Conditions Known

Beginning Ratio of Daughter to Parent Isotope Known (zero date problem)

Constant Decay Rate

No Leaching or Addition of Parent or Daughter Isotopes

All Assumptions Valid for Billions of Years

There is also a difficulty in measuring precisely very small amounts of the various isotopes



Another issue is that sometimes the geologic periods of rocks are revised to agree with the ages computed. This also makes data about percentages of anomalies less meaningful.



It sometimes seems that reasons can always be found for bad dates, especially on the geologic column. If a rock gives a too old date, one says there is excess argon. If it gives a too young date, one says that it was heated recently, or cannot hold its argon. How do we know that maybe all the rocks have excess argon? It looks like geologists are taking the "majority view" of K-Ar dating, but there is no necessary reason why the majority of rocks should give the right date

Answer 4

I am a Christian and I do not believe that the Earth is merely 6,000 years old because so far as I can tell the scriptures do not say that. If someone has a verse or something where it states that please send it to me. Also, in Genesis where it says "On the first day" and all that, "day" doesn't necessarily mean a 24 hour amount of time, it could mean until something is finished. So each of these "days" could be millions of years long each, with the sun going up and down many, many, many times. Also the sun doesn't actually move, its the Earth spinning that makes it bright out and dark out.

Answer 5

I'm a Christian and I don't believe that at all. The planet’s coming into existence is recounted in the Bible with the simple statement: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” (Ge 1:1) Just how long ago the starry heavens and the earth were created is not stated in the Bible. Therefore, there is no basis for Bible scholars to take issue with scientific calculations of the age of the planet. Scientists estimate the age of some rocks as being three and a half billion years, and the earth itself as being about four to four and a half billion or more years. A friend of mine showed me pictures of the Valley of fire. Those red rocks formation have definitely more than 6000 yrs old.

The facts disagree with such a conclusion: (1) Light from the Andromeda nebula can be seen on a clear night in the northern hemisphere. It takes about 2,000,000 years for that light to reach the earth, indicating that the universe must be at least millions of years old. (2) End products of radioactive decay in rocks in the earth testify that some rock formations have been undisturbed for billions of years.



As to time, the Scriptures are more definite about the six creative days of the Genesis account. These days have to do, not with the creation of earth’s matter or material, but with the arranging and preparing of it for man’s habitation.

Answer 6

Genetic Mental Illness.

Brain Damage.

Stockholm Syndrome/Childhood Indoctrination. (They're the same thing)

Poor/Lack of Proper Education.



BTW... We're not going on "Assumptions" and Carbon 14 dating isn't the only method being used to calculate the age of the known multiverse. There are DOZENS of different fields which all come together with the conclusion that the earth itself is approximately 4.6 billion years old. Astronomy, Physics, Carbon Dating, and so on and so forth...



We KNOW that humans first got to Australia approximately 50,000 years ago... So that means that no matter what, the whole 4000 to 6000 age is NONSENSE.



I'm so very sorry you are mentally ill and can't take the time to do a little research.



► Video - Life Rocks the Earth: Biologic & Mineral Evolution

http://www.livescience.com/common/media/video/player.php?aid=23894



► The Exciting Evolution of ... Rocks

http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/081113-mineral-evolution.html



► Glimpse of Time Before Big Bang Possible

http://www.livescience.com/space/scienceastronomy/070702_mm_big_bang.html



► Hubble telescope shows earliest photo of universe

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100105/ap_on_sc/us_sci_hubble_photo



► Giant Mystery Blob Discovered Near Dawn of Time

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/090422-space-blob.html

Answer 7

There is a tradition in popular Christianity that Genesis is a literal scientific account of creation, ( it is Hebrew poetry), coupled with the notion that the genealogies listed in Genesis are all inclusive father to son lists, ( they are highlights of family trees. So-and-so being the son of So-and-so could be a great grandchild, not necessarily a literal first born), and certain schools of thought have counted about 6,000 years in generations from Adam to Jesus to now.

That's why, neighbor.

It has become popular, but it is wrong.

Answer 8

Because they take the Biblical timeline as literal years since God made earth and man. Many Christians know those creation days could represent millions of years. There certainly does appear to be plenty of evidence to support an older earth, but they also claim that since God is God He could also make it appear that way if He so chose... also some testing can be close but can also be somewhat incosistent, but either way it does appear to be much much older than thousands of years old. I think either one is possible considering God is capable of anything, but I think it takes a bigger God to evolve the earth into what it is over millions of years rather than will it just like it is now.

Answer 9

Why do we continue to make a stink about what a tiny percent of fundies think?



It makes no sense. Everyone else gets this. It's sort of like pointing at the blind kid and asking why he can't see something.



People believe what they want to. Even when given facts. It's not just a Christian thing. It made headlines for a while. Around the time when Dan Brown's book was a best seller - because even though it was marked Fiction - people thought it was true.

Answer 10

They are taught that. To be fair, I was once taught that and believed it. I no longer do, not only because of science, but because the Bible does not even claim a young earth. It only claims a young Adamic human race.

Answer 11

@Jesus Freak



If there really is that big of a problem with Radiometric Dating, that means we must shut down all nuclear power plants. Because if there really was that huge of a problem, Nuclear reactors would be melting down all over the place.

Answer 12

There's a quote from a geology professor in Harvard, who is a YEC, who said "you can show me all the evidence that point to an old earth, but i will still believe earth is ~6000 years old because the scriptures said so"



You can't argue with a mind like that!

Answer 13

Because Thats what is found in the bible. The spirit speaks truly.

Answer 14

Because some guy decided that genealogies were an accurate way to measure Earth's age...I don't know why people give him so much credit.

Answer 15

They take the biblical years literally rather than figuratively...



I was told by this one guy that the years in genesis are lunar years so you divide the years they lived by 13

Answer 16

Because I've watched as the most current system of dating is shown to be incorrect in the dates it produces. We used to use carbon 14 dating. If you don't know what happened with that, I suggest you look it up. I would suggest the same with radiometric dating. There are flaws in pretty much all of the dating systems that have been invented thusfar.

Answer 17

There's nothing to calibrate radiometric age dating against. We can't be 100% sure those numbers are accurate. We have no set in stone figures to compare them against. Whereas radiocarbon dating can be calibrated, it is accurate, and it has never shown anything older than 6,000 years.



Not to mention our faith in the Bible.

Answer 18

It's called willful ignorance

Answer 19

they added up all the years the people mentioned in the bible lived back to adam....

Answer 20

Because that's what they have been told to by their religious leaders and they are not allowed to question the dogma. Doing so would be against their creator.

Answer 21

They can't count to 21 unless they are standing naked in the shower...

Answer 22

They weren't taught critical thinking skills...

Answer 23

Cognitive dysfunction

Answer 24

Silly girl, haven't you noticed that all really religious people are primitive washed up brain washed egg plants?

Answer 25

It's truly saddening.

Answer 26

fantasy tells them to deny reality