creation around 7,000 BC?

One hot topic to many christians is how old the earth really is and are the 7 days in genesis literal. Well one interesting passage in the gospel of luke shows Jesus ancesters all the way to adam the first male human. In all 77 people times that by 100 and you get 7,700. Now those people lived up to various years some to 50, 35, adam and noah lived passed a 100 so this is a rough estimate. Just a little something ive been thinking about discuss

The universe’s age in Genesis is measured by a different view of time from our usual view, until Adam.

Good News: Jesus Christ was born on December 25, 1 BC.
Bad News: Ussher’s Date for Adam at 4004 BC is Wrong

It’s not that simple!

“Begat” or “begot” does not mean the son of, or the father of, so and so.

“Begat” means the ancestor of. This sometimes means several generations missing, although in some cases, there are clear links to denote one or two generations because the ‘ancestor’ is said to have died with the number of years since the death given whilst the next link was sojourning wherever, or said to be doing something.

:cool:

Jewish tradition considers a generation to be 40 years. With that in mind, if one is going to treat it all as literal the world would have been created 6 days before B.C. 3080. However, numerology was also important to the Hebrew people. The number seven implied completeness, so 77 could just be used to imply a ‘total completion’ of the age before Christ. I have said this on several other threads: it is important to read the bible wearing our “Ancient Hebrew” goggles. When we read it with our “2008 A.D. Christian” goggles, things are pretty blurry, out of focus, and wide open to all sorts of thoughts about what they could mean.

I often use Matthew 1:1 as an example: “A record of the genealogy of Jesus Christ the son of David, the son of Abraham”. Just a few people missing there! :slight_smile:

rossum

Perfect example!

Without “the fullness of truth” interpreting it, many would just say, “SEE? It’s a rubbish book, full of mistakes!!”…

Oh, uhmm…many do!

:cool:

The following might be of interest to you:

The Egypt of Osiris

‘Semiramis was very highly honoured in Egypt where, by her intrigues and diabolical arts, she greatly contributed to the spread of idolatry. I saw her in Memphis, where human sacrifices are common, plotting and practicing magic and astrology. It was Semiramis who here planned the first pyramid; it was built on the eastern bank of the Nile. The whole nation had to assist in its construction…This building was the centre of Egyptian idolatry, astrology, witchcraft and abominable impurity. Astrologers and necromancers calling up spirits of the dead dwelt in the pyramid and there had diabolical visions…But I saw that, even at the coming of Semiramis to Memphis, these people, in their pride had designedly confused the calendar. Their ambition was to take precedence of all other nations in point of time. With this end in view, they drew up a number of complicated calendars and royal genealogical tables.
By this and frequent changes in their computations, order and true chronology were lost. That this confusion might be firmly established, they perpetuated every error by inscriptions and the erection of great buildings. For a long time they reckoned the ages of father and son, as if the date of the former’s demise were that of the latter’s birth. The kings, who waged constant war with the priests on the subject of chronology, inserted among their forefathers the names of persons that never existed. Thus the four kings of the same name who reigned simultaneously in Thebes, Heliopolis, Memphis and Sais were in accordance with the design, reckoned one after the other.
I saw too that once they reckoned nine hundred and seventy days to a year, and again, years were computed as months. I saw a pagan priest drawing up a chronological table in which for every five hundred years, eleven hundred were set down.
I saw these false computations of the pagan priests at the same time as I beheld Jesus teaching the Sabbath at Aruma. Jesus, speaking before the Pharisees of the Call of Abraham and his sojourn in Egypt, exposed the errors of the Egyptian calendar. He told them that the world had now existed 4028 years. When I heard Jesus say this, He was Himself thirty-one years old.’
— Katarina Emmerick (1774-1823), the Augustinian nun who bore the stigmata, received many visions of past events including the above. From her recall Mel Gibson acquired details used in his film The Passion of the Christ.

Emmerick was spot on –
In the Scriptures and one finds the following: Adam 5 days, Noah and the flood 1056 years (2941 BC), Abraham 1950, Exodus 2540, birth of Jesus 3997, death of Jesus 4030, fall of Jerusalem 4070, the year 2000AD 5997 and so on.

its says son of in my bible

Creation began before Adam. Do you wish to discuss how long ago Adam was created or how long ago creation began?

That’s probably just how it was translated (what version?).

I like the Christ, son of David, son of Abraham example.:smiley:

I grabbed this from my Douay-Rheims Challoner edition. This coming from a Historical and chronological index. The terms used used for dates are A.M(anno mundi) meaning year of the world and A.D(anno domine) meaning year of the Lord. The first date is A.M. 1 with Adam and ending 3934 with Joseph. The New Testament begins with A.D. 1 with Christ’s birth and ending with 96 with the Death of St. John. We live in 2008 so you do the math. This adds up to 5942 years not counting the gap between the birth of Joseph and the birth of Jesus. So to say that that creation of the earth and man is relatively young in my opinion. I continue to disagree with Evolution and scientist on the age of the earth. I will continue to believe what the Bible says on creation and how old the earth is before anything else

What we call a "day" in Genesis should probably be translated more accurately as "period" because the Hebrew word meant both at the time, so yea, the world is probably a lot older than that.

[quote="Giga1992, post:13, topic:135892"]
What we call a "day" in Genesis should probably be translated more accurately as "period" because the Hebrew word meant both at the time, so yea, the world is probably a lot older than that.

[/quote]

Plausible, but then you have the argument of how long the "period" may be!?

The funny thing is, I always thought that the Sun on the fourth day, was an error in translation, or the writer made a mistake as to it's placement in the creation period.

But the older I get, the more obvious it becomes that The Creator deliberately did that and WROTE that to remove all doubt between those who belive as Thomas (I must see it to believe it) ...and those who simply, believe!

Of course, as knowledge progresses, it points more and more towards The Author of the Scriptures, than just His 'narrative.'

:cool:

[quote="wiggbuggie, post:1, topic:135892"]
One hot topic to many christians is how old the earth really is and are the 7 days in genesis literal. Well one interesting passage in the gospel of luke shows Jesus ancesters all the way to adam the first male human. In all 77 people times that by 100 and you get 7,700. Now those people lived up to various years some to 50, 35, adam and noah lived passed a 100 so this is a rough estimate. Just a little something ive been thinking about discuss

[/quote]

Catholics are free to believe in a young earth or an old earth. I believe the earth is around 4.5 billion years old. There is clear scientific evidence to show that.

Catholics are free to believe God created everything in 6 literal 24 hour days or not. I do not take 6 days as being six 24 hour periods.

Hi.

Fundamentalist readers of Scripture turn handsprings pretending to themselves and others that the creation account in Genesis 1 and the creation account in Genesis 2 and subsequent chapters do not conflict.

But they do conflict.

Because of this and other internal difficulties in the accounts, which Fundamentalist readers of Scripture also turn handsprings ignoring, in my opinion the ages of the pre- and post-flood patriarchs in Scripture have zero historical value. Zero.

It’s not a question of God’s “years” in the creation accounts meaning something other than 365.25 days each. I don’t think that God’s “years” in the creation accounts have any meaning at all, historically.

Reality is jammed with evidence that the Earth is vastly older than Scripture provides.

My favorite piece of evidence is a string of extinct underwater volcanoes about 1,500 miles long ending in the current Hawaian Island chain. 1,500 miles long = 7,920,000 feet long = 95,040,000 inches long. If we assume crustal plate movement over the hotspot in the mantle which generated the volcanoes at 2 inches per year, that generates a time frame of 47,000,000 years just to generate the chain.

If the Earth were actually created in 7,000 B.C., then the Earth is only 9,000 years old. 95,000,000 inches -:- 9000 years equals a crustal plate movement rate of about 10,500 inches per year!!! The world would never have stopped shaking!!!

Another wonderful piece of evidence is the “Lie in the Sky Starlight Argument.”

There’s no doubt about it…relative to us, light in a vacuum always travels about 186,290 miles per second.

At that speed, light from the nearest star took a little over 4 years to get here from where the star was when the light from the star which we see in our telescopes began its trip a little over 4 years ago.

Some of the stars in the sky are so vastly far away that the light from those stars must have been traveling through space for millions of years, contradicting the creation accounts.

Fundamentalists answer this objection by saying that God must have created the light seeming to come from those stasrs in-place, so that the light never really originated from the stars, it only appears to be.

But this creates a new problem – supernovas.

In 1987, mankind watched a star violently explode in one of the galactic clouds about 70,000 light years away.

That means that the explosion actually took place about 70,000 years ago, and the light finally reached here 70,000 years later, in 1987.

But if the Universe is only 9,000 years old, then what I just said is impossible. Fundamentalists would have to say that the light of the star explosion, or supernova, was buried in the “fake star light” light stream created by God in-place in space, 9,000 years ago.

But that means that since the end of the light stream is the supernova light, then the star never existed!!!

Voila! A lie in the sky!

The Fundamentalist view of Scripture – that it is historical down to the jot and tittle, thus requires that God be a liar!

There are other arguments built into nature – for example, the radioactivity by-products evidence. For example, half of the Uranium 238 in any given deposit steadly breaks-down into Lead 206 over a period of about 4.5 billion years.

Low and behold, on the average, in the world, the ratio of Uranium 238 to Lead 206 in Uranium-bearing rock is about 50/50, suggesting that, indeed, the Earth is about 4.5 billion years of age.

Fundamentalists would have to say that that, too, is a “lie” built by God in the ground, if the time in Genesis is historically accurate.

**Liturgical Reading of Midnight Mass
Solemnity of the Nativity

From the Roman Martyrology

In the twenty-fourth day of the month of December;

In the year five-thousand one-hundred and ninety-nine from the creation of the world, when in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth;

In the year two-thousand nine-hundred and fifty-seven from the flood;

In the year two-thousand and fifty-one from the birth of Abraham;

In the year one-thousand five-hundred and ten from the going forth of the people of Israel out of Egypt under Moses;

In the year one-thousand and thirty-two from the anointing of David as king;

In the sixty-fifth week according to the prophecy of Daniel;

In the one-hundred and ninety-fourth Olympiad;

In the year seven-hundred and fifty-two from the foundation of the city of Rome;

In the forty-second year of the reign of the Emperor Octavian Augustus;

In the sixth age of the world, while the whole earth was at peace— JESUS CHRIST eternal God and the Son of the eternal Father, willing to consecrate the world by His gracious coming, having been conceived of the Holy Ghost, and the nine months of His conception being now accomplished, (all kneel) was born in Bethlehem of Judah of the Virgin Mary, made man. The birthday of our Lord Jesus Christ, according to the flesh.**

ALL FUNDAMENTALISTS NO DOUBT.

[quote="cassini, post:17, topic:135892"]
**Liturgical Reading of Midnight Mass
Solemnity of the Nativity

From the Roman Martyrology

In the twenty-fourth day of the month of December;

In the year five-thousand one-hundred and ninety-nine from the creation of the world, when in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth;

In the year two-thousand nine-hundred and fifty-seven from the flood;

In the year two-thousand and fifty-one from the birth of Abraham;

In the year one-thousand five-hundred and ten from the going forth of the people of Israel out of Egypt under Moses;

In the year one-thousand and thirty-two from the anointing of David as king;

In the sixty-fifth week according to the prophecy of Daniel;

In the one-hundred and ninety-fourth Olympiad;

In the year seven-hundred and fifty-two from the foundation of the city of Rome;

In the forty-second year of the reign of the Emperor Octavian Augustus;

In the sixth age of the world, while the whole earth was at peace— JESUS CHRIST eternal God and the Son of the eternal Father, willing to consecrate the world by His gracious coming, having been conceived of the Holy Ghost, and the nine months of His conception being now accomplished, (all kneel) was born in Bethlehem of Judah of the Virgin Mary, made man. The birthday of our Lord Jesus Christ, according to the flesh.**

ALL FUNDAMENTALISTS NO DOUBT.

[/quote]

You may be right. Jesus probably wasn't born in December...

Because the Bible offers no date for Jesus' birth, the placement of the nativity is up for debate. However, the presence of shepherds "keeping watch over their flock by night" [Luke, 2:8] suggests the birth may have actually occurred in the spring during lambing--the only time of year shepherds watched their flocks both day and night.

christmas.howstuffworks.com/traditions/christmas4.htm

**Good News: Jesus Christ was born on December 25, 1 BC.

**First we’ll give the Good News:
We have been told by source critical scholars that Jesus was probably born in 6 BC, or possibly even earlier. This was based on the information provided by Flavius Josephus that Herod died in 4 B.C. Since Herod slaughtered the infants two years old and younger, this may lead one to conjecture that the birth of Christ took place in 5 B.C. or 6 B.C.

more...

[quote="Peter_Dawson, post:16, topic:135892"]
Hi.

Reality is jammed with evidence that the Earth is vastly older than Scripture provides.

Another wonderful piece of evidence is the "Lie in the Sky Starlight Argument."

There's no doubt about it...relative to us, light in a vacuum always travels about 186,290 miles per second.

At that speed, light from the nearest star took a little over 4 years to get here from where the star was when the light from the star which we see in our telescopes began its trip a little over 4 years ago.

Some of the stars in the sky are so vastly far away that the light from those stars must have been traveling through space for millions of years, contradicting the creation accounts.

Fundamentalists answer this objection by saying that God must have created the light seeming to come from those stasrs in-place, so that the light never really originated from the stars, it only appears to be.

But this creates a new problem -- supernovas.

In 1987, mankind watched a star violently explode in one of the galactic clouds about 70,000 light years away.

That means that the explosion actually took place about 70,000 years ago, and the light finally reached here 70,000 years later, in 1987.

But if the Universe is only 9,000 years old, then what I just said is impossible. Fundamentalists would have to say that the light of the star explosion, or supernova, was buried in the "fake star light" light stream created by God in-place in space, 9,000 years ago.

But that means that since the end of the light stream is the supernova light, then the star never existed!!!

Voila! A lie in the sky!

The Fundamentalist view of Scripture -- that it is historical down to the jot and tittle, thus requires that God be a liar!.

[/quote]

OK Peter, let me see what I can do with this science of yours that makes the Church's martyrology, a prayer believed in by popes and the flock throughout the centuries look like they were singing about things closer to Humpty Dumpty had a great fall than to anything real.

First of all how do you know the distance of stars? No doubt you will say they are measured through stellar parallax. But stellar parallax is no more than as metaphysical assumption. If what the Bible says is true then stellar parallax is a geocentric phenomenom and cannot be used to distance stars. Next, how do they know which is a near star and which is a far star. No doubt they will tell you bright stars are near stars and dim stars are far stars. But why couldn't there be near small dim stars and large bright stars further out. You cannot reject either of the above arguments so your star science is not science before you begin. In other words that supernova COULD be 6,000 light years or less from the earth.

Now a little use of Catholic faith, something you Copernicans, uniformitarians and evolutionists have very little of. Oh yes, I hear you protest, I hear you say you have wonderful faith. Well you haven't. Go pray for some real faith, faith that takes the word of Scripture, or the Church, before the word of science with its metaphysical assumptions, one after the other. Yes faith in the Church's MARTYROLOGY for example. A faith that would say to someone with a Catholic INSTINCT, 'Surely such a Catholic prayer must be the truth and I must search to see if what science taught me is actually true science or just the metaphysical assumptions of man.'

Here is another test of faith. On the Last Sunday after Penticost, the Gospel (Matt. 24 25) spoke of the end times, remember? Jesus said He would cause chaos in the heavens with the stars moving in all directions. But we all KNOW, DON'T WE Peter, that because the stars are supposed to be up to billions of light years away, it will take billions of years for this movement to be seen on earth. According to science Peter, this prophesy in the Gospel is impossible and thus we DON'T HAVE TO BELIEVE IN THAT GOSPEL, do we?
**
Voila! A lie in the sky!**

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.