So the most common argument I have come across is that the earth is young but God made it look old. Just like Adam was not made as a baby but as an adult, so it would logically follow that the earth could have been made the same way. But did that really happen?
On the first glance even though I strongly disagree with this position, I can say, yeah sure it may have happened. God is certainly not off- limits to deception. The lord does work in mysterious ways. What if he really made the earth and the entire universe 6000 years ago but made it look like it was 14 billion years old? Can he do it, well if he can do anything yeah, sure.
It is a clever position because it can neither be supported from within the scriptures, nor outside of it. There is no way to really test this claim. I could be accused of holding a similar position, which can not be defended by scriptures, sure, I grant you this. But the fact is, my position is based on observation and science, the only difference is that I am not treating the Genesis account as literal. But on the other hand, the idea that Genesis account of creation should be taken literally, demands consistency from within the scriptures. You can not at one hand say, that you are being consistent and literal with scriptures and then on the hand say that God made the Earth look old. It just does not hold water. The scriptures never give an iota of the hint that God made the earth look old.
I understand why people believe this, of course, no one wants to look crazy or silly, they believe it to be right and therefore they believe it. I for one, do not doubt their faith and their love for Christ, not for a single moment. I think they love the Lord and stand up to defend what they believe in, even when the modern world is taking all shots at religion, especially the 6000 years creationist movement.
The problem is, you can not account for a lot of geological and cosmological FACTS if you revert to the 6000 years age of earth. My observation is, even when I was a YEC myself that I would not take the scientific data available. Because somewhere I thought they could be wrong. I also thought even if they right, it is partially so. A better thing is to hold to the scriptures. I also believed, that things like evolution and others scientific theories are just guess works at their best. Their is nothing concrete to support it. My idea was that even if there is 1% of doubt, well then its good to assume its probably wrong.
The problem was, I never questioned my view. And instead of reading out of the text and understanding its limitations, I read into the text. Yes, Adam was made adult, scriptures say that. When you read, God made the world (and he made it look old), now this is the part where you are actually reading into the text to fit it to what you believe to be right. The scriptures never even hint at this. But this is important to back up the YEC point of view. Otherwise it can not stand any scrutiny at all. This method is not always wrong either but the problem with systematic theology is, that it can string verses together and make a case for itself while totally forgetting the historical, grammatical context. In the case of Genesis it is apparent enough.
One important thing to note is that the Hebrew stories are written in a poetic fashion. Genesis chapter is in fact poetry. It sounds like prose when it is translated but it is what is called parallel poetry. And the point is, the poetic expression is often not the accurate one. It sounds okay but in essence it is not. For example, “the heart wants what the heart wants”, or “you are my sweetheart”. Does that mean that the heart actually thinks and wants something? no. What in the world is sweetheart? In reality these things do not exists as they are portrayed in their respective expressions.
The question to ask is, what is the point of the story and what is it trying to say? If you take the Genesis account you will realize that it is not the age of the Earth which is being conveyed but the idea that God created everything. It is not the mechanism which is being told but the omnipotence of God. That is the point of the Genesis account. Go ask a rabbi, what he thinks about Genesis one and I can tell you he won’t be teaching you that the age of the Earth is the point of the story. The story expresses creation. It is us who actually read into it what we believe to be true. The context of the creation story is God’s omniscience and omnipotence, not how the world was made in six days.
Anyway, back to the point. Please realize that when you say that the Earth is 6000 years old but looks 13 billion years old, it in actuality means nothing. Because what you are saying directly defies the laws of time and space. What must be realized it that our calculation of time and such is based on physical evidence, not imaginary numbers.
For example, why does distant moving away objects in space display the red shift? Why does start luminosity say about space time. Has God hidden some artificial lights out there which just makes these objects display such light shifts?
Consider, the meter is defined to be the distance traveled by light in 0.000000003335640952 of a second. And that is because we know the speed of light to be the same wherever we go in space. It may appear quickly or slowly depending on our relativity to the source but in essence its speed does not change. It is the same principle with which we travel in space or even in air. These are some of the most basics of our understanding of space and time. And if you think that this is just wrong because even though we see it old but it is young, then you are calling all of these findings as wrong because they are same principles with which we also calculate the age of the galaxy. Do you know if it would be wrong, then a lot of things in our experience would never work. We could have never landed on the moon, let one Mars. Consider using the same light measurements, scientists here predicted the landing of the new Mars rover and get this, it actually went as they had predicted. Now that is observational science not imaginary time stamps we are wrongly attributing to the heavenly bodies. the diagram to the left is based on observation and by the same principle we observe when our jets scramble the sound barrier or a swan swims in a lake. The same effect is caused by moving objects in space and we can observe it.
People like Ken ham had made almost conspiracy theories against science, because they read in the biblical text, which is not even written there. But because there English bible can not be wrong, oh, no sir, they would go on even neglecting the evidence that directly flies in the face of their beliefs. Ending it with “do you God’s word or man’s?”
What they do not realize that God’s word is creation and it speaks for itself if we carefully observe. We are not deceived into thinking an old universe is just because it looks old, no. If that happens then planes should not fly, because the measurements in appearance would be different than in reality. But then reason we fly is because the real is what we also calculate, the puzzle completes.
I would humble ask you to not only rely on your English Bibles but also science, common sense, physical evidence and proper context of scriptures to understand these things.
Original discussion links: