Zone1 How old is the Earth in your opinion?

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Rainbows are circles. They are not flat.

All circles are flat. Calling a rainbow a circle is colloquial. Don't be silly.

And here we see no disc with a circle around it...

Correct. The Bible verse was wrong and what we should expect.

 

[toobfreak]

I know. What shape do you think the earth is?

If you really wanna know, Ram, it is technically called an oblate spheroid. That and $1.39 will buy you a cup of coffee.

Ecclesiastics 1:6 The wind blows​

And I can testify to that as well... the wind definitely blows.

 

[toobfreak]

This was in 1931 I believe, when he saw that the universe was expanding. It led him to understand that time was a dimension.

Well, the Hale telescope on Palomar Mountain was completed in the late 40s I believe and Einstein died in the mid-50s.

But astronomer Hubble deduced the expanding universe from his study of galaxies in the 40s I think. But the whole time thing, I believe that again all goes back to Einstein around the turn of the century.

Do you know that no one would even read Einstein's papers? Einstein would have remained anonymous and relativity undiscovered if not for one man who picked up one of Einstein's papers, actually read it, and saw the potential in it for what it implied.

 

[otto105]

There is however, scriptural evidence that the seven days of creation are 1000 years each. The earth already existed prior to the seven days of creation so this does not include the creation of the earth.

In the Bible we read:

2 Peter 3:8
8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

God told Adam that in the day that he eats of the forbidden fruit that he would surely die. According to our time of reckoning, Adam lived to be 930 years old (see Genesis 5:5). If one day to the Lord was 1000 years of our time, then Adam would have died in the very day of the Lord that he partook of the fruit.



Abraham 3:4
4 And the Lord said unto me, by the Urim and Thummim, that Kolob was after the manner of the Lord, according to its times and seasons in the revolutions thereof; that one revolution was a day unto the Lord, after his manner of reckoning, it being one thousand years according to the time appointed unto that whereon thou standest. This is the reckoning of the Lord’s time, according to the reckoning of Kolob.

Abraham 5:12-13
12 And the Gods commanded the man, saying: Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat,
13 But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it; for in the time that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die. Now I, Abraham, saw that it was after the Lord’s time, which was after the time of Kolob; for as yet the Gods had not appointed unto Adam his reckoning.

According to these verses, Adam had not been given his time of reckoning all the way up to the time he was placed into the Garden of Eden. Abraham verifies that it was after the time of Kolob which was after the Lord's time which was a thousand of our years being equivalent to 1 day according to the Lord's time. From all this scriptural evidence, the seven days of creation (which did not include the creation of the earth) was seven thousand years of our time.

No, the bible counts a day as 24-hours and a week is 7 days.

 

[The Irish Ram]

All circles are flat. Calling a rainbow a circle is colloquial. Don't be silly.



Correct. The Bible verse was wrong and what we should expect.

What shape do you think a rainbow is? Never mind. It's not important.

We are just going to have to agree to disagree. This thread has run its course, and is going nowhere...

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

What shape do you think a rainbow is?

Yes, colloquially, it is a circle. We agree.

The use of "circle" in the Bible verse was colloquial. Obviously. "The circle of the Earth". Colloquial or otherwise, it shows they had not a single clue the Earth is a spheroid.

We might both call a rainbow a circle. Would you call this a square? No, you wouldn't.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Well, the Hale telescope on Palomar Mountain was completed in the late 40s I believe and Einstein died in the mid-50s.

But astronomer Hubble deduced the expanding universe from his study of galaxies in the 40s I think. But the whole time thing, I believe that again all goes back to Einstein around the turn of the century.

Do you know that no one would even read Einstein's papers? Einstein would have remained anonymous and relativity undiscovered if not for one man who picked up one of Einstein's papers, actually read it, and saw the potential in it for what it implied.

AI Overview

Yes, Edwin Hubble showed Albert Einstein the expanding universe, first through data in 1929 (galaxies moving apart), convincing Einstein, and then in person when Hubble invited him to the Mount Wilson Observatory around 1930-1931, where Einstein looked through the giant telescope and acknowledged the universe's beginning, calling his earlier static model idea his "biggest blunder

 

[Votto]

nobody yet voted for those 6000 years

Because the Bible does not say that anywhere in the text perhaps.

In fact, if the Bible was trying to imply that the earth was made in 6 literal days, what does this verse mean in Genesis?

Genesis 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens,

Be honest, you started this thread specifically to try and draw that crowd out

Admit it.

 

[toobfreak]

Yes, Edwin Hubble showed Albert Einstein the expanding universe, first through data in 1929 (galaxies moving apart), convincing Einstein, and then in person when Hubble invited him to the Mount Wilson Observatory around 1930-1931, where Einstein looked through the giant telescope and acknowledged the universe's beginning, calling his earlier static model idea his "biggest blunder

Yeahbut, I'm not arguing what telescope Hubble used to demo Einstein with, I was just saying that the biggest telescope around in Einstein's latter years had to be the Hale on Mt. Palomar.

 

[braalian]

There are different opinions about this.

I wonder what you believe.

You can’t have “opinions” about facts

 

[onefour1]

No, the bible counts a day as 24-hours and a week is 7 days.

During the days of the creation each day was reckoned according to God's time which according to Abraham 5:12-13 one day under the Lord's time is 1000 of our years. The head Apostle Peter taught this same principle in 2 Peter 3:8:

2 Peter 3:8
8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

God did not give Adam and Eve their time of reckoning until after the 7 days of creation.

Abraham 5:12-13
12 And the Gods commanded the man, saying: Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat,
13 But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it; for in the time that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die. Now I, Abraham, saw that it was after the Lord’s time, which was after the time of Kolob; for as yet the Gods had not appointed unto Adam his reckoning.

When Adam and Eve partook of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, they were under the reckoning of God's time. So when God told Adam that if he partook of the forbidden fruit he would die in the very same time or day:


Genesis 2:17
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Did Adam die the very day he partook of the fruit according to our current time of reckoning? NO!! According to Genesis 5:5 Adam lived to 930 years old according to our current time of reckoning. However, according to the Lord's time of reckoning, Adam died the very day God said he would.

Genesis 5:5
And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.

So until Adam was given his and our current time of reckoning, the creation period and the counting of Adam's lifespan was according to God's time which is 1 day of the Lord's time = 1000 years of our current time of reckoning. Thus Peter knew what he was saying when he gave the message of 2 Peter 3:8.

 

[Zebra]

Does anybody think …. 6.000 years?

 

[Ace Nova]

I've thought about this often. My conclusion is that although "it could be" over 4 billion years old - I doubt it is - not in realty, anyway.

I am intrigued by science and I am grateful for the vast amount of dedicated and hard work they have put into the field.

That said - Science is (primarily) based from the "observable" data that they collect, test and so forth.

I am quite surprised that no one in the quantum physics area of science has (at the very least) hypothesized that the Earth and Universe could be substantially younger than what the traditional scientific community has theorized through physical observation.

My question is quite simple - quantum physics states that the further and faster an object leaves Earth, the more "time will slow down" for that object. If the object comes within the proximity of a black hole - time will almost "freeze" as compared to what it is on Earth. By the time the object comes back to Earth, hundreds of thousands of years could have passed on Earth but yet it only took the object a few hundred years to make it's round trip journey (in its own calculated interior time).

Astronomers currently view the Universe as being between 8 and 12 billion years old.

If an object traveling from Earth for a few hundred years and comes within the perimeter of a black hole- barely leaving the solar system - then returns to see that over one hundred thousand years passed on Earth - how much time would have passed on Earth if that object traveled for 1000 years? 10,000 years, 100,000 years? - coming within the perimeters of black holes - then returning...a few million years in its own time compare dto the time on Earth? Maybe more?

Science believes that the Universe came about from the "Big Bang".

For me, it is clear as day that if or when the "Big Bang" occurred - nothing existed - including time. The expansion of the Universe in our current 3 dimensional Universe is what "created time" as we view it and understand it.

Quantum physics also theorizes the high probability of there being multiple dimensions. For example, a person viewing our 3 dimensional Universe from a "5th dimension" could view it the same way we view a one dimensional video game. That person could watch the Big bang occur and the expansion of the Universe in a matter of hours or a few days but in our 3 dimensional Universe, over 8 billion years could have passed.

So for me the answer is simple: The Universe can be both 6000 years old or 8 billion years old. (or anything in between).

All depending from where a person exists and/or views it.

This understanding supports both the "Big Bang Theory" of science - viewing the Universe from our 3 dimensional Earth - in which time has always existed AND the Biblical 7 Day Creation where NOTHING existed, including time UNTIL "Light" was created and separated from Darkness - aka "The Big Bang".

If there was a "Creator" in control of the "Big Bang" the "Creator" would naturally exist outside the 3 dimensional Universe that created time through expansion,

What takes 8 billion years in our 3 dimensional Universe to exist (as we perceive it) would only take a "Creator" existing outside of our 3 dimensional Universe a few days to observe and/or create.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I am quite surprised that no one in the quantum physics area of science has (at the very least) hypothesized that the Earth and Universe could be substantially younger than what the traditional scientific community has theorized through physical observation.

Because they would be laughed out of the room and lose all credibility, forever.

Science relies on determinism and testability of hypotheses. Your untestable, essentially magical ideas are really no different than saying, oh perhaps, a rainbow unicorn controls the speed of time with his rainbow heartbeat. And his heartbeat used to be faster. So we perceive a longer amount of time, since the big bang.

OK. Maybe that is true. But it isn't a scientific idea, so ... well... better start looking for a new career, Dr.....

 

[Zebra]

Zero of 27 say 6000

 

[Ace Nova]

Because they would be laughed out of the room and lose all credibility, forever.

I don't think anyone would laugh at them. Do they laugh at each other when discussing "The Problem of Time"?

Problem of time - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

In theoretical physics, the problem of time is a conceptual conflict between quantum mechanics and general relativity. Quantum mechanics regards the flow of time as universal and absolute, whereas general relativity regards the flow of time as malleable and relative. This problem raises the question of what time really is in a physical sense and whether it is truly a real, distinct phenomenon. It also involves the related question of why time seems to flow in a single direction, despite the fact that no known physical laws at the microscopic level seem to require a single direction.

 

[Trickster]

Earth is older than God.

 

[Ace Nova]

Earth is older than God.

What came first, the chicken or the egg?

"The egg came first but it was "laid" by something else - something no one would consider as being a chicken."

- Neil Degrasse Tyson

 

[Trickster]

What came first, the chicken or the egg?

"The egg came first but it was "laid" by something else - something no one would consider as being a chicken."

- Neil Degrasse Tyson

Cute.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I don't think anyone would laugh at them.

I promise you that it is what would happen.

Try it.