how old is the earth?

How Old Is The Earth?

• How Old?

• Did God really take six days to create everything?

• What about Carbon Dating?

How Old?

The Bible contains genealogies that extend from Jesus all the way back to Adam. --- i.e. (Genesis 5 and 11, Matthew 1, and Luke 3)

How do we know?

God told us through Moses:

“For in six days the Lord made the heavens and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day” --- (Exodus 20:11)

The Earth was created on day one, and Adam was created on day six,

then the Earth is only five days older than man.

Jesus said:

“from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female” --- (Mark 10:6)

How Old?World history, archaeology, and the Bible reveal that

• from the present time back to the time of Jesus was about 2,000 years.

• from Jesus back to Abraham was at most about 2,000 years.

Moses (Genesis 1) and Paul (1 Corinthians 15:45) both recorded that Adam was the fist man to live upon the Earth. We know from Exodus

20:11 and Exodus 31:17 that the Earth was created on day one, while man was created on day six.

Can we determine the length of time between Abraham and Adam?

Yes!

Using the genealogies listed in the Bible (i.e. – Genesis 5), we find that this period is roughly:

2,000 years

How Old?

Present to Jesus 2,000 years

Jesus to Abraham 2,000 years

Abraham to Adam 2,000 years

About 6000 years old!

Not millions or billions of years

Did God Really Take Six Days?

Are the days of creation ordinary days?

Could they be long periods of time?

Why six days?

Does the length of the days really affect the gospel?

How can there be “days” without the sun on the first three days?

How are we meant to understand the Bible?


If the days of creation are really “geologic ages” of millions of years, then the gospel message is undermined at its foundation because it

puts death, disease, thorns, and suffering before the Fall.

God created the universe, the earth, the sun, moon, and stars, plants and animals, and the first two people, within six ordinary (approximately 24-hour) days.

Did God Really Take Six Days?The entrance of your words gives light; it gives understanding to the simple (Psalms 119:130).

Romans 3:4 “Let God be true, and every man a liar.”

In every instance where someone has not accepted the “days” of creation to be ordinary days, it is because they have not allowed the words of Scripture to speak to them in context. They have been influenced by ideas from outside of Scripture.

Did God Really Take Six Days?What does the Bible tell us about the meaning of “day” in

Genesis 1?

A word can have more than one meaning, depending on the context. For instance, the English word “day” can have perhaps 14 different meanings. For example:

“Back in my father’s day, it took ten days to drive across the Australian Outback during the day.”

day = time in a general sense

day = ordinary day

day = daylight period of the 24 hours period

To understand the meaning of “day” in Genesis 1, we need to determine how the Hebrew word for “day,” yom,

is used in the context of Scripture.

Did God Really Take Six Days?What does the Bible tell us about the meaning of “day” in

Genesis 1?Consider the following:

• A typical concordance will illustrate that yom can have a range of meanings: a period of light as contrasted to night, a 24-hour period, time, a specific point of time, or a year.

• A classical, well-respected Hebrew-English lexicon (a one-way dictionary) has seven headings and many subheadings for the meaning of yom – but defines the creation days of Genesis 1 as ordinary days under the heading “day as defined by evening and morning.”

• A number, and the phrase “evening and morning,” are used for each of the six days of creation (Gen. 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 331).

• Outside Genesis 1, yom is used with the word “evening” or “morning” 23 times. “Evening” and “morning” appear in association, but without yom, 38 times. All 61 times the text refers to an ordinary day – why would Genesis 1 be the exception?


• In Genesis 1:5, yom occurs in context with the word “night.” Outside of Genesis 1, “night” is used with yom 53 times – and each time it means an ordinary day. Why would Genesis 1 be the exception. Even the usage of the word “light” with yom in tis passage determines the meaning as ordinary day.

• The plural of yom, which does not appear in Genesis 1, can be used to communicate a longer time period, e.g., “in those days.” Adding a number here would be non-sensical. Clearly, in Exodus 20:11 where a number is used with days, it unambiguously refers to six earth-rotation days.

What does the Bible tell us about the meaning of “day” in Genesis 1?

If we are prepared to let the words of the language speak to us in accord with the context and normal definitions, without being influenced by outside ideas, then the word for “day’ in Genesis 1 – which is qualified by a number, the phrase “evening and morning,” and for day one the words “light and darkness” – obviously means an ordinary day (about 24 hours).

Objections to Literal Days in Genesis 1

Objection 1: “Science” has shown the earth and universe are billions of years old, therefore the “days” of creation must be long periods (or indefinite periods) of time.

Answer:

a) The age of the earth as determined by man’s fallible methods is based on unproved assumptions, so it is not proven that the earth is billions of years old.

b) This unproved age is being used to force an interpretation on the language of the Bible.

c) Evolutionary scientists claim the fossil layers over the earth’s surface date back hundreds of millions of years. As soon as one allows millions of years for the fossil layers – then one has accepted death, bloodshed, disease, thorns, and suffering before Adam’s sin.


Objection 2: According to Genesis 1, the sun was not created until day four. How cold there be day and night (ordinary days) without the sun for the first three day?

Answer:

a) Each of the six days of creation appears with the Hebrew word yom qualified by a number, and the phrase “evening and morning.” The first three days are written the same way as the next three. So if we let the language speak to us – all six days were ordinary earth days.

b) The sun is not needed for day and night. What is needed is light and a rotating earth. On the first day of creation, God made light (Gen1:3). The phrase “evening and morning” certainly implies a rotating earth. --- Where did the light come from? We are not told. Don’t forget Revelation 21:23 tells us that one day the sun will not be needed, as the glory of God will light the heavenly city.

c) Evolutionary scientists claim the fossil layers over the earth’s surface date back hundreds of millions of years. As soon as one allows millions of years for the fossil layers – then one has accepted death, bloodshed, disease, thorns, and suffering before Adam’s sin.


Objection3: 2 Peter 3:8 states “that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years,” therefore, the days of creation could be long periods of time.

Answer:

a) This passage has no creation context – it is not referring to Genesis or the six days of creation.

b) This verse has what is called a “comparative article” – “as” or “like” – which is not found in Genesis 1. In other words, it is not saying a day is a thousand years – it is comparing a real, literal day to a real, literal thousand years.

c) The second part of the verse reads “and a thousand years as one day,” which in essence cancels out the first part of the verse for those who want to equate a day with a thousand years.


Objection 4: Genesis 2:4 states: “In the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens.” As this refers to all six days of creation, it shows that the word day does not mean an ordinary day.

Answer:

The Hebrew word yom as used here is not qualified by a number, the phrase “evening ad morning,” light, or darkness. In this context, the verse really means “in the time God created” (referring to the creation week) or, “when god created.”

Other Problems with long Days• If the plants made on day three were separated by millions of years from the birds

and nectar bats (created day 5), and insects (created day 6) necessary for their pollination, then such plants could not have survived.

• Adam was created on day six, lived through day seven, and then died when he was 930 years old (Gen. 5:5). If each day were a thousand years, or millions of years, this would make no sense of Adam’s age at death.

• Some people want the days of creation to be long periods in an attempt to harmonize evolution or billions of years with the Bible’s account of origins. However, the order of events according to long-age beliefs does not agree with that of Genesis. Consider the following:

Biblical account of creation

Earth before the sun and stars

Earth covered in water initially

Ocean first, then dry land

Life first created on the land

Plants created before the sun

Land animals crated after birds

Whales before land animals

Evolutionary/long-age speculation

Stars and sun before earth

Earth a molten blob initially

Dry land then the oceans

Life started in the oceans

Plants came long after the sun

Land animals existed before birds

Land animals before whales

PURE WORDS1 Thessalonians 2:13

“You received it not as the word of men, but as it is, truly the word of God.”

Proverbs 30:5-6

“Every word of God is pure… do not add to His words, lest He reprove you and you be found a liar.”

2 Tim. 3:16-17

All Scripture is God-breathed, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be

perfected, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Every word and letter in the Bible is there because God put it there. Let us listen to God speaking to us through His Word, and not arrogantly think

we can tell God what He really means!

What About Carbon Dating?

How does the carbon “clock” work?

Is it reliable?

What does carbon dating really show?

What about other radiometric dating methods?

Is there evidence that the earth is young?

What About Carbon Dating?People who ask about carbon-14 (14C) dating usually want to know

about the radiometric dating methods that are claimed to give millions and billions of years --- carbon dating can only give thousands of years.

.

What About Carbon DatingHow the Carbon Clock Works

Carbon-14 is made when cosmic rays knock neutrons out of atomic nuclei in the upper atmosphere. These displaced neutrons, now moving fast, hit ordinary nitrogen (14N) at lower altitudes, converting it into 14C. Unlike common carbon (12C), 14C is unstable and slowly decays, changing back into nitrogen and releasing energy. This instability makes it radioactive.

Ordinary carbon (12C) is found in the carbon dioxide (CO2) in the air, which is taken up by plants, which in turn are eaten by animals. So a bond, or a leaf of a tree, or even a piece of wooden furniture, contains carbon. When 14C has been formed,, like ordinary carbon (12C), it combines with oxygen to give carbon dioxide (14CO2), and so it also gets cycled through the cells of plants and animals.

We can take a sample of air, count how many 12C atoms there are for every 14C atom, and calculate the 14C/12C ratio. Because 14C is so well mixed up with 12C, we expect to find that this ratio is the same if we sample a leaf from a tree, or a part of your body.


In living things, although 14C atoms are constantly changing back to 14N, they are still exchanging carbon with their surroundings, so the mixture remains about the same as in the atmosphere. However, as soon as a plant or animal dies, the 14C atoms which decay are no longer replaced, so the amount of 14C in that once-living thing decreases as time goes on. In other words, the 14C/12C ratio gets smaller. So we have a clock that starts ticking the moment something dies. (see next slide)

14C is gained by living things but lost after death.


14C

12C 12C 12C12C

14C14C

14C not measurable

Moment ofDeath

Old Older “Infinite” age

After death, the amount of 12C remains constant, but the amount of 14C decreases.

Total carbon-12 and -14 in specimen (e.g., wood)


The rate of decay of 14C is such that half of an amount will convert back to 14N in 5,730 + 40 years. This is the “half-life.” So, in two half-lives, or 11,460 years, only one-quarter will be left. This if the amount of 14C relative to 12C in a sample is one-quarter of that in living organisms at present, then it has a theoretical age of 11,460 years. Anything over about 50,000 years old, should theoretically have no detectable 14C left. That is why radiocarbon dating cannot give millions of years. In fact, if a sample contains 14C, it is good evidence that it is not millions of years old.


Things are not quite so simple.

1) Plants discriminate against carbon dioxide containing 14C. (They take up less than expected so they test older. Also, different types of plants discriminate differently.)

2) The ratio of 14C/12C in the atmosphere has not been constant. --- for example: it was higher before the industrial era when the massive burning of fossil fuels released a lot of carbon dioxide that was depleted in 14C. This would make things which died at that time appear older in terms of carbon dating. -- Then there was a rise in 14CO2 with the advent of atmospheric testing of atomic bombs in the 1950s. This would make things carbon-dated from that time appear younger than their true age.

What About Carbon DatingOther factors affecting Carbon Dating

The amount of cosmic rays penetrating the earth’s atmosphere affects the amount of 14C produced. The amount of cosmic rays reaching the earth varies with the sun’s activity, and with the earth’s passage through magnetic clouds as the solar system travels around the Milky Way galaxy. The strength of the earth’s magnetic field affects the amount of cosmic rays entering the atmosphere.

Overall, the energy of the earth’s magnetic field has been decreasing, so more 14C is being produced now than in the past. Old things will look older.

“At present, the only working theory for the origin, fluctuations, rapid reversals, and decay of the field is a creationist theory--a theory that fits all the data. Thus, according to the best theory and data we have, the earth's magnetic field certainly is less than 100,000 years old; very likely less than 10,000 years old, and fits in well with the face-value Biblical age of 6,000 years.” --- (Russell Humphreys, Ph.D.)

Earth’s Magnetic Field



According to the dynamic-decay theory, the "energy" in the field has always decreased rapidly. In fact, the energy loss during reversals and fluctuations would have been even faster than today's rate. This information allows us to

estimate the age of the field

“The data and the dynamic-decay theory imply that, ever since creation, the field has always lost at least half its energy every 700 years. (The next slide) illustrates the factors involved. The maximum energy in the figure comes from another theory I proposed about the nature of the field when God created the earth, a theory which successfully predicted space probe measurements of planetary magnetic fields. Extrapolating today's energy decay rate back (along the dotted straight line labeled "free decay") to that limit yields a maximum age of 8700 years.”

“According to the dynamic-decay theory, the true age would be less than that because of extra losses during the reversals and fluctuations. The solid line (labeled "dynamic decay") shows that with a significant loss of energy during the Genesis flood, the age of the field would be about 6000 years.” --- (Russell Humphreys, Ph.D.)



For more detail on how the chart was scientifically comprised, visit http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-242.htm.

http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-242.htm


The Genesis flood

The Genesis flood would have greatly upset the carbon balance. The flood buried a huge amount of carbon, which became coal, oil, etc., lowering the total 12C in the

biosphere. The 14C is also proportionally lowered at this time, but whereas no terrestrial process generates any more 12C, 14C is continually being produced, and at a rate which does not depend on carbon levels. Therefore, the 14C level relative

to 12C increases after the flood. So the 14C/12C ratio in plants/animals/ the atmosphere before the flood had to be lower than what it is now.

Also, volcanoes emit much CO2 depleted in 14C. Since the flood was accompanied by much volcanism, fossils formed in the early post-flood period would give

radiocarbon ages older than they really are.

In summary, the carbon-14 method, when corrected for the effects of the flood, can give useful results, but needs to be applied carefully. It does not give dates of millions of years and when corrected properly fits well with the biblical flood.


The Genesis flood

What About Carbon DatingOther Radiometric Dating Methods

There are various other radiometric dating methods used today to give ages of millions or billions of years for rocks. These techniques, unlike carbon dating, mostly use the relative concentrations of parent and daughter product in radioactive decay chains. For example, potassium-40 decays to argon-40; uranium-238 decays to lead-206 via other elements like radium; uranium-235 decays to lead-207; rabidium-87 decays to strontium-87; etc. These techniques are applied to igneous rocks, and are normally seen as giving the time since solidification.

The isotope concentrations can be measured very accurately, but isotope concentrations are not dates.

To derive ages from such measurements, improvable assumptions have to be made, such as:

1. The starting conditions are known (isotopes present at start).

2. Decay rates have always been constant

3. Systems were closed or isolated so that no parent or daughter isotopes were lost or added.

For in-depth comments: Science In Christian Perspective

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Wiens.html#page%203

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Wiens.html#page%203


Radiometric dating can be compared to an hourglass. When the glass is turned over, sand runs from the top to the bottom. Radioactive atoms are like individual grains of sand--radioactive decays are like the falling of grains from the top to the bottom of the glass. You cannot predict exactly when any one particular grain will get to the bottom, but you can predict from one time to the next how long the whole pile of sand takes to fall. Once all of the sand has fallen out of the top, the hourglass will no longer keep time unless it is turned over again. Similarly, when all the atoms of the radioactive element are gone, the rock will no longer keep time (unless it receives a new batch of radioactive atoms).


The rate of loss of sand from the top of an hourglass compared to exponential type of decay of radioactive elements. Most processes that we are familiar with are like sand in an hourglass. In exponential decay the amount of material decreases by half during each half-life. After two half-lives one-fourth remains, after three half-lives, one-eighth, etc. As shown in the bottom panel, the daughter element or isotope amount increases rapidly at first and more slowly with each succeeding half life.

What About Carbon DatingDifferent Dating Techniques Should

Consistently Agree

If the dating methods are an objective and reliable means of determining ages, they should agree.

Method “Age”

Six potassium-argon model ages 10,000 years to 117 Ma

Five rubidium-strontium ages 1,230-1,390 Ma

Rubidium-strontium isochron 1,340 Ma

Lead-lead isochron 2,600 Ma

Radiometric “ages,” using different methods, for basaltic rocks most geologists accept as only thousands of years old, from the Uinkaret Plateau of the Grand

Canyon (Ma = millions of years).

What About Carbon Dating

We should remember God’s admonition to Job,

“Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?” (Job 38:4).

Different Dating Techniques Should Consistently Agree

In Australia, some wood found in Tertiary basalt was clearly buried in the lava flow that formed the basalt, as can be seen from the charring. The wood was “dated” by radiocarbon (14C) analysis at about 45,000 years old, but the basalt was “dated” by the potassium-argon method at 45 million years old.

Isotope ratios of uraninite crystals from the Koongarra uranium body in the Northern Territory of Australia gave lad-lead isochron ages of 841+ 140 Ma. This contrasts with an age of 1550-1650 Ma based on other isotope ratios, and ages of 275, 61, 0, 0, and 0 Ma from thorium/lead (232Th/208Pb) ratios in five uraninite grains. The latter figures are significant because thorium-derived dates should be the more reliable, since thorium is less mobile than the uranium minerals that are the parents of the lead isotopes in the lead-lead system. The “zero” ages in this case are consistent with the Bible.

What About Carbon DatingDifferent Dating Techniques Should

Consistently Agree

Carbon dating in many cases seriously embarrasses evolutionist by giving ages that are much younger than those expected from their model of earth history. A specimen older than 50,000 years should have too little 14C to measure.

Laboratories that measure 14C would like a source of organic material with zero 14C to use as a blank to check that their lab procedures do not add 14C. Coal is an obvious candidate because the youngest coal is supposed to be millions of years old, and most of it is supposed to be tens of hundreds of millions of years old. Such old coal should be devoid of 14C. It isn’t. No source of coal has been found that completely lacks 14C.

Many Physical Evidences Contradict the “Billions of Years”

•Evidence for rapid formation of geological strata, as in the biblical flood…

•Red blood cells and hemoglobin have been found in some (unfossilized!) dinosaur bone. But these could not last more than a few thousand years – certainly not the 65 Ma since the last dinosaurs lived, according to evolutionists.

•The earth’s magnetic field has been decaying so fast that it looks like it is less than 10,000 years old. Rapid reversals during the flood year and fluctuations shortly after would have caused the field energy to drop even faster.

•Radioactive decay releases helium into the atmosphere, but not much is escaping. The total amount in the atmosphere is only 1/2000th of that expected f the atmosphere were really billions of years old.

•The moon is slowly receding from earth at about 4 cm (10 inches) per year, and this rate would have been greater in the past. But even if the moon had started receding from being in contact with the earth, it would have taken only 1.37 billion years to reach its present distance from the earth. This gives a maximum age of the moon, not the actual age. Evolutionists claim the moon is 4.6 billion years old.

•Salt is entering the sea much faster than it is escaping. The sea is not nearly salty enough for this to have been happening for billions of years.

A few more interesting facts

1980 Mt. St. Helen erupted

The Lava Dome is about 20 years old. Creationists took samples of this lava to labs to be tested without telling them where it was from.

The results: 350,000 to 2.8 million years old

Method used: potassium-argon dating

Volcanic flow in Hawaii from 160 years ago was taken to labs to be tested.The results: 170 million years old

Conclusion

There are many lines of evidence that the radiometric dates are not the objective evidence for an old earth that many claim, and that the world is really only thousands of years

old. We don’t have all the answers, but we do have the sure testimony of the Word of God to the true history of the world.

how old is the earth?

Documents