How old is the earth?

[CrowCross]

@CrowCross

Augustine interpreted the "days" of creation in Genesis allegorically, not literally as 24-hour periods. He believed that God created everything simultaneously, and the six days described in Genesis 1 represent how creation unfolded in a temporal, rather than a literal, sense. He saw the six days as a way to present the process of creation in a way that humans could understand, not as a literal timeline of events.

In the epistle of Barnabas...one of the guys who hung out with Paul presents each day of creation being just that....a day. Because his letter isn't in the bible doesn't mean it wasn't correct. At any rate it shows what Barnabas and others believed.

Here is what Barnabas wrote...

Barnabas 15:3
Of the Sabbath He speaketh in the beginning of the creation; And
God made the works of His hands in six days, and He ended on the
seventh day, and rested on it, and He hallowed it.

Barnabas 15:4
Give heed, children, what this meaneth; He ended in six days. He
meaneth this, that in six thousand years the Lord shall bring all
things to an end; for the day with Him signifyeth a thousand years;
and this He himself beareth me witness, saying; Behold, the day of
the Lord shall be as a thousand years. Therefore, children, in six
days, that is in six thousand years, everything shall come to an end.

Barnabas 15:5
And He rested on the seventh day. this He meaneth; when His Son
shall come, and shall abolish the time of the Lawless One, and shall
judge the ungodly, and shall change the sun and the moon and the
stars, then shall he truly rest on the seventh day.

Here Barnabas was saying one 24 hour long day will be equated to 1,000 years of mans history.
That is the sixth day will end after 6,000 years....which is pretty close to what the biblical genealogy of Bishop Ussher presented. That is according to the YEC's the earth is about 6,000 years old. This leaves 1,000 years left...which is more support, although x-tra biblical of a literal millennial reign being the being the 7th day of rest.

 

[Rella]

Are you now saying God created many men and only Adam was placed into the garden?

I am not saying many. There is no indication of that. Other translations have indicated that though.

Yes, I am saying only Adam was placed in the Garden, and I do believe there was for certain one other.

What I am also saying is We have a lineage leading back to Adam.... We are tied to him because of the plan
God gave to us that led forward for us to Jesus and prayerfully to eternity in heaven or (dont shoot me for this) the New Earth and New Heavens.

The following is not dogma to me.... But over the decades of Genesis study and the arguements with the evolutionists and the age of the earth and the big bang poppycock
I could be convinced that God created a planet(earth) when the rest of the space creations came into being and wanted life on it that was not intended to do other then be for His (their) enjoyment.... until..... the plan came into being that
needed a start and that start was Adam and Eve and moving forward from there.

That is just ramblings in my mind with no foundation to voice ... yet.

Now....Please read again,,,, slowly


Gen 1 :26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

Before going farther, I ask you what real-estate God gave to this man and what his duties were?
Hint. I made the type blue above to readily see. Real estate = over all the earth Duties = let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

Gen 1:28 Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”

Do you see how the instructions are repeated here from Gen 1:26?... adding the be fruitful and multiply.
We are not told how many man God created on that day.

NIV translation says So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. Plural ????
NLT translation says So God created human beings in his own image. In the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. Which is definitely plural
Contemporary English Translation says So God created humans to be like himself; he made men and women. Which is definitely plural

Gods Word Translation So God created humans in his image. In the image of God he created them. He created them male and female. Plural again
And just a very quick post for you to see without comment All, indicative of plural.
Good News Translation
So God created human beings, making them to be like himself. He created them male and female,

International Standard Version
So God created mankind in his own image; in his own image God created them; he created them male and female.

NET Bible
God created humankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them, male and female he created them.

New Heart English Bible
And God created humankind in his own image. In God's image he created him; male and female he created them.

New American Bible
God created mankind in his image; in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

New Revised Standard Version
So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

Genesis 2
Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.
No woman was made yet
Gen 2:8 The LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden, and there He put the man whom He had formed.
This is the real-estate God gave to Adam, because God placed him there, still without a woman
Gen 2: 15 Then the LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to tend and keep it.

These are the duties that were given to Adam. .. in the garden of Eden to tend and keep it.
Still without a woman.
Gen 2:18 And the LORD God said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.”
Finally.
Gen 2:19 Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name.
Gen 2:20 So Adam gave names to all cattle, to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper comparable to him.
Gen 1 male and female were mentioned together, Gen 2 it seems as if Adam was created
with out the need for a woman.... until no other helper was found.
Gen 2:22 Then the rib which the LORD God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man.
Gen 2:24 Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

A completely different scenario then in Genesis 1.

 

[Hazelelponi]

That's all good stuff...but that isn't the context of Eve was the mother of all.

First, what you just stated is not what Scripture says. The Bible says:

"The man called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living." Genesis 3:20 (ESV)

If Eve is called life or life-producer by Adam because she is the mother of the living, it helps to understand what it means to be alive in the first place, which is what I shared from Scripture in post #367.

Once we recognize "the living" we better understand the meaning of the verse in question.

 

[QVQ]

If you traced a particular family surname back to one man (because the lineage of anyone else with that name had died out), you wouldn't conclude that the name started with him or that nobody else at the time shared it. Perhaps others did share that surname,

OK There were tribes named Smith Jones Nelson...
All the descendents of all tribes except Smith died out or were absorbed by Smith
So mt Eve was a member of the tribe (Smith) and she had parents (Smith)
There isn't any index one, initial
So there isn't any beginning.
The Age of the Earth would be infinity

Or out of the ooze, single cell organism organized by and in the ooze. Those acquired mutations and differentiated into all the forms
So there was an Index One perhaps not two alike, created by the conditions of the ooze.
That would make the Age of the Earth however long it took the ooze to manufacture all the single organisms, plus how long it took to differentiate all the single ooze organisms into the complex creatures that inhabit the planet.
That is est 3 billion years for the initial organisms to arise in the ooze, then est 3.5 billion to man +another billion or so just for luck
The billions just keep adding up

The Age of the Earth either way is an unknowable Infinity.

But the earth is 4.5 billion years old according to my search engine.

Personally, I don't believe that Eve in the Garden was an ameoba in the ooze.

Just some random thoughts, the view expressed above are not necessarily the views of the management.
Just exploring various themes of the Topic How old is the earth.

 

[CrowCross]

I am not saying many. There is no indication of that. Other translations have indicated that though.

Yes, I am saying only Adam was placed in the Garden, and I do believe there was for certain one other.

What I am also saying is We have a lineage leading back to Adam.... We are tied to him because of the plan
God gave to us that led forward for us to Jesus and prayerfully to eternity in heaven or (dont shoot me for this) the New Earth and New Heavens.

The following is not dogma to me.... But over the decades of Genesis study and the arguements with the evolutionists and the age of the earth and the big bang poppycock
I could be convinced that God created a planet(earth) when the rest of the space creations came into being and wanted life on it that was not intended to do other then be for His (their) enjoyment.... until..... the plan came into being that
needed a start and that start was Adam and Eve and moving forward from there.

That is just ramblings in my mind with no foundation to voice ... yet.

Now....Please read again,,,, slowly


Gen 1 :26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

Before going farther, I ask you what real-estate God gave to this man and what his duties were?
Hint. I made the type blue above to readily see. Real estate = over all the earth Duties = let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

Gen 1:28 Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”

Do you see how the instructions are repeated here from Gen 1:26?... adding the be fruitful and multiply.
We are not told how many man God created on that day.

NIV translation says So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. Plural ????
NLT translation says So God created human beings in his own image. In the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. Which is definitely plural
Contemporary English Translation says So God created humans to be like himself; he made men and women. Which is definitely plural

Gods Word Translation So God created humans in his image. In the image of God he created them. He created them male and female. Plural again
And just a very quick post for you to see without comment All, indicative of plural.
Good News Translation
So God created human beings, making them to be like himself. He created them male and female,

International Standard Version
So God created mankind in his own image; in his own image God created them; he created them male and female.

NET Bible
God created humankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them, male and female he created them.

New Heart English Bible
And God created humankind in his own image. In God's image he created him; male and female he created them.

New American Bible
God created mankind in his image; in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

New Revised Standard Version
So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

Genesis 2
Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.
No woman was made yet
Gen 2:8 The LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden, and there He put the man whom He had formed.
This is the real-estate God gave to Adam, because God placed him there, still without a woman
Gen 2: 15 Then the LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to tend and keep it.

These are the duties that were given to Adam. .. in the garden of Eden to tend and keep it.
Still without a woman.
Gen 2:18 And the LORD God said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.”
Finally.
Gen 2:19 Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name.
Gen 2:20 So Adam gave names to all cattle, to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper comparable to him.
Gen 1 male and female were mentioned together, Gen 2 it seems as if Adam was created
with out the need for a woman.... until no other helper was found.
Gen 2:22 Then the rib which the LORD God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man.
Gen 2:24 Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

A completely different scenario then in Genesis 1.

people forget that Gen i is a description of the six day creation and what God did.
When we read Genesis 2 it for the most part focused on day 6.
it would be like saying the baseball game lasted 9 innings....BUT...this is what happened in the 6th inning.

Gen 1 tells us God made male and female....man and women on day 6.
Gen two goes into more detail and tells us how God made male and female. It explains that they were not created at the same time, but, on the same day.

 

[CrowCross]

First, what you just stated is not what Scripture says. The Bible says:

"The man called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living." Genesis 3:20 (ESV)

If Eve is called life or life-producer by Adam because she is the mother of the living, it helps to understand what it means to be alive in the first place, which is what I shared from Scripture in post #367.

Once we recognize "the living" we better understand the meaning of the verse in question.

With all due respect...you've lost me. I think your'e overcomplicating things....The verse means Eve was the mother of all humans. Obviously Adam was the father of all humans.
After the flood Noah, his wife, 3 sons and their wives became the "parents" of all the people born after the flood.

 

[CrowCross]

OK There were tribes named Smith Jones Nelson...
All the descendents of all tribes except Smith died out or were absorbed by Smith
So mt Eve was a member of the tribe (Smith) and she had parents (Smith)
There isn't any index one, initial
So there isn't any beginning.
The Age of the Earth would be infinity

Or out of the ooze, single cell organism organized by and in the ooze. Those acquired mutations and differentiated into all the forms
So there was an Index One perhaps not two alike, created by the conditions of the ooze.
That would make the Age of the Earth however long it took the ooze to manufacture all the single organisms, plus how long it took to differentiate all the single ooze organisms into the complex creatures that inhabit the planet.
That is est 3 billion years for the initial organisms to arise in the ooze, then est 3.5 billion to man +another billion or so just for luck
The billions just keep adding up

The Age of the Earth either way is an unknowable Infinity.

But the earth is 4.5 billion years old according to my search engine.

Personally, I don't believe that Eve in the Garden was an ameoba in the ooze.

Just some random thoughts, the view expressed above are not necessarily the views of the management.
Just exploring various themes of the Topic How old is the earth.

We also have to keep in mind Eve was made for Adams rib.....which is the furthest thing from evolutionism.

 

[Hazelelponi]

The verse means Eve was the mother of all humans

Absolutely nowhere does the verse state that.

That is what you have read into the text. Jesus does not equate living to mere biological life alone, but to covenantal life, and it's the same with the apostles and the prophets.

Happy to refer you back to post #367 again.

 

[CrowCross]

Absolutely nowhere does the verse state that.

That is what you have read into the text. Jesus does not equate living to mere biological life alone, but to covenantal life.

??????? what are you talking about? The verse means Eve was the mother of all people. Eve has babies, who had babies, who had babies...

I'm not sure what you really think....and I don't think you're really know what you think...but I do know the way you try to interpret the verse isn't the intention of the verse.

Even the 'scientific world" understand the meaning of Eve being the mother of all people with their mitochondrial Eve being the first mother concept.

 

[Hazelelponi]

what are you talking about?

Find me the words mother of all humans in the verse. It's Genesis 3:20
.

 

[CrowCross]

Find me the words mother of all humans in the verse. It's Genesis 3:20
.

The humans are the living...or are you saying Eve is also the mother of kangaroos and penguins?

 

[Hazelelponi]

The humans are the living...or are you saying Eve is also the mother of kangaroos and penguins?

Adam names Eve “life” not merely because she births children—but because, in God's redemptive plan, through her would come the Seed who gives life to the dead (cf. Galatians 4:4, 1 Corinthians 15:22).

So Eve is the “mother of all the living”—where the living, in God’s covenantal language, are those who belong to the line of promise, a line that leads to Christ, and through Him, to eternal life.

 

[CrowCross]

Adam names Eve “life” not merely because she births children—but because, in God's redemptive plan, through her would come the Seed who gives life to the dead (cf. Galatians 4:4, 1 Corinthians 15:22).

So Eve is the “mother of all the living”—where the living, in God’s covenantal language, are those who belong to the line of promise, a line that leads to Christ, and through Him, to eternal life.

Are you claiming all of the human race isn't the progeny of Adam and Eve?

 

[EarlyActs]

OK There were tribes named Smith Jones Nelson...
All the descendents of all tribes except Smith died out or were absorbed by Smith
So mt Eve was a member of the tribe (Smith) and she had parents (Smith)
There isn't any index one, initial
So there isn't any beginning.
The Age of the Earth would be infinity

Or out of the ooze, single cell organism organized by and in the ooze. Those acquired mutations and differentiated into all the forms
So there was an Index One perhaps not two alike, created by the conditions of the ooze.
That would make the Age of the Earth however long it took the ooze to manufacture all the single organisms, plus how long it took to differentiate all the single ooze organisms into the complex creatures that inhabit the planet.
That is est 3 billion years for the initial organisms to arise in the ooze, then est 3.5 billion to man +another billion or so just for luck
The billions just keep adding up

The Age of the Earth either way is an unknowable Infinity.

But the earth is 4.5 billion years old according to my search engine.

Personally, I don't believe that Eve in the Garden was an ameoba in the ooze.

Just some random thoughts, the view expressed above are not necessarily the views of the management.
Just exploring various themes of the Topic How old is the earth.

1, the term mutation is used as though it improves things. It does not. Mutations cause chromosomal deterioration, to quote Dr. J. Seegert, The Starting Point.

He gives three 'editorial' analogies. 1st, in ch 2 of your book, you double all the appearances of the letter e.
2nd, in ch 3, you continue #1 and delete all appearances of the letter r.
3rd, in ch 4, you continue #2 and you switch all appearancs of the letter t with the letter j.

That is mutation in action, and even a child can see that it would ruin things.

2, here is an alternate cosmology which I find entirely supportable by Scripture and nature. The earth was already there from the 'spreading out' event, and already water covered. There may be other objects in distant space that are water covered. Webb found something 1000 LYA that has water.

But the 'spreading out' was not creation week's 7 days. It was before. The English term heavens confuses us because it was much more confined to local, moving objects. That's why 'kavov' or stars is only once in Gen 1-11, not to be used again until ch 15, and is only in a rather dangling phrase in 1:16, which may not even be adverbial.

There may have been microorganisms already in earth, but when God creates life, it is thriving and complete immediately. The verb is 'swarm with swarms.'

I do not know have a way to date the 'spreading out' but I do realize that carbon is traceable for 56K years, and that starlight, as mentioned on Day 1, could have traveled merely 9 years, if it is referring to Sirius. Gen 1 appears to me to be consistently from the earth POV, not omniscient, and if Sirius' emitting light is part of a wider event, there is a way to put the 'spreading out's start further back, while creation week is still recent and "lively."

 

[QVQ]

Dr. J. Seegert, The Starting Point.

I am unfamiliar with Dr. Seegert.
Interesting post but I will have to do research before I am able to comment.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Are you claiming all of the human race isn't the progeny of Adam and Eve?

As we seem to have moved past the Bible verse in question, I take it you understand it now?

 

[John Bauer]

I am unfamiliar with Dr. Seegert.

As a source, Jay Seegert is about as trustworthy as AI models (e.g., Gemini). I have one of his books—Creation and Evolution: Compatible or in Conflict? (2014)—and it is fraught with errors. Pursue with caution.

 

[CrowCross]

As we seem to have moved past the Bible verse in question, I take it you understand it now?

Nope.....the claim is Eve wasn't the mother of all humans...because she was only part of the human progeny line as there were other mothers around to give birth...

So, what you did was insert the meaning to be Eve would be the mother of all people saved because Jesus was in her progeny.

Dong this allows you to create a false biblical narrative that suggest Adam and Eve were not the first humans.

So, besides your strange take of Gen 3:20 The man called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.....where else does the bible say there were other people around when Adam was created, placed in the garden then Eve formed from his rib?

 

[EarlyActs]

I am unfamiliar with Dr. Seegert.
Interesting post but I will have to do research before I am able to comment.

Among others, a leading creationist with several European Ph.Ds, Dr. Wilder-Smith, said that 'evolution is unknown to the universe' for similar reasons.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Nope.....the claim is Eve wasn't the mother of all humans.

To my knowledge this entire exchange has been centered upon a single verse, that of Genesis 3:20, and the interpretation thereof.

I haven't spoken to you about anything else. Just a single verse.

How I might view and interpret several additional verses together in light of the whole of Scripture has not even been on the radar and honestly won't be anytime soon from the looks of it.

I have only discussed how to interpret life and what it means to be living, A single word, in a single sentence. It's important, because this is covenantal.