Do Christians who believe the Earth is only 6000 years old also

[valerief]

believe the rest of the universe is only 6000 years old?

Just curious. I know there are no DUers who believe this, but I thought you guys might know. Thanks.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. I think so.

Don't they say God just zapped all of creation into being at once?

[valerief]

2. That's what I was thinking, but I'm on the phone with a friend and we

weren't sure.

[Curmudgeoness]

3. Yes, they believe that god created everything at the same time,

well, within six days. And these people walk among us. Scarier yet, they vote.

[valerief]

5. Definitely scary. nt

[hlthe2b]

4. In my lifetime, I have never met a Christian who believed this...

then again, I don't live or willingly frequent areas heavily populated with RW Xians who are Creationists. The most religious among my relatives, friends and acquaintances growing up were all able to reconcile their religious beliefs with a firm belief in science and evolution. So, I should point out, was Darwin. :shrug:

[moobu2]

6. How can you be a Christian and not believe the Bible?

The entire shtick is predicated upon Eve tempting Adam with the fruit thus tainting the entire human race with original sin making it necessary for God to have himself born to a virgin then sacrificing himself so that "whosoever believes in him shall not Perish"...and all that. It’s all built on the assumption that the events that allegedly occurred in the Garden of Eden actually happened otherwise they’re just making crap up.

[hlthe2b]

8. You can not possibly not recognize that not all believe in a literal interpretation

of the bible. Do you? Sorry, but even to this acknowledged religious agnostic, that is really incredibly ill informed.

[brooklynite]

12. We recognize it.....we don't understand it.

If you accept that Genesis is "metaphorical", then why aren't "Matther", "Mark", "Luke" and "John".

[hlthe2b]

13. Again, as an agnostic I feel ill prepared to address this... BUT

I really detest the DU stereotyping and lumping of all self-professed Christians with RW nutsy fundamentalist Xians.

Here from a gallup poll and then if you want to understand why most educated Christians believe that the bible is merely man's interpretation of the word of God, then please do more reading. I am agnostic, but I had the usual LIBERAL childhood foundation in a mainstream Christian denomination. The kind of exposure that some here would be Shocked (I say SHOCKED, do you hear me!!!!) to learn was progressive, liberal, humanistic, and science-based view of Christianity. Sorry, but for those who want to make out that ALL Christians are so ignorant and backward, I'm afraid you expose yourself as being similarly ignorant.



One-Third of Americans Believe the Bible Is Literally True
High inverse correlation between education and belief in a literal Bible
by Frank Newport

GALLUP NEWS SERVICE http://www.gallup.com/poll/27682/onethird-americans-believe-bible-literally-true.aspx

PRINCETON, NJ -- About one-third of the American adult population believes the Bible is the actual word of God and is to be taken literally word for word. This percentage is slightly lower than several decades ago. The majority of those Americans who don't believe that the Bible is literally true believe that it is the inspired word of God but that not everything it in should be taken literally. About one in five Americans believe the Bible is an ancient book of "fables, legends, history, and moral precepts recorded by man."

Belief in a literal Bible is strongly correlated with indicators of religion, including church attendance and identification with a Protestant or other non-Catholic Christian faith. There is also a strong relationship between education and belief in a literal Bible, with such belief becoming much less prevalent among those who have college educations.

Background

One's view of the authority of the Bible has been and remains a key focal point for many religions today.

Some denominations hold the belief in a literal Bible as a hallmark of their faith. The statement of "Faith and Mission" of the Southern Baptist Convention, for example, states that: " The Holy Bible was written by men divinely inspired and is God's revelation of Himself to man. It is a perfect treasure of divine instruction. It has God for its author, salvation for its end, and truth, without any mixture of error, for its matter. Therefore, all Scripture is totally true and trustworthy."

Although even those who believe in a literal Bible can still be at odds in their attempt to interpret exactly what the Bible says about key areas of Scripture and moral issues, a literal belief structure has been the basis for justifications for a variety of important positions in American life. These have included opposition to evolution and the teaching thereof in public schools (going back to the days of the Scopes Monkey Trial), opposition to same-sex relationships, the proper relationship between husbands and wives with a marriage, observance of a day of rest, the belief that positions as preachers or priests should be maintained for men only, and even such seemingly unrelated topics as immigration.

Americans' Opinions

Only about one-third of Americans today believe the Bible is absolutely accurate and that it should be taken literally word for word. The rest either feel that the Bible is the inspired word of God, but not literally so, or that it is a book of ancient fables, legends, and history as recorded by man.



Americans' views on the Bible have not changed materially over the past 16 years. Gallup has asked this question about personal views of the Bible nine times since 1991. The percentage saying the Bible is the actual, literal word of God has remained in a relatively narrow range between 27% and 35% across this time period, with the average being 31%.



There is much more at the link above. It actually was a pretty interesting poll.

[valerief]

10. +1000

[onager]

15. Well...they say Eve tempted Adam with an apple...

But man, I ain't going for that,
I know it was a...

[Thats my opinion]

23. come on!

The whole theological world today knows that these are stories!!

[darkstar3]

24. Tell that to the pastors I grew up with.

[iris27]

55. And my mother.

First place I ever heard the line that fossils are "a test placed by Satan" was from her. She should've known that wasn't going to work on the 11-year-old daughter who'd insisted on borrowing Dad's copy of "Jurassic Park" when he was done reading it.

[dmallind]

27. 31% haven't heard the punchline yet.

[Kurmudgeon]

30. Then where did the land of Nod come from?

In Genesis 4:16-17 it says, "16 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden."
"17 And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch."
Adam and Eve are the beginning of the Jewish race, it is their beginning. There were obviously others or there wouldn't have been people for Cain to meet later. Maybe you should have studied the "schtick" more before you criticize.

[moobu2]

33. Wow, you know...Jewish cultural fairy tails

are so uninteresting to me that I could really care less where they imagined all that came from ... srsly.

[Tyrs WolfDaemon]

39. Jesus was a Vampire

He told his followers to eat his flesh making them Ghouls.
Moses parted the Red Sea because certain spirits can't cross water
Then there is a whole bunch more of these real (spirit) world explanations to the bible...



All that began because a girl named Eve ate some ergot infested bread and thought a snake was talking to her
gave her 'fruit' to a guy named adam against her father's wishes and they had to make up some story to fix it all.





I like this game, it's fun. I may have to try writing my own version of the bible.

[Angry Dragon]

28. I have a neighbor that believes in the young earth

and even loaned me a cd to prove this belief.......

They are out there and coming to get you

[moobu2]

7. Every Christian I know believes that.

It's the weirdest thing to be talking to someone and having them going off about what Noah did during the flood or Jesus walking on water or some crazy thing like that. Everyone I know that claims to be a Christian believes everything that is written in the Bible including the idea that everything was created as it is today.

[valerief]

9. I like the comment on your profile!

:rofl:

[Deep13]

17. So how do they decide between holy writ and myth? nt

[regnaD kciN]

20. You obviously don't know many...

I've been in a number of parishes in several denominations in both the eastern and western U.S., and I've found nobody who held the Genesis account of creation was literally true. The only creationists I have ever known were a handful of people who belonged to a couple of small local fundie churches (one in Vermont, one in Washington state) and who were also new "born-again" converts who had little or no experience of Christianity out of those local churches.

I'd say that no more than about 10% of all Christians believe in a literal interpretation of everything in the scriptures -- and that's in the U.S., which has a higher percentage of fundies than elsewhere in the world.

[darkstar3]

22. HA!

I think you missed at least 25 states in the middle there, somewhere close to what they call "the bible belt." You'll find an overwhelming majority there that believe in a literal bible.

Go live in rural MO for a year or two, or IA, or AR, or AL, or TN, or KY...the list goes on. After you spend some time there, tell me you think only 10% of Christians believe this shit.

:crazy:

[Rob H.]

44. "After you spend some time there, tell me you think only 10% of Christians believe this shit. "

You're absolutely right--I live in Tennessee, and I caught on TV part of a sermon given by the pastor of a local Southern Baptist megachurch, and he was going on and on about how both the Earth and the universe are no more than 6,000 years old. He went into the various Bible verses, but it basically boiled down to the old, "The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it" argument. I could hardly believe my ears!

I also work with at least one young earth creationist (there may be more, but they keep it themselves) who doesn't believe dinosaur fossils are more than 6,000 years old, either. It's mind boggling to me that 21st century people think that way--there are literally mountains of evidence that disprove both of those beliefs and they choose to ignore them because some book that was written 2,000 years ago is more credible, to them, than modern science and things like carbon dating. (False and unreliable, according to the pastor.)

Oh, and Darwin, according to the pastor I mentioned above? The father of Nazism. And "it takes more faith to believe in science than it does to believe in God."

Apparently no one has pointed out to the wingnut fundies down here that the 6,000 years figure puts the creation of the entire universe after the domestication of the dog and the invention of the wheel! :crazy:


Edit: missing word.

[Thats my opinion]

25. Wow!

You must live in a cave.

[darkstar3]

26. Or a "flyover state".

[cordelia]

32. I'm thinking an asylum.

[skepticscott]

37. If he does, it's a much larger cave

than the one you live in. Polls consistently show that 40% or more of ALL Americans (and presumably even a higher percentage of Christians) believe that god created the world essentially as it appears now, less than 10,000 years ago.

[sudopod]

43. God is an iron.

lol

[tortoise1956]

56. Where do you live?

I'm 55 years old, I've lived in 7 states, traveled to 14 others and spent time overseas in the Navy, and I've only met one Christian who had a literal belief in the Bible.

[iris27]

57. I know you weren't asking me, but as someone who knows more Christians with literal belief than

Christians without it, I grew up in St. Louis, MO, spent 2 years of college in Rochester, NY, returned to Missouri for about 9 years, and now live in Austin, TX. The bulk of the literalists I know are members of the church I grew up attending (~2000 people on the list of confirmed members), but in all three places, I've known more literalist Christians than non.

At my childhood church in particular, obviously I can't speak to the personal beliefs of each member, but it was held as a point of pride and often mentioned at church functions that our particular brand of Lutheranism was "more correct" than another Lutheran denomination in the area, specifically because we held to a literal view of the bible. And that other denomination taught only a partial literalism -- that most of the Bible is literally true but that certain stories, like that of Jonah and Job, may just be fables. My church leaders' derision for that idea usually went something like, "If certain parts can just be a story, what's to say it's all not just a story? If God can create the Earth in 7 days, surely he can keep Jonah safe in the belly of a fish for only 3!"

[kestrel91316]

11. Of course.

ETA: None of the Christians I know personally and associate with believe any of that literalist crap. They are of the allegory/nonliteral persuasion. Either that, or they are non-christian or atheist. I don't associate with fundie literalists.

[hlthe2b]

14. I posted a link to a Gallup poll that shows only a third or so believe this...

That's the same wacko, teabagger crowd that believe the earth is flat, that can't differentiate socialism from fascism and that think the "gubment needs to stay out of their medicare"...


One-Third of Americans Believe the Bible Is Literally True
High inverse correlation between education and belief in a literal Bible
by Frank Newport

GALLUP NEWS SERVICE http://www.gallup.com/poll/27682/onethird-americans-believe-bible-literally-true.aspx

[truth4us93]

18. Inverse correlation?

Is not a inverse correlation to be expected when almost all public universities unequivocally teach anti-creationist theories? It's expected, if not predicable that the more someone is taught that the earth is not 10,000 years old and was not created by God that they would reply in agreement or in this case, disagreement to a statement asserting the literalness of the Bible. Conversely, if students were taught that the earth was 10,000 years old then they would be more likely to agree with the statement that the Bible is literal. There is no justification that b/c someone has had more "higher" education that they can interpret the Bible more accurately by deeming it not literal. They are simply taught this and agree when surveyed. To call someone (or imply) who is uneducated dumb or subordinate to those who have had the opportunity to progress their education is also unfair and inaccurate.

[Deep13]

16. Yes. As far a starlight already in transit then...

...god did it.

[sakabatou]

45. Some actually believe that.

[Lint Head]

19. Some do. I am a Christian because I believe the principles of loving your neighbor,

taking care of poor and unfortunate and disliking the money changers. In other words I'm a Democrat. Democrats are Matthew and Republicans are Leviticus. I also believe in science. The Supreme Being concept is subject to interpretation, metaphor and many questions and seeking. To say I or anyone know the truth of everything is absurd. I believe in what science says about the age of everything. What sparked the moment of something coming from nothing will always be a question until and unless mankind can travel back into time or forensically prove it emphatically. Until that time I know the earth is billions of years old or older. Understanding the concepts of time being warped by gravity and what we are composed of is something more intelligent people than me should determine.

[jwirr]

21. First - I do not believe either of those things but I know the answer.

If they believe the earth is only 6000 years old then they also believe the universe is 6000 years old - in Genesis the star, moon and sun are also created in the 6 days.

By the way the idea that the earth is only 6000 years old was added to some copies of one version of the Bible by some guy and rejected by most interpreters and Christians. I suspect the rwers still follow it though. Hope that helps.

[Kurmudgeon]

29. That old saw again, just where did you start counting the 6000 years from?

I feel there are more that believe Christians think this way then there are Christians who actually do.
Nowhere in The Bible does it say that one of God's Days of Creation equals exactly 24 hours.
The Sun were created after the 1st day of Creation, makes it kind of hard to figure out how many years were used without a sun to orbit.
So the amount of time used is best figured as indeterminate. No one knows in comparison with modern time.
And that's not even taken into consideration all the different ways of time keeping through the years.
Just say where to start counting from,that's the one thing that never gets answered whenever one of these so many years of creation statements gets tossed out there.
I don't believe it's been only 6000 years, never did, never will.
However, if anyone has a starting point, go ahead , toss it out there.

[moobu2]

34. Or either the stories were made up by bronze age peoples

in an attempt to explain their reality.

[truth4us93]

35. 24 hours yes . . .

In Genesis chapter 1 it says repeatedly . . . "there was evening and there was morning-the ___ day" Implying without a doubt that the creation did take place over 24 hour periods. Secondly, it's not 6,000 (I have no idea why the creator of this thread choose 6,000???) but 10,000 years and this number is derived from using the very accurate and detailed genealogies in the Bible. Hope this helps and we can continue to discuss!

[skepticscott]

36. You have no idea??

Sheesh, educate yourself just a teeny bit.

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/ussher.html

[truth4us93]

38. sheesh??

The article ends with this statement. . .

"Bryan--My impression is they were periods, but I would not attempt to argue as against anybody who wanted to believe in literal days." also . . .

"The date of creation clearly does matter. If Bishop Ussher figured correctly, and every living thing has appeared in only 6,000 years, there simply would have been no time for new species to evolve." http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/ussher.html

???

I'm confused. Are you citing this article in support of the 6,000 year old claim? (not implying that you believe it is 6,000 yrs old, but just supporting the idea of where the theory came from)
OR are you supporting the fact that the 6,000 date is not supported at all?
ALSO, since the article ends with the possibility of 24 hr periods, are supporting that or not?

[skepticscott]

47. Of course I'm not citing this article as proof

that the world is 6000 years old. I'm saying that if you'd expended even the slightest effort in finding out why that figure was used in the OP (something apparently so confusing to you that it needed multiple question marks), you would have found this and many other similar citations explaining exactly where 6000 years came from.

If you're going to get involved in discussions about creationism on this board, you'd do well to become a little more conversant with the topic first.

[truth4us93]

50. Oh okay,

Okay cool. While I appreciate your concern for my lack knowledge, I also did not know it was a prerequisite to have complete knowledge about the subject before posting? But I understand that my three ? (???) might have been extreme to you, but I also find the 6,000 claim to be extreme.

[valerief]

53. Maybe you'd better stick to the number of angels on a pin. Thx. nt

[trotsky]

48. Wait, is your only objection to the time scale?

And not the other details?

[LeftishBrit]

31. I think they do.

At the time when Genesis was written and for a long time afterwards, people thought that the universe was geocentric in any case. Interestingly, most people who are young earth creationists *don't* think that the sun goes around the earth, the universe is restricted to what we can see, and all the other things originally associated with such a view.

[pokerfan]

40. Do they believe that it's only 12,000 ly across?

Because with a 6ky old universe, there wouldn't have been time to light to have traveled further than 6k ly. :shrug:

[laconicsax]

41. I believe the answer to that is that the light was created "in transit."

You can check Answers in Genesis for yourself, but I'm pretty sure the "in transit" response is the most common.

[pokerfan]

42. and that would mean that

the creator wanted to give the appearance of an old universe, i.e. deceiving his creatures. Interesting.

[trotsky]

49. Another "how can we make this fit" explanation that's out there...

is that the speed of light is much slower today than in the past. Like exponentially slower.

[jeepnstein]

51. Think about what you just said.

That line of thinking can make some of my literal six-day-creationist bretheren's heads explode. Ask them how if light is slowing then what do we use as a measure of time?

[trotsky]

52. They have a built-in barrier to prevent head explosions.

GODDIDIT.

[deacon_sephiroth]

46. yes............ yes they do...... (n/t)

[David Sky]

54. Many Christian colleges in the USA do not have courses in geology, astronomy,

physics, or anthropology.

Ever wonder why?