YECs believe that the Earth is "young", on the order of 6,000 to 10,000 years old,[30] rather than the age of 4.54 billion years calculated by modern geology using geochronological methods including radiometric dating.

Oh I know that you might say well what about this carbon dating which says that the earth has been in existence millions of years, well one thing that you have to remember is that the material which goes up to make the earth has indeed been in existence for much longer than the earth in its present form. You cannot create matter, for it has always been in existence, but the earth has not.

On February 23, 1987, a supernova, which is a vast star explosion, was observed. It was known as SN 1987A. About eight months after the explosion was observed, reflections from the explosion were seen in a distant gas cloud ring that circled the supernova. The ring can be seen as an orange circle in the photo above. The reason the reflected light was delayed eight months was that it took time for the light to travel from the supernova to the distant gas clouds and then to reflect from there back to earth. (See illustration below.) And so we can conclude that it took about eight months--or 0.66 years-- to journey from the supernova to the gas ring. Knowing the time it took to reach the ring, and knowing the speed of light, we can calculate the distance to the ring. Knowing this distance, and measuring the angle between the supernova and the reflection as seen from the earth, we can use simple trigonometry to calculate the distance of the supernova from the earth. Astronomers have calculated that the distance is so large that it took light 169,000 years to make that journey.

So if you think the universe is 6000 years old, how is it that we can see this supernova and the reflected light? The light had to travel for 169,000 years to reach earth. It must have left the supernova long before the traditional date of Creation, 4000 BC. Can you see how most of us conclude the universe is more than 6000 years old?

Some will suggest that God made the universe complete with a beam of light from the stars to the earth. The actual light that arrives here would have never left the stars, but would have been created midway. It would be like a truckload of Florida oranges that made it to Vermont in 1 hour because the truck and the oranges aboard had been created out of nothing 20 miles away from Vermont. But if this had happened, then the truck does not have oranges from Florida onboard. It would be carrying oranges that had been created enroute. Similarly, if the light was created enroute, the light would not have actually come from the stars.

There is a big problem with this view. We are not merely seeing a simple beam of light. We see events such as this supernova explosion in the light that arrives. Did these explosions really occur? If the light was created part way between the star and the earth in such a way that it looked like an explosion, then it seems that the creator was deceptive. For to create light that looks like an elaborate explosion, when no such explosion really happened, would be deceitful. If the creator was deceptive, would he blame us for being fooled by the deception he made?

If we were to assume that the Bible was God's perfect revelation, but that the light from the stars was deceiving us, how could we trust such a God's written revelation? For if God's physical evidence is deceptive, could not the written evidence also be deceptive?

On one hand, what is written in the bible isn't necessarily the word of God, it is the word of man and how he interprets what God has shown and said.

On the other hand, how science interprets everything is dependent on its past formulas and knowledge - therefore it is flawed and can and has been incorrect.

Can we know for sure that the Universe is as old as science suggests without observing it?

Originally posted by Anuberial
reply to post by Nventual

---

First of all, the Bible is the word of God...It is true that man wrote it, but God told them what to say and how to write it. They did not just interpret it

Where in the bible does it say the earth is 6,000 to 10,000 years old?

What if there was a great fire on earth, and carbon developed faster, making carbon dating look much older.

How long does a molten material take to cool off and form into rock. Days, maybe weeks. Not millions of years.

By the way, what is your purpose?

So...what say you Christians?

"In the beginning"...so was it the beginning or not?

YEC is normally characterized as opposing evolution, though it also opposes many claims and theories in the fields of physics and chemistry (especially absolute dating methods), geology, astronomy, cosmology, molecular biology, genomics, linguistics, anthropology, archaeology, dendrochronology and any other fields of science that have developed theories or made claims incompatible with the Young Earth version of world history.

Focusing on precise phrasing when you're working with a translated copy is bound to have issues.

Day is a man-made Earth-time. One day on Earth is not the same as one day in Mars, or Jupiter, or wherever else.

Originally posted by CHA0S
reply to post by Unregistered

---

Day is a man-made Earth-time. One day on Earth is not the same as one day in Mars, or Jupiter, or wherever else.

I think since he placed us on Earth, and the bible was made for us to follow...we can safely say he wasn't referring to a day on Uranus...