Where does the 6000 year old universe idea actually come from?


#1

I hear it has something to do with tracing the descendants of Noah, or something like that. But what about pe-Adam? Is there any Biblical evidence at all that the UNIVERSE is only 6000 years old? Why should this number have any signfiance?

I mean, we know the speed of light, and we can use pythagoras to work out the distance of any given star from earth, and from this we can tell how long that light had to travel to get here tens, hundreds of thousands…millions of years… and yet there are still creationist out there claiming that the ‘world’ is only 6000 years old.


#2

Dr. John Lightfoot, a 17th century Anglican clergyman, estimated that creation occurred during 4004 BC. Bishop James Ussher in the 17th century made the same estimate a decade later. Add 2000 years since the birth of Christ and you have about 6000 years.

You will notice that this number was not calculated by a Catholic bishop. The Catholic Church has never declared how old the earth is nor how scientists ought to calculate the age of the earth in their investigations.

The only thing the Catholic Church has said its faithful must believe about the accounts in Genesis is that God created all there is and that there was one man and one woman from whom all humans who have ever lived afterwards are descended. Leaves things pretty wide open, doesn’t it? :slight_smile:


#3

James Ussher (1581-1656), Archbishop of Armagh, Primate of All Ireland, and Vice-Chancellor of Trinity College in Dublin was highly regarded in his day as a churchman and as a scholar. Of his many works, his treatise on chronology has proved the most durable. Based on an intricate correlation of Middle Eastern and Mediterranean histories and Holy writ, it was incorporated into an authorized version of the Bible printed in 1701, and thus came to be regarded with almost as much unquestioning reverence as the Bible itself. Having established the first day of creation as Sunday 23 October 4004 BC, by the arguments set forth in the passage below, Ussher calculated the dates of other biblical events, concluding, for example, that Adam and Eve were driven from Paradise on Monday 10 November 4004 BC, and that the ark touched down on Mt Ararat on 5 May 2348 BC `on a Wednesday’.

lhup.edu/~dsimanek/ussher.htm


#4

The universe is way older than 6,000 years! Here is what
I found:

hubblesite.org/reference_desk/faq/answer.php.id=47&cat=cosmology


#5

[quote=Marilena]The universe is way older than 6,000 years! Here is what
I found:

hubblesite.org/reference_desk/faq/answer.php.id=47&cat=cosmology
[/quote]

Marilena, the HubbleSite is excellent ! Thanks for bringing it to our attention. :slight_smile:

I located this fasinating article on National Geographic’s website:

**Stardust’s Space Cargo Thrills Scientists
John Roach
for National Geographic News
January 19, 2006

Scientists say they’re thrilled and awed by their first glimpse at the comet particles and samples of interstellar dust returned by the Stardust spacecraft.

Stardust’s canister of samples dropped safely to Utah’s desert floor Sunday.

“Now we can bring to mankind a very unique glimpse of the beginning of our solar system,” said Peter Tsou, the mission’s deputy principal investigator, at a mission briefing today at NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas.

“In fact I will say tiny samples from a distant comet open giant windows of our past,” Tsou added.**
news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/01/0119_060119_stardust.html

The on-line peer reviewed scientific journal *Nature * published an article on 16 January 2006 that was virtually thrilling news for me. NASA’s Mark Peplow wrote the article ‘Comet dust delivered to Earth Cosmic grains should tell tales of the early Solar System’.

**Stardust Capsule Return as seen from NASA’s DC-8 Airborne Laboratory

The first ever sample of a comet parachuted safely down to the Utah desert early on Sunday 15 January. The Stardust mission’s capsule left a bright streak of light in the night sky as it tore through the atmosphere at more than 46,000 kilometres per hour, before popping a series of parachutes and driving into the desert sand at 2:10 local time.

The milligram or so of dust inside is the first geological sample returned from space since the Apollo flights of the early 1970s, says Phil Bland, a planetary scientist from Imperial College London, UK, who will be one of the first to get his hands on the grains. “It’s so exciting,” he says. “I was three years old when the last Apollo samples came back, and there have been no rocks brought back from space since then.”

Stardust’s 4.6-billion-kilometre round trip to the comet Wild 2 took a total of seven years. Its close encounter in January 2004 gave us our best picture of a comet yet, with a surface pockmarked by craters and a surprisingly rigid core.

Clean sweep

Skimming just 240 kilometres from the comet’s surface, the craft detected simple organic molecules in the particles drifting from Wild 2. To get a closer look, it swept a soft, lightweight material called aerogel through the halo of dust and gas surrounding the comet’s tail, and bagged a sample.

The few thousand specks of dust collected are thought to date back 4.6 billion years, to a time when the Solar System was first forming. Scientists hope that the samples will give them clues about the chemical make-up of the primordial rubble that spawned the planets.

Identifying minerals in the grains should reveal which elements were available as building blocks for our Solar System, and what sorts of stars created them. And if researchers find minerals that have been altered by water in the past, it might help to determine whether comets were instrumental in delivering much of the water in Earth’s oceans, says Bland.**

nature.com/news/2006/060116/full/060116-1.html

Awesome! :smiley:


#6

well obviousely this is all a trick of satan to make you question the irrefutable truth of a 6000 year old, 7 day created universe. I’m sure the devil doesn’t need you to be his advocate…

(er, sarcasm)


#7

[quote=cynic]well obviousely this is all a trick of satan to make you question the irrefutable truth of a 6000 year old, 7 day created universe. I’m sure the devil doesn’t need you to be his advocate…

(er, sarcasm)
[/quote]

Fine, whatever. Now how about acknowledging the fact that this silly idea isn’t a Catholic one? :hmmm:


#8

Maybe not but plenty of catholics, as well as evangelicals seem to believe it.

What’s really annoying in when people say the ‘world’ was created back whenever. What do they mean by ‘world’ - is that planet earth? or the entire universe? or do they believe that the universe itself consists enitirely the earth, the moon and the sun, and everything else that appears in the sky is trickery. (sarcasm)

As stated before, by knowing the speed of light, and using really basic math to work out the distance a point in the sky is from earth (from its change in position during the different seasons when the earth is the on the opposite side of the sun - the distance from the sun being known - creating a triangle, then using pythagoras…) we can tell just how long light has had to travel to reach earth. And for almost all of the stars you see in the sky its a great deal longer than 6000 years.

I’d like to hear from people who believe in a literal 6000 year old creation, how they reconcile all this…


#9

[quote=Dan-Man916]Having established the first day of creation as Sunday 23 October 4004 BC, by the arguments set forth in the passage below, Ussher calculated the dates of other biblical events, concluding, for example, that Adam and Eve were driven from Paradise on Monday 10 November 4004 BC, and that the ark touched down on Mt Ararat on 5 May 2348 BC `on a Wednesday’.

[/quote]

:eek: That’s hilarious. Did he know what time on Wednesday? :smiley:


#10

[quote=cynic]Maybe not but plenty of catholics, as well as evangelicals seem to believe it.
[/quote]

And they are free to believe it if they like, just as they are free to believe in the tooth fairy. It hardly means that the Catholic Church teaches it or demands we believe it, which is the only thing that really matters here.

What’s really annoying in when people say the ‘world’ was created back whenever. What do they mean by ‘world’ - is that planet earth? or the entire universe? or do they believe that the universe itself consists enitirely the earth, the moon and the sun, and everything else that appears in the sky is trickery. (sarcasm)

Well exactly. What is the author of Genesis telling us? Is he trying to tell us in scientific terms how the world/universe came into being? No he isn’t. Neither were the Egyptians who had a great deal of knowledge about the movement of the heavens but still built their beliefs on the idea that the earth arose out of the waters in a mound. What these ancient creation stories are telling us is the metaphysical origins of the universe not the mere physical origins that ordinary investigation and human thought can understand.

As stated before, by knowing the speed of light, and using really basic math to work out the distance a point in the sky is from earth (from its change in position during the different seasons when the earth is the on the opposite side of the sun - the distance from the sun being known - creating a triangle, then using pythagoras…) we can tell just how long light has had to travel to reach earth. And for almost all of the stars you see in the sky its a great deal longer than 6000 years.

I’d like to hear from people who believe in a literal 6000 year old creation, how they reconcile all this…

And I agree with you about the physical laws of the universe. But, I also think YOU are taking the Genesis accounts as literalistically as fundamentalists because you are basing your critique of it not on the literal meaning (which is metaphysical and not merely the physical) but on the literalist interpretation that is just as bent on making the whole thing strictly metaphysical as you are in trying to make it strictly physical. It is both, which is why you are having such a hard time understanding the first chapters of Genesis. :wink:


#11

[quote=cynic]well obviousely this is all a trick of satan to make you question the irrefutable truth of a 6000 year old, 7 day created universe. I’m sure the devil doesn’t need you to be his advocate…

(er, sarcasm)
[/quote]

Err… yeah… right… :rolleyes: :whistle: :whacky:


#12

[quote=cynic]Maybe not but plenty of catholics, as well as evangelicals seem to believe it.

What’s really annoying in when people say the ‘world’ was created back whenever. What do they mean by ‘world’ - is that planet earth? or the entire universe? or do they believe that the universe itself consists enitirely the earth, the moon and the sun, and everything else that appears in the sky is trickery. (sarcasm)

As stated before, by knowing the speed of light, and using really basic math to work out the distance a point in the sky is from earth (from its change in position during the different seasons when the earth is the on the opposite side of the sun - the distance from the sun being known - creating a triangle, then using pythagoras…) we can tell just how long light has had to travel to reach earth. And for almost all of the stars you see in the sky its a great deal longer than 6000 years.

I’d like to hear from people who believe in a literal 6000 year old creation, how they reconcile all this
[/quote]

You know what they think because you participated in the thread Age of the Earth!!


#13

I’d like to hear them come up with an explanation for the apparent age of the universe from measuring the speed of light etc.

Also how they can honestly believe that dinosaurs existed alongside man. Or how mountains were weathered, canyons formed.
I don’t think it was properly covered.

The most you can decipher from the posts is

" God made the universe/earth appear older than it is"

ie. he’s playing a trick on us as some sort of test. That’s a fairly lame argument, but at least its an attempt to explain phenomena.

The worst ones are " I don’t really care about all this atheist science stuff’" etc.


#14

The notion of a cosmos lasting no longer than 6000 years from its creation goes back to the late 1st-C. Epistle of Barnabas (with antecedents in earlier Judaism).


#15

How understanding of creation is not essential to salvation, whether it is 6000, 10.000 years or more.
The only Papal promulgation on this was by Leo XIII that only the literal Genesis account maybe taught.
As stated earlier by another poster, as long as one believes that God is the Creator of all and Adam and Eve.
God Bless


#16

[quote=cynic]I’d like to hear them come up with an explanation for the apparent age of the universe from measuring the speed of light etc.

Also how they can honestly believe that dinosaurs existed alongside man. Or how mountains were weathered, canyons formed.
I don’t think it was properly covered.

The most you can decipher from the posts is

" God made the universe/earth appear older than it is"

ie. he’s playing a trick on us as some sort of test. That’s a fairly lame argument, but at least its an attempt to explain phenomena.

The worst ones are " I don’t really care about all this atheist science stuff’" etc.
[/quote]

Dinosaurs did not exist alongside man. Where did you hear that notion?


#17

Well, they can’t deny the existence of dinosaurs, but they won’t belive the earth is older than 6000 years - so we had to have soexisted with dinosaurs, as laughable as it seems. Passages of the bible which talk about lizards etc are then cited as proof.


#18

[quote=my agatha]:eek: That’s hilarious. Did he know what time on Wednesday? :smiley:
[/quote]

Eastern Daylight or Greenwich Mean time???:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

When I was growing up, I remember having a Bible that had all the dates of events in the margins…Now I guess I know where they came from!!!:whacky: :whacky: :whacky:


#19

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.